IMPLICIT BIAS, STEREOTYPE THREAT, AND TEACHING PHILOSOPHY Jennifer Saul
Implicit Biases: those that we will be concerned with here are unconscious biases that affect the way we perceive, evaluate, or interact with people from groups that are stigmatised in our society. Stereotype Threat: people s awareness of their group membership may (often unconsciously) have a negative impact on their performance.
This talk The phenomena, including esp. how they affect teaching in particular Some philosophically interesting issues arising from them.
Psychological research over the last decades has shown that most people-- even those who explicitly and sincerely avow egalitarian views-- hold what have been described as implicit biases against such groups as blacks, women, gay people, and so on. These biases are manifested in, for example, association tasks asking subjects to pair positive and negative adjectives with black or white faces: most are much speedier to match black faces with negative adjectives than with positive ones. (To try one, go to Project Implicit online)
Importantly Automatic, largely unconscious Often contrary to genuinely held commitments. Held even by members of the target group.
Bias in action: Marking Anonymous marking leads to higher marks for women (Bradley 1984, 1993)
Bias in action: running discussion More likely to call on male students, more likely to charitably interpret their inchoate contributions. More likely to take point raised by a woman seriously if re-stated by a man. The University of Sheffield 6/25/14
Letters of Reference Man: brilliant ; outstanding ; original Woman: works hard friendly surprisingly successful very attractive friends with my wife The University of Sheffield 6/25/14
Women and leadership
Women and leadership
Leadership and teaching If students (or conference participants) challenge women more than they do men, women have to face choices that men do not, and these choices are likely to be double binds. So for example, when I taught a course to engineers that was usually taught by a male colleague, he advised me to brook absolutely no excuses for late papers, and to announce (as he always did) that students would simply be docked 5 points for every day late. When I found that I had over 40 late papers (in a class of 300+), and that many of them were so late they would have a failing grade before I even read them, I asked him what he did: did he disregard the announced policy, or did he let the chips fall where they may (leading to failing grades for quite a few students). His answer: that's never happened to me. Thus, he never had to face the dilemma of either undermining his own authority by not following his announced policy, or evoking the ire of 40 students in a class that didn't like you to begin with. Louise Antony
Stereotype Threat Underperformance on particular tasks by members of groups stigmatised as less good at these tasks, when They really care about doing well Stakes are high They are reminded of their group membership
Stereotype threat Women who are reminded of their gender (by ticking a gender box, or by being surrounded by men), taking a high- stakes math test, will underperform.
Stereotype threat Black men taking tests of academic ability will underperform.
Stereotype threat White men at Ivy League universities doing tests of athletic ability will underperform if reminded of their race.
Stereotype threat 5-7 year old girls will do worse on a math test if they take it after colouring in a picture of a girl with a doll.
Philosophy? Teaching of philosophy at university level is 83% male in US, 76 % male in UK, and 72% male in Canada. Overwhelmingly male lecturers, reading lists, speakers at seminars/conferences, papers in intro anthologies. Stereotypically male behaviour e.g. unnecessary aggression (Beebee). Stereotypes associated with maths may carry over to logic, often treated as foundational. The University of Sheffield 6/25/14
A-Level Philosophy? I genuinely don t know (would be curious to know what you think!)
What can we do? Implicit Bias Don t just tell yourself to not be biased. Specific techniques are needed.
Implicit Bias Anonymising Including counterstereotypical exemplars on reading list (e.g. philosophers who aren t all white and male) and on walls! Making more effort to notice when those other than the usual suspects want to speak. ( Raise your hand if you don t want to speak. ) Making sure that e.g. women s contributions aren t attributed to someone else.
Discussions: Put some norms in place Talk to students about the purpose of philosophical discussion, and about how to best conduct it. As we stress in logic classes, arguments are not things that we win or lose. Importance of getting a variety of perspectives. Importance of really listening to the views of others, and even helping them to develop their views even if you disagree, it s far better to object to the strongest possible version of the view you oppose.
