Unconscious Bias

[WritersPanic]

I see this term used a lot these days. I also see there's no straight answer to describe the meaning of it. A few lines into a discussion about it if you don't agree, a Kafka trap is sent your way (since you refuse to accept it, you MUST be IT).

But today on LinkedIn, a place where this kind of FaceBook-esque conversation doesn't belong (it's a career killer), I see this:

https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:lyndaCourse:515183/?updateEntityUrn=urn%3Ali%3Afs_feedUpdate%3A%28V2%26VOYAGER_SINGLE_UPDATE%2Curn%3Ali%3AlyndaCourse%3A515183%29

It's a thread about a course one can see for free through the graces of the platform.

But what's interesting is what happens as you read the responses. And I had to read about 9 feet of them to gain a perspective. For one, people who lead an answer to a serious discussion with "Lol" and then a series of insults, are very difficult to be taken seriously. So that is a prime example of my own bias, and I don't feel like it's unconscious at all. I think I know when someone is not taking a discussion seriously and prefers to use it as a launch pad for criticism and personal jabs.

Reminds me a LOT of politics on HF.

But another bias I realized was formed each time I read a particular author's posts. If they started out with a position I didn't respect, it was very difficult to disengage with this when they posted something I agreed with. As I continued reading what I found was several people who fit this pattern as I read their posts. But as I continued down the page, I could see how they were also conflicted about the subject and were exploring it in the discussion. So it seems like their position is flexible, but confused.

The unfortunate side of this came from the learned professionals who I'd hope would rely on science and reality. In many cases they did so by providing examples of their position among the writings of Jung, Freud etc. Many of them seemed to be just as confused or just as determined to accept their own definition as the law of the land. When you go to the lesson, the comments there contain many examples of blatant racism in their workplaces from off-color "jokes" to career issues. Serious stuff actually.

And yet, they want to insist that "unconscious bias" is at the heart of this. There is nothing unconscious about discrimination, racism, nepotism and corruption. Nobody has to dig deep in the corners for this stuff when there's so many blatant examples to be put on display. It's second only to the ridiculous term "micro-aggressions" which also has one digging in the corner while the blatant problem is on full display.

But the really preposterous aspect of "unconscious bias" is the way those who wield the term seem to think they can "spot" unconscious bias. For this they rely heavily on tactics and verbal judo. Any factual discussion is discarded and the innuendo takes the wheel.

[Din Djarin]

first of all a semantic point: would it be even more accurately called: subconscious bias?

But what's interesting is what happens as you read the responses. And I had to read about 9 feet of them to gain a perspective. For one, people who lead an answer to a serious discussion with "Lol" and then a series of insults, are very difficult to be taken seriously. So that is a prime example of my own bias, and I don't feel like it's unconscious at all. I think I know when someone is not taking a discussion seriously and prefers to use it as a launch pad for criticism and personal jabs.

Recognizable :P

Imo having biases is only human and its wise to acknowledge no one is completely void of them. As usual its how we deal with them. Subconscious biases can pop up as spontaneous thoughts which we can consciously process. Some embrace them right away. Some do not recognize them as a bias.

[tumbling.dice]

I have conscious bias. News from either FOX or MSNBC I consider suspect, for example. 4Chan and similar sources are even worse. They could be right about something of course, but I won't believe anything based on the say so of any of the above sources.

[WritersPanic]

first of all a semantic point: would it be even more accurately called: subconscious bias?



Recognizable :P

Imo having biases is only human and its wise to acknowledge no one is completely void of them. As usual its how we deal with them. Subconscious biases can pop up as spontaneous thoughts which we can consciously process. Some embrace them right away. Some do not recognize them as a bias.

Maybe we'll get subliminal bias next.

[Beach Ball Bitch]

WritersPanic I think there is already subliminal Bias. A new thing which is called subliminal perception phenomena

[WritersPanic]

WritersPanic I think there is already subliminal Bias. A new thing which is called subliminal perception phenomena

I was speaking more to programming people into a preferred state of bias with subliminal persuasion. It can be applied in visual or audible formats.

[Beach Ball Bitch]

There are some psychologists who are playing with this and patients, like triggers, there is a series of stimulus that the person isn’t aware of, they are put under the influence and not conscious of what is triggering them. The five senses are used to stimulate the person unconsciously to react or do things. Like being turned on. It is called subliminal perception. Annoying too, commercials that throw in the sound of an iPhone or door bell to make you look up. Pay attention.

maybe this too which I think is a precursor to the perception. Subliminal priming. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6027235/

But it is used in advertising a lot.

[WritersPanic]

There are some psychologists who are playing with this and patients, like triggers, there is a series of stimulus that the person isn’t aware of, they are put under the influence and not conscious of what is triggering them. The five senses are used to stimulate the person unconsciously to react or do things. Like being turned on. It is called subliminal perception. Annoying too, commercials that throw in the sound of an iPhone or door bell to make you look up. Pay attention.

maybe this too which I think is a precursor to the perception. Subliminal priming. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6027235/

But it is used in advertising a lot.

It's used for loss prevention as well.

[Beach Ball Bitch]

WritersPanic

ah here we go.... there is a test you can take... to MAYBE tap into your implicit bias.
and your reaction time has nothing to do with left or right handed. Or your reaction time has nothing to do with doing things with one hand then switching hands and what they represent for answers. It is a bs test in my opinion.

[Beach Ball Bitch]

http://kirwaninstitute.osu.edu/research/understanding-implicit-bias/

[Beach Ball Bitch]

After the test and you are made aware of your subliminal, unconscious bias and racism... you get to be called racist... then you have explicit bias.

[Din Djarin]

I have conscious bias. News from either FOX or MSNBC I consider suspect, for example. 4Chan and similar sources are even worse. They could be right about something of course, but I won't believe anything based on the say so of any of the above sources.

Conscious bias is like standard bias. Everybody acknowledges bias is a thing. I think the concept of subconscious bias has a lot of merit. And it could be interesting seeing how others here see it.
Don't you?
And what about WritersPanic ? Does he reject the idea of unconscious bias as it is posed in the OP? Or alltogether?
Unconscious bias seems a nonsensical term to me btw. I mean unconscious means not conscious at all in my book. But subconscious bias is. It's what you're not consciously busy with or aware of.

[tumbling.dice]

Din Djarin I wasn't making any commentary about unconscