Stereotypes I: Implicit Stereotyping

Question 1

BANAJI & GREENWALD (2013)

Answer 1

• ingrained thought habits -> perception/remembering/reasoning/decision making errors ie. visual perception errors
• aka. we cognitively mess up more than we like

Question 2

FALSE ALARM

Answer 2

• aka. remembering that a category WASN’T among previously perceived group BUT…
• key category title may be falsely remembered (ie. thinking you saw “insect” among a group of words colloquially describing insects)
• other mind-bugs include retroactive info (misinformation effect ie. eyewitness errors)
• social mind-bugs = attribution errors/categorisation errors/cognitive heuristics

Question 3

HARVARD IMPLICIT ASSOCIATION TEST (IAT)

Answer 3

• brain stores past experiences of items going together (ie. valence)
• associations = hard to put aside
• shared valence (ie. lilac + happy = pleasure) -> task = easy
• NOT shared (ie. lilac + ugly) -> task = tricky -> slowing down

Question 4

TODAY’S IATS

Answer 4

• age/race/gender/careers/educational attainment/weight
• race = african american VS european american; large research base
• widely used to show implicit bias in culture/ethnicity/setting range
• 27% = strong automatic white people pref against black people -> initial prejudice assumption BUT…

Question 5

TODAY’S IATS: CRITIQUE

Answer 5

BANAJI & GREENWALS (2013)
- old-fashioned self-report of overtly negative attitudes; IAT results don’t appear to tap same hostility
- initially unclear if ^ IAT = racially discriminatory future beh
- 75% race IAT results = automatic white pref; predicts some discriminatory beh
- BUT correlation = 0.24 (medium) -> IAT is not strictly discrimination

Question 6

MCCONNELL & LEIBOLD (2001)

Answer 6

• pps videotaped
• interviewed by black/white woman post race IAT
• tapes analysed for:
  1. comfort/friendliness (ie. smiling/longer speaking/laughing/spontaneous social comments)
  2. discomfort/unfriendliness (ie. speech errors/hesitations/seating distance)
• interviewers also gave pp ratings

Question 7

MCCONNEL & LEIBOLD (2001): RESULTS

Answer 7

• pps w/^ race IAT automatic white pref = < comfort/friendliness w/black interviewer

Question 8

RACE IAT EVIDENCE

Answer 8

• race IAT result predicted:
  ZIEGER & HANGES (2005)
• simulated hiring decision = white applicants > favoured than = qualified black applicants
  GREEN ET AL (2007)
• ER doctors recommend optimal treatment (thrombolytic therapy) < for black patients w/= acute cardiac symptoms
  HUGENBERG & BODENHAUSEN (2003)
• college students perceive > anger in black faces
  GREENWALD ET AL (2009)
• meta-analysis; 184 studies
• racially discriminatory beh via race IAT

Question 9

OUTSMARTING IMPLICIT MIND-BUG

Answer 9

VIRTUOSO
- blind orchestra auditions
- women hired ^ 20-40% over 20y
ACADEMIC WORK
- blind marketing
- not always possible w/o identity
TRAINING MEDICAL PROFESSION
- awareness/individuation/perspective taking
- ^ BME medics (CHAPMAN ET AL (2013)

Question 10

! SUMMARY !

Answer 10

• IAT = helped understand how associations (ie. valance) -> implicit bias
• bias predicts SOME discriminatory beh forms
• high white pref DOESN’T = prejudice (????????)
• mind-bugs can’t be erased BUT strategies to outsmart them exist/evolve