3 ms·

As a WASP, also from the south (the deep south, below the Gnat Line), I'm constantly reminded that I have an implicit bias however I've never seen nor heard of

As a WASP, also from the south (the deep south, below the Gnat Line), I'm constantly reminded that I have an implicit bias however I've never seen nor heard of how to identify or measure such. It's really just that 'if you think this way then you have it', which is overwhelmingly unsatisfactory if it's indeed a problem I should solve. I should have awareness of what the conditions are measurements are so that I can address them appropriately. For instance if/when my doctor tells me to lose weight I need to know how much. But this escapes me and no one seems to have a good answer. Until then I have to categorize it as an emotional response and handle it in the same way, which is basically just empathizing, consoling, and not necessarily fixing the root of the problem. I need to know what to measure and how to fix it: I've been through the corporate unconscious bias training a couple of times and it did none of that. Until then I'm a skeptic.

awbraunstein 6y ago
If you're interested in measuring your implicit bias, this site has a lot of interesting tests you can take https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/takeatest.html https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/takeatest.html I was shocked with my own results from the gender/career bias test. At the end of the day, the test doesn't tell you how to fix it, it shows you that these patterns of thought are deeply ingrained in how we think and the way to "fix" it is to actively go against the biases we have been trained on. There is are some good resources here as well. https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/faqs.html#faq14 https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/faqs.html#faq14
- manfredo 6y ago
  This output of this kind of test is determined by the order in which the categories are presented. Put male on the left and humanities on the right first, then put male and science simultaneously on the left side and it will produce the opposite result: men associated with liberal arts and women with science.
- brodouevencode 6y ago
  It also says > The results may fluctuate and should not be used to make important decisions. which is the gap.
  - Izkata 6y ago
    Because of exactly that, the creators of the original implicit bias test have said it should not be used the way it has been. I think they've pretty much said the test is worthless.
mplanchard 6y ago
I hadn't heard the term "gnat line." Thanks for introducing me! I also grew up south of gnat line, along the gulf coast of Mississippi. To get to your comment, unfortunately I think that measuring our own thought processes is far from a solved problem. And I'm not sure that implicit biases are necessarily a problem that can be "solved." A huge part of being in society is subduing certain of our more damaging natural inclinations, essentially being civil: not yelling and hitting people when we're angry, being willing to be bored for long periods of time in order to get something we need, etc. I really do think you hit the nail on the head with this: > Until then I have to categorize it as an emotional response and handle it in the same way, which is basically just empathizing, consoling, and not necessarily fixing the root of the problem Largely, these things are emotional responses, and just like emotional responses, they're not necessarily rational or useful. Often the only thing we can do is recognize that they're there, let them exist, and refuse to act on them. To be clear, I'm not making any claims here about any kind of corporate training. I'm not sure that I'm personally convinced that mandatory corporate training does any good in any situation, although I'm inclined to say that I guess it's better than nothing, in that it at least (hopefully) makes clear what the official company line is on things, and makes it clear that e.g. blatant sexism is not okay in the workplace, even if it doesn't actually change the opinions of any workplace harassers or misogynists. That being said, I am also deeply skeptical of its ability to effect any real change in people.

awbraunstein 6y ago

If you're interested in measuring your implicit bias, this site has a lot of interesting tests you can take https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/takeatest.html https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/takeatest.html I was shocked with my own results from the gender/career bias test. At the end of the day, the test doesn't tell you how to fix it, it shows you that these patterns of thought are deeply ingrained in how we think and the way to "fix" it is to actively go against the biases we have been trained on. There is are some good resources here as well. https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/faqs.html#faq14 https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/faqs.html#faq14

manfredo 6y ago
This output of this kind of test is determined by the order in which the categories are presented. Put male on the left and humanities on the right first, then put male and science simultaneously on the left side and it will produce the opposite result: men associated with liberal arts and women with science.
brodouevencode 6y ago
It also says > The results may fluctuate and should not be used to make important decisions. which is the gap.
- Izkata 6y ago
  Because of exactly that, the creators of the original implicit bias test have said it should not be used the way it has been. I think they've pretty much said the test is worthless.

mplanchard 6y ago

I hadn't heard the term "gnat line." Thanks for introducing me! I also grew up south of gnat line, along the gulf coast of Mississippi. To get to your comment, unfortunately I think that measuring our own thought processes is far from a solved problem. And I'm not sure that implicit biases are necessarily a problem that can be "solved." A huge part of being in society is subduing certain of our more damaging natural inclinations, essentially being civil: not yelling and hitting people when we're angry, being willing to be bored for long periods of time in order to get something we need, etc. I really do think you hit the nail on the head with this: > Until then I have to categorize it as an emotional response and handle it in the same way, which is basically just empathizing, consoling, and not necessarily fixing the root of the problem Largely, these things are emotional responses, and just like emotional responses, they're not necessarily rational or useful. Often the only thing we can do is recognize that they're there, let them exist, and refuse to act on them. To be clear, I'm not making any claims here about any kind of corporate training. I'm not sure that I'm personally convinced that mandatory corporate training does any good in any situation, although I'm inclined to say that I guess it's better than nothing, in that it at least (hopefully) makes clear what the official company line is on things, and makes it clear that e.g. blatant sexism is not okay in the workplace, even if it doesn't actually change the opinions of any workplace harassers or misogynists. That being said, I am also deeply skeptical of its ability to effect any real change in people.