Testing for implicit bias: Values, psychometrics, and science communication.

IF 3.2 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews-Cognitive Science Pub Date : 2022-02-21 DOI:10.31234/osf.io/y5nm9
Nick Byrd, Morgan Thompson
{"title":"Testing for implicit bias: Values, psychometrics, and science communication.","authors":"Nick Byrd, Morgan Thompson","doi":"10.31234/osf.io/y5nm9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Our understanding of implicit bias and how to measure it has yet to be settled. Various debates between cognitive scientists are unresolved. Moreover, the public's understanding of implicit bias tests continues to lag behind cognitive scientists'. These discrepancies pose potential problems. After all, a great deal of implicit bias research has been publicly funded. Further, implicit bias tests continue to feature in discourse about public- and private-sector policies surrounding discrimination, inequality, and even the purpose of science. We aim to do our part by reconstructing some of the recent arguments in ordinary language and then revealing some of the operative norms or values that are often hidden beneath the surface of these arguments. This may help the public learn more about the science of implicit bias. It may also help both laypeople and scientists reflect on the values, interests, and stakeholders involved in establishing, justifying, and communicating scientific research. This article is categorized under: Cognitive Biology > Social Development.","PeriodicalId":47720,"journal":{"name":"Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews-Cognitive Science","volume":"62 1","pages":"e1612"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews-Cognitive Science","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/y5nm9","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Our understanding of implicit bias and how to measure it has yet to be settled. Various debates between cognitive scientists are unresolved. Moreover, the public's understanding of implicit bias tests continues to lag behind cognitive scientists'. These discrepancies pose potential problems. After all, a great deal of implicit bias research has been publicly funded. Further, implicit bias tests continue to feature in discourse about public- and private-sector policies surrounding discrimination, inequality, and even the purpose of science. We aim to do our part by reconstructing some of the recent arguments in ordinary language and then revealing some of the operative norms or values that are often hidden beneath the surface of these arguments. This may help the public learn more about the science of implicit bias. It may also help both laypeople and scientists reflect on the values, interests, and stakeholders involved in establishing, justifying, and communicating scientific research. This article is categorized under: Cognitive Biology > Social Development.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
内隐偏见的检验:价值观、心理测量学和科学传播。
我们对内隐偏见的理解以及如何衡量它还有待解决。认知科学家之间的各种争论尚未解决。此外,公众对内隐偏见测试的理解仍然落后于认知科学家。这些差异带来了潜在的问题。毕竟,大量的内隐偏见研究是由政府资助的。此外,隐性偏见测试继续在围绕歧视、不平等甚至科学目的的公共和私营部门政策的讨论中发挥作用。我们的目标是通过用日常语言重建一些最近的论点,然后揭示一些隐藏在这些论点表面之下的操作规范或价值观,从而尽我们的一份力量。这可能有助于公众更多地了解内隐偏见的科学。它还可以帮助外行和科学家反思建立、证明和交流科学研究所涉及的价值观、利益和利益相关者。本文分类如下:认知生物学、社会发展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
50
期刊最新文献
The Multiple Dimensions of Familiarity: From Representations to Phenomenology. Compositionality in perception: A framework. An update of the development of motor behavior. Consciousness Under the Spotlight: The Problem of Measuring Subjective Experience. Catching Mind Wandering With Pupillometry: Conceptual and Methodological Challenges.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1