Do IAT Scores Explain Racial Inequality?

Jussim, Lee; Careem, Akeela; Honeycutt, Nathan; Stevens, Sean T.

doi:10.4324/9780367816407-16

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Typically, scholarship has examined whether racial disparities are better explained by implicit rather than explicit racial biases (e.g., Kang et al., ; Smith & Levinson, ). Although there is serious debate about the definition of implicit bias (Jussim, Careem, Honeycutt, & Stevens, ), much of the legal scholarship on racial disparities in the justice system has defined implicit bias as a set of negative beliefs or associations about a particular racial group that is held without awareness and would not be consciously endorsed but results in discriminatory behavior (see Kang et al., ). Conversely, explicit bias is intentional racial discrimination based on conscious beliefs that groups should be treated differently.…”

Section: A Search For Solutionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Racial Disparities in the Criminal Justice System: Prevalence, Causes, and a Search for Solutions

Kovera

2019

Journal of Social Issues

111

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Racial disparities in the criminal justice system are well documented and widespread. The present review examines racial disparities in three areas of the system: policing, prison populations, and participation on juries. Some, but not all, of these disparities may be the result of implicit racial bias. Even if the disparities are caused by implicit racial bias, given the number of people involved in the decision making that results in these disparities and the difficulty in training people to overcome implicit bias, interventions designed to eliminate disparities by reducing implicit racial bias may fail. Instead, policies designed to constrain the operation of implicit and/or explicit bias or that eliminate (or at a minimum reduce) problematic outcomes for everyone, regardless of race, may be more effective at reducing racial disparities than are interventions designed to eliminate implicit bias.

show abstract

Section: A Search For Solutionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Racial Disparities in the Criminal Justice System: Prevalence, Causes, and a Search for Solutions

Kovera

2019

Journal of Social Issues

111

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, Pigott and Cowen (2000) explored the extent to which perceived student race factors into teachers' judgment of student work. To illustrate, if a teacher is negatively biased toward students of color, they may see those students not as talented as White students, which may cause them to judge the student's work based on that perception (Ferman & Fontes, 2021;Jussim, 1989;Jussim et al, 2020). Indeed, "any internalized racial prejudice can activate biases and lead teachers to use discriminatory performance evaluations" (Wood & Graham, 2010, p. 177).…”

Section: Racial Biasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigating Racial Bias and Attribution Error in Grading Student Performance

Reibel,

Roegman

2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standards-based grading (SBG) is a more recent approach to grading that aims to reduce the impact of teacher biases that affect grading. This study investigates whether SBG effectively mitigates biases related to race and attribution errors that can distort traditional grading methods. To achieve this, a quantitative factorial vignette experiment was conducted to analyze the qualitative feedback given on student performance, shedding light on teachers' evaluative reasoning under SBG. Findings indicate that despite the structured framework of SBG, the evaluative process remains susceptible to a wide range of influencing factors, though there were no significant findings related to racial bias. The results of the factorial vignette experiment underscored that while SBG aims to objectify the grading process, some biases may still affect teachers' evaluations, highlighting the intricate web of factors involved in the evaluation process. The paper contributes significantly to the ongoing discourse surrounding modern grading systems, emphasizing the need for continuing evolution in grading methodologies to ensure fairness and objectivity in student assessments.

show abstract

“…For instance, the blatant cherry picking of performance data and the selective reporting of physiological sex differences recounted above are not easily attributed to naivete, especially when done by highly educated scientific researchers. Moreover, the deceptive research practices that underlay the claims of reversing sex gaps always worked in favor of the authors' claim-never against it, which is evidence of systematic bias (Jussim and Honeycutt, 2023). Simply put, the world records indisputably demonstrate that the gap between men and women world records has remained large since the 1980s, and yet some researchers chose to ignore these and other relevant data and instead argued that elite women will dominate elite men.…”

Section: Researcher Biasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Researcher bias and the enduring gap between the world’s fastest men and women

Rohrer

2024

Front. Physiol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Do IAT Scores Explain Racial Inequality?

Cited by 7 publications

References 0 publications

Racial Disparities in the Criminal Justice System: Prevalence, Causes, and a Search for Solutions

Racial Disparities in the Criminal Justice System: Prevalence, Causes, and a Search for Solutions

Investigating Racial Bias and Attribution Error in Grading Student Performance

Researcher bias and the enduring gap between the world’s fastest men and women

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About