Norms of discussion cont d At the more practical level Basic politeness: don t interrupt, or talk over people. Don t just hold forth. Notice when others are trying to say something. Be charitable: if the view someone is trying to articulate sounds really stupid, that s probably not what they re trying to say. Try saying things like I disagree instead of that s wrong.
Stereotype Threat Include counterstereotypical exemplars. Try to avoid creating a stereotype-threat provoking environment. Discuss stereotype threat, and how it may be a source of anxiety. Have all students spend some time in the classroom writing about values that matter to them.
Part 2: Philosophical Issues
Philosophical implications: Blame? We are, very likely, being influenced by racist, sexist and other biases. We are, very likely, acting in ways that: Have harmful effects on others (and perhaps on ourselves) Perpetuate racism, sexism and other injustices Are unfair Looks like we are terribly blameworthy
But Before we learn about implicit bias, we may have no idea that we are doing these things. Our biases may be contrary to genuine egalitarian commitments. We may not know how to control our biases. So not blameworthy?
Not so fast! We can easily blameworthy for doing things we re unaware of: recklessly running over a small child while driving drunk. We re often blameworthy for action contrary to genuine commitments: weakness of will may lead me to drive drunk even though I genuinely believe it s bad. We re often blameworthy for things we don t know how to control: I may not know how to change my tendency to be late all the time, but I m still blameworthy.
My view (under development) Implicit biases BEFORE WE KNOW ABOUT THEM Sometimes give us a special combination of these factors: Lack of awareness. Genuine contrary commitments. Lack of knowledge of how to control. But once we know we re likely to be biased, we re blameworthy if we don t try to something about it.
My view Once we become aware of our likely implicit biases, and how to control them, we do become blameworthy if we fail to take action. Note also: another job for philosophers will be rethinking our vocabulary. Need for more subtlety than just racist and sexist.
Scepticism Sceptical arguments, traditionally, get us to think about some possibility that we can t rule out. Then they get us to move from that to the thought that we really don t know (for example) that anything around us is real.
Traditional scepticism Doesn t really worry anyone. We don t really have a reason to take the sceptical doubts seriously.
Implicit Bias and Scepticism When implicit bias leads us to make mistakes, we are being influenced by totally irrelevant factors. We re being influenced by factors that we think should not influence us. This is all happening totally outside their awareness. And we re ending up with false beliefs. And we are, very likely, doing this A LOT. (Consider how many things we believe because someone told us to, and how bias may affect who we believe.) And we don t know exactly when.
Implicit Bias Scepticism Learning about implicit bias tells us that we almost certainly are making mistakes. So stronger than traditional forms. Not mistaken about everything. But a lot, and stuff that we were pretty confident of.
Implicit Bias Scepticism But traditional scepticism is quite sweeping can make us doubt whether anything exists! Doubt induced by implicit bias not so much. We know not all of our beliefs are false. But still: we don t know which ones are false. And we know we re likely to be making lots of errors.
Demand for action Traditional scepticism: not really. Implicit bias scepticism: strong demand.
Philosophical implications: affirmative action New argument for affirmative action. Traditional arguments: Affirmative action redresses past wrongs against an underrepresented group. Affirmative action provides positive role models for members of underrepresented groups. Focus is on helping members of underrepresented groups.
Philosophical implications: Affirmative action Traditional understanding: affirmative action is a policy which may allow Between two candidates of equal merit, favour the candidate from an underrepresented groups. Between two candidates who meet the minimal criteria for the job, favour the candidate from an underrepresented group, even if they are less well qualified in terms of merit. Affirmative action involves deviating from our standard practise of merit-based appointment.
How implicit bias changes this Appointment of counterstereotypical exemplars isn t just about helping members of underrepresented groups. It s about helping every one to reason better in ways less affected by implicit bias. Implicit bias shows us that our standard appointment procedures are not merit based: we re very bad at discerning merit.
Note I m NOT arguing that implicit bias research shows that we should practise affirmative action of the sort just described. My claim is just that it gives us a new argument that s worthy of our consideration.
Philosophy illuminates implicit bias Helping us to think through issues of blame. Showing us how deeply troubling implicit bias should be for our self-conception as knowers. Alllowing us to consider policy implications.