Many methods for reducing implicit prejudice have been identified, but little is known about their relative effectiveness. We held a research contest to experimentally compare interventions for reducing the expression of implicit racial prejudice. Teams submitted seventeen interventions that were tested an average of 3.70 times each in four studies (total N = 17,021), with rules for revising interventions between studies. Eight of seventeen interventions were effective at reducing implicit preferences for Whites compared to Blacks, particularly ones that provided experience with counterstereotypical exemplars, used evaluative conditioning methods, and provided strategies to override biases. The other nine interventions were ineffective, particularly ones that engaged participants with others' perspectives, asked participants to consider egalitarian values, or induced a positive emotion. The most potent interventions were ones that invoked high self-involvement or linked Black people with positivity and White people with negativity. No intervention consistently reduced explicit racial preferences. Furthermore, intervention effectiveness only weakly extended to implicit preferences for Asians and Hispanics. Abstract = 160 words Keywords = attitudes, racial prejudice, implicit social cognition, malleability, Implicit Association Test September 9, 2016 update: We updated this manuscript to fix several minor reporting errors that we have learned about since the publication of the manuscript in August 2014. For a summary of these updates, please see pages 67 and 68. Authors' note:This project was supported by a gift from Project Implicit. Lai and Hawkins are consultants and Nosek is an officer of Project Implicit, Inc., a non-profit organization that includes in its mission "To develop and deliver methods for investigating and applying phenomena of implicit social cognition, including especially phenomena of implicit bias based on age, race, gender or other factors. Thoughts and feelings outside of conscious awareness shape social perception, judgment and action (Bargh, 1999;Devine, 1989;Greenwald & Banaji, 1995). Nowhere has this idea been more explored than in studies of racial prejudice in which people report egalitarian racial attitudes, but also implicitly prefer Whites compared to Blacks (Devine, 1989;Dovidio, Kawakami, Johnson, Johnson, & Howard, 1997;Fazio, Jackson, Dunton, & Williams, 1995;. These studies have been influential because implicit racial preferences predict behaviors such as negative interracial contact (McConnell & Leibold, 2001), biases in medical decision-making (Green et al., 2007), and hiring discrimination (Rooth, 2010).From the hundreds of studies conducted, we can conclude that implicit preferences (1) are related to, but distinct from, explicit preferences (Greenwald & Banaji, 1995;, (2) are constructed through different mechanisms than explicit preferences (De Houwer, Teige-Mocigemba, Spruyt, & Moors, 2009;Ranganath & Nosek, 2008;Ratliff & Nosek, 2011;Rydell & McConnell, 2006), ...
About 70% of more than half a million Implicit Association Tests completed by citizens of 34 countries revealed expected implicit stereotypes associating science with males more than with females. We discovered that nation-level implicit stereotypes predicted nation-level sex differences in 8th-grade science and mathematics achievement. Self-reported stereotypes did not provide additional predictive validity of the achievement gap. We suggest that implicit stereotypes and sex differences in science participation and performance are mutually reinforcing, contributing to the persistent gender gap in science engagement.Implicit Association Test ͉ culture ͉ social psychology ͉ implicit social cognition
The Brief Implicit Association Test (BIAT) consists of two blocks of trials with the same four categories and stimulus-response mappings as the standard IAT, but with 1/3 the number of trials. Unlike the standard IAT, the BIAT focuses the subject on just two of each block's four categories. Experiments 1 and 2 demonstrated that attitude BIATs had satisfactory validity when good (but not bad) was a focal category, and that identity IATs had satisfactory validity when self (but not other) was a focal category. Experiment 2 also showed that a good-focal attitude BIAT and a self-focal identity BIAT were psychometrically similar to standard IAT measures of the same constructs. Experiment 3 presented each of six BIATs twice, showing that procedural variables had no more than minor influences on the resulting implicit measures. Experiment 4 further demonstrated successful use of the BIAT to measure implicit stereotypes.
Animal models have highlighted the importance of innate lymphoid cells (ILCs) in multiple immune responses. However, technical limitations have hampered adequate characterization of ILCs in humans. Here, we used mass cytometry including a broad range of surface markers and transcription factors to accurately identify and profile ILCs across healthy and inflamed tissue types. High dimensional analysis allowed for clear phenotypic delineation of ILC2 and ILC3 subsets. We were not able to detect ILC1 cells in any of the tissues assessed, however, we identified intra-epithelial (ie)ILC1-like cells that represent a broader category of NK cells in mucosal and non-mucosal pathological tissues. In addition, we have revealed the expression of phenotypic molecules that have not been previously described for ILCs. Our analysis shows that human ILCs are highly heterogeneous cell types between individuals and tissues. It also provides a global, comprehensive, and detailed description of ILC heterogeneity in humans across patients and tissues.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.