4 ms·

> No I'd really encourage you to read it an other articles on implicit bias; they're really important issues that have disastrous impacts. > I'm pretty sure t

> No I'd really encourage you to read it an other articles on implicit bias; they're really important issues that have disastrous impacts. > I'm pretty sure that if you run statistics, you would find out that people from poor neighborhoods are more likely to be criminals, violent, less educated, less intelligent. The problem I have with this is that it's a hunch that sounds reasonable, but there's no data to support the claim. I think we need to be especially careful in situations with implicit bias to vet all of our assumptions, because in aggregate, they have really negative impacts on large subgroups of people. Here's a link to the source document for the linked article: http://www.povertyactionlab.org/publication/are-emily-and-greg-more-employable-lakisha-and-jamal-field-experiment-labor-market-discr http://www.povertyactionlab.org/publication/are-emily-and-gr... That article references other journal articles that review exactly what you're talking about, varying only location. It appears that it helps, but helps whites more. I didn't read that article (I'm at work; only have time for so much research, which probably should be no time at all :P) > I'm not from the US, but don't many American blacks have white-sounding names? And I assume those blacks are more likely to come from families that are wealthier and better educated. The article says, "Each resume listed identical qualifications except for one variation... names" I looked into the underlying source article and they list and control for the education of the applicants, which means there's no need to judge their education by their name, since you already have it. I think the problem a lot of people have is that it feels a lot like we're saying everyone is racist, which feels a lot like an attack. To spin it a little differently, I'd personally say we're all biased. You could go through any long list of cognitive biases and implicit racial bias would just be one of the myriad everyone is subject to in some magnitude. It's a matter of being aware of it and really questioning your founding assumptions so you can reduce the bias where possible. The problem with racism is that it has real and lasting impacts right now on minorities, and is particularly insidious (if you ask me). I really think it would be worth your time to read the article and follow some of the linked articles. It's really interesting information that's relevant.

UrMomReadsHN 12y ago
>I think the problem a lot of people have is that it feels a lot like we're saying everyone is racist, which feels a lot like an attack And the article I linked to says that. Individuals don't MEAN to be racist (or sexist, etc.) but are, because culture gives us biases. Addressing unintended racism is hard, because it isn't visible. We aren't attacking individuals.
- doorhammer 12y ago
  Yeah. Implicit bias is tough. For anyone interested, there's a quick rundown here: http://med.stanford.edu/diversity/FAQ_REDE.html http://med.stanford.edu/diversity/FAQ_REDE.html
mcguire 12y ago
> > I'm pretty sure that if you run statistics, you would find out that people from poor neighborhoods are more likely to be criminals, violent, less educated, less intelligent. > The problem I have with this is that it's a hunch that sounds reasonable, but there's no data to support the claim. I would bet that there is data to suggest that "people from poor neighborhoods are more likely to be criminals, violent, less educated, less intelligent", and even data to suggest the other inferences tomp brought up. However, the vast majority of people are not "criminals", at least in the habitual sense, and the vast majority of people from the 'hood are also not "criminals". "When the incidence, the proportion of those who [are criminals], is lower than the [proportion of people from the 'hood who are not criminals], even tests that have a very low chance of giving a false positive in an individual case will give more false than true positives overall."
- doorhammer 12y ago
  I should have said "there's no data you're presenting to support this claim." The problem I have is with phrases like "I would bet there is" or "I assume those blacks [with white sounding names] are more likely to come from families that are wealthier and better educated." It seems like an obvious correlation to make, but they're not based on data. I think it's in our best interest, intellectually, to take a few minutes and look for some information. The internet means it can take fifteen or twenty minutes to find a decent chunk of data to start working with. It won't make you an expert (and I'm by no means one either), but it can help highlight a lot of the nuance that exists in issues like this.

UrMomReadsHN 12y ago

>I think the problem a lot of people have is that it feels a lot like we're saying everyone is racist, which feels a lot like an attack And the article I linked to says that. Individuals don't MEAN to be racist (or sexist, etc.) but are, because culture gives us biases. Addressing unintended racism is hard, because it isn't visible. We aren't attacking individuals.

doorhammer 12y ago
Yeah. Implicit bias is tough. For anyone interested, there's a quick rundown here: http://med.stanford.edu/diversity/FAQ_REDE.html http://med.stanford.edu/diversity/FAQ_REDE.html

mcguire 12y ago

> > I'm pretty sure that if you run statistics, you would find out that people from poor neighborhoods are more likely to be criminals, violent, less educated, less intelligent. > The problem I have with this is that it's a hunch that sounds reasonable, but there's no data to support the claim. I would bet that there is data to suggest that "people from poor neighborhoods are more likely to be criminals, violent, less educated, less intelligent", and even data to suggest the other inferences tomp brought up. However, the vast majority of people are not "criminals", at least in the habitual sense, and the vast majority of people from the 'hood are also not "criminals". "When the incidence, the proportion of those who [are criminals], is lower than the [proportion of people from the 'hood who are not criminals], even tests that have a very low chance of giving a false positive in an individual case will give more false than true positives overall."

doorhammer 12y ago
I should have said "there's no data you're presenting to support this claim." The problem I have is with phrases like "I would bet there is" or "I assume those blacks [with white sounding names] are more likely to come from families that are wealthier and better educated." It seems like an obvious correlation to make, but they're not based on data. I think it's in our best interest, intellectually, to take a few minutes and look for some information. The internet means it can take fifteen or twenty minutes to find a decent chunk of data to start working with. It won't make you an expert (and I'm by no means one either), but it can help highlight a lot of the nuance that exists in issues like this.