fanghuilin

Professional thoughts

Caution is thus advised when it comes to programs aiming at reducing biases. Much more investigation into the long term effects of possible interventions is needed. The most problematic fine-grained implicit stereotypes need to be identified and a range of specifically-tailored interventions need to be designed to combat the whole gamut of prejudices that are problematic in our societies, not only targeting black/white race prejudice. More research needs to be conducted examining the conditions under which interventions will work and the factors that make them fail.

The fact that there is scarce evidence for particular bias-reducing techniques does not weaken the case for implementing widespread structural and institutional changes that are likely to reduce implicit biases, but that are justified for multiple reasons.

Feedback

The intervention has become attractive to the experts
The scenario could be more plentiful
Static web has restrained the final effect compared with dynamic website
There could be an internet forum section for participants to have more engagements with out groups More precise descriptions of appearance are required
I am happy to see people are waking up to their inner bias and trying to be in touch with story providers The intervention needs to be updated frequently to construct participants’ cognition

One participant have told me about an idea to set up a forum if am going to establish a dynamic web in the future instead of share the result online. He suggests me to consider gathering people from out groups to join the forum. And it can become a perfect place for people to communicate and look for counterexamples.

There also could be a unconscious bias training section. But it would require experts to join in. Implicit bias training will give participants the skills that they need to manage and overcome their own implicit biases.

As we mentioned before, restraining implicit bias or stereotype requires repeated process and long periods. So the web must be updated and renewed frequently to receive constant inputs to remain the effect. And there are some participants suggesting me to broaden the scenarios and characters.

Test with stakeholder

I have invited about 10 persons in total. All of them are volunteers I found on instagram. I am surprised that nearly half are willing to send me emails with their codes. So here are the comments after I post their viewpoints:

There is an example that really impresses me. The participant has chosen a guy who she assumed that would be a good foster father. And the reason was that he was white and well-dressed. I have got some responses online. A girl told me a story about his cousin-in-law, who was a successful lawyer and father of two kids. He was found a violent pedophilia after divorced with his wife.

Nearly all participants have received responses. Stories told by real persons obviously have stronger impact to them. And I suggest participants to exchange emails with providers if they are willing to. 

I am more than flattered to see that participants replied to my email. It has impacted their cognition and bias. One participant is willing to be in touch with the story provider. I wish this new friendship would further contribute to intervention.

INTERVENTION:

In the discussion with two experts, they all agreed with that my previous intervention idea could only be regarded as a trigger to let participants be aware of their bias but can’t be a proper tool to restrain the bias, which must be more in-depth and relevant to participants’ personal emotions. Also, as a game, it has limited effectiveness period. It may won’t work to stimulate any changes of participants’ cognition.

As I have talked with Zuleika, she suggests me to create a proper criteria of judgement. The standard of ‘bad’ or ‘good’ can not be decided by me so easily. The evidence needs to be more valid. And judgement would better be more precise and targeted. She also suggests me to narrow down the range of bias I am going to intervene.

As I want my intervention be more specific and detailed, and there needs to be a proper judgment criteria, I have redesigned the process as a story with special scenario. The beginning of the story could be a girl/boy looking for a foster parent. And after moving to another city, you will have a chance to choose a neighbor to become your best friend, who would you choose? A good looking serial killer or a miserable lesbian? Different decisions would lead to different roads of life. Also, you can try to pick the one you dislike the most and see how dramatic the comparison in the end would be. After each choice, there will be options of each person’s feature details waiting for you to choose. Photos are the only evidence. And to simplify the process, there would be codes to represent each option. After filling the whole life story, I would like to post the reasons online and see if others have counter- examples. Letting people share their stories and engaging with others’ prospectives can expand the group of participants and reinforce cognition. Meanwhile, as we are not only judging people by their looks, the intervention also could be run in other ways. For instance, evidence can be changed to voice, which also usually causes biases in our life.

I firstly thought of making a powerpoint file. But it is really unhandy. So I started to think of creating a website for participants to take part in. I found my friend who’s an expert of making web and ask him for help. He was going to create a web based on the pages I designed in ppt.

Ideally, I hope I could create a special website and share it online for people who would like to participate in this intervention. When participants click the button of their choice of reasons, the codes and his contact information would be automatically sent to my email. But It seems like too expensive and complicated to do so. So I had my friend who helped to create a static website. But there will be several defects. For instances, the data couldn’t be collected and participants need to send emails to me on their won initiative.

I invited some of my friends and volunteers who would like to take part in from. I posted their result and choice on instagram and seek for counter- examples from my followers. There is an example that really impresses me. The participant has chosen a guy who she assumed that would be a good foster father. And the reason was that he was white and well-dressed. I have got some responses online. A girl told me a story about his cousin-in-law, who was a successful lawyer and father of two kids. He was found a violent pedophilia after divorced with his wife.

Mechanism

Retrain the underlying associations

Shift the context of evaluation

Control the activation or application of associations

Effective interventions:

1. Engaging with others’ perspective, consciousness-raising or imagining contact with outgroup – participants either imagine how the outgroup thinks and feels, are made aware of the way the outgroup is marginalised or given new information about the outgroup, or imagine having contact with the outgroup.
2. Identifying the self with the outgroup – participants perform tasks that lessen barriers between themselves and the outgroup.
3. Exposure to counterstereotypical exemplars – participants are exposed to exemplars that contradict the stereotype of the outgroup.
4. Appeals to egalitarian values – participants are encouraged to activate egalitarian goals or think about multiculturalism, co-operation or tolerance.
5. Evaluative conditioning – participants perform tasks to strengthen counterstereotypical associations.
6. Inducing emotion –emotions or moods are induced in participants
7. Intentional strategies to overcome biases – participants are instructed to implement strategies to override or suppress their biases.
8. Drugs – participants take a drug.

The most effective categories were: intentional strategies to overcome biases; exposure to counterstereotypical exemplars ; identifying the self with the outgroup ; evaluative conditioning ; and inducing emotion. The sole study in our drugs category was effective. The appeals to egalitarian values category had 4 interventions that were effective and 4 that were not. The largest category was engaging with others’ perspective, with 11 interventions, but a mere 4 of these were effective.

To some extent, the ineffectiveness of interventions after a longer time period is to be expected. Implicit biases have been partly formed through repeated exposure to associations: their very presence hints at their being not only generated but also maintained by culture. Any counter-actions, even if effective immediately, would then themselves be rapidly countered since participants remain part of their culture from which they receive constant inputs. To tackle this, interventions may need to be repeated frequently or somehow be constructed so that they create durable changes in the habits of participants. More in-depth interventions where participants follow a whole course or interact frequently with the out-group have been successful.

With experts:

It took me about one week to find experts who have studied about implicit bias. Even for psychologist, implicit bias is a less desirable topic. Among the experts that I have been in contact with, most of them discussed with me about bias in a broad sense. Luckily, I finally found two psychologists who had professional understanding about implicit bias.

I had a discussion with two psychologists. They all agree that it is more than complex and difficult to eliminate implicit bias completely. And in some case it is meaningless as it only has limited influence.It would require long time conditioning and constant effort. Implicit bias can be regarded as a high probability event. But it is definitely worth containing those biases when it is going to become explicit. One very effective method is proving a counter- example. Concentrating to observe others’ characteristic feature but not only the information that he belongs to the groups could also help. I introduced my ntervention idea to them and they quite like my idea. It shows peoples’ mental tendentiousness while they are deciding which person to choose. But still, there are things more than that needed to be considered.

CONCLUSION:

A The uncomfortable truth is that we live in a society in which stereotypes about groups of people are ubiquitous, and it follows that almost everyone has some implicit bias
It is nearly impossible to eliminate implicit bias, but It is very meaningful and necessary to contain bias in case of being explicit

B For some special industries like customs or police, intervening their implicit bias which may affect their judgement can prevent likely faults

C One very effective method is providing a counter- example. Concentrating to observe others’ characteristic feature but not only the information that he belongs to the groups could also help.

D Any counter-actions, even if effective immediately, would then themselves be rapidly countered since participants remain part of their culture from which they receive constant inputs. To tackle this, interventions may need to be repeated frequently or somehow be constructed so that they create durable changes in the habits of participants.

Advice for future studies in this area can be summarized as follows:

Investigate the effect of interventions on implicit stereotypes as well as implicit prejudices

Use large sample sizes

Pre-register study designs

Use key words and titles that will span disciplines

Include all relevant study parameters in the title and abstract

Include all statistical analyses and data when publishing

Include all the details of the study method

Investigate the long term effects of interventions

Investigate the effects of institutional/organizational changes on implicit biases

Test interventions on a wide range of real workforces outside universities

Intervention concept 4:

This could be played as a little party/drinking game. And it is a combination of education, awareness and finding exceptions. Basically, I have collected data of a bunch of people, who could be criminals, normal citizens or excellent enterprisers etc. I would give each of them a mark which is a total of two different marks-personal and social. Personal mark means his/her personal happiness and satisfaction, while social represents his/her contribution or harm to society or others. All marks will be made by me based on real data that collected online. There might be some deviation, especially on personal feelings. But I set this game to normal people, I will assume the result is made from normal being’s point of view.

Each person’s photo will be printed on playing card. There will be a number representing the card. People need to refer to the notebook to know further details and reasons. The marks and background story will be demonstrated on the notebook.

Every turn participants would need to pick 5 persons who they assume have the lowest/highest points. In another word, they need to choose five guys who look most evil or noble. Five marks need to be added up. The person who get the lowest/highest mark is the winner. Similarly, if your mark is higher/lower than anyone else, you lose the game.

EXAMPLES:

Intervention concept 3:
Gather around 20 persons who haven’t seen each other before and practice a game called ‘WHO YOU THINK IS THE BEST…’ .And all participants will be divided into two groups A and B.

Basically one person would be named to set a theme such as painting, math or yoga etc. For example, Group A needs to select 3 persons from group B who they think look like an artist most . Then the 6 participants need to show their drawing or painting skills. And selectors need to speak reasons and explain why.

This game is totally based on people’s first impression and can demonstrate implicit bias in a very apparent way. Also, after the game, I will offer everyone a sheet to write if they have changed assumption of someone during process of the game. As we mentioned, working closely is helpful to breaking down bias between us

Disadvantages:

It is difficult to find 20 people gathering under the pandemic. And there will only be asian participants which means the data has limitation.

INTERVENTION CONCEPT 1:

Invite people from different age and profession groups, and restyle them in accordance with their preference. The comparison has to be clear and distinct.

For example:

The ‘before and after’ photos need to be printed separately and bound together in book form. There will be several blank pages behind each photo left to be filled in stories that readers assume is real, including their age, occupation & sex orientation etc.

After finishing the story book, I will invite people who haven joined the experiment to an introduction party. They will get to know the real face and story of each model demonstrated in every page and check with them whether their assumption is accurate.

disadvantages:

I asked some of my friends, only a few of them could be available to be the models. And it is not easy to hold a party or event that everybody can attend together.

INTERVENTION CONCEPT 2:

It is now very popular for young people to make friends online. And mostly when people use the apps like Tinder or Tantan, they choose and judge others by their looks in photos.

I have been been quite familiar with these apps as I used some of them. I met some interesting people who are way more attractive than their pictures, however, few have very outstanding profiles but look very dull in real life. Also, my friend told me a story that he met a man who dressed up like a girl. He was shocked because obviously he wants to date a women just as the photos. I think it could be a good tool to text strangers’ assumption and verify internet falsity.

I could find and match different people and record their impression towards me. we could have a drink and I would love to listen what they think I am like, as well as other people like my friend, colleges and even strangers. Also, I would exchange my view about what he/she is like to me with them. I will be interested to know what details give them certain assumption and the reason behind it.

Disadvantage :

It would took to much time to match people online. Not much people are willing to join as they are here to meet partners or sex partners. And it will cost me too much to pay the dinner, drinks and tax fees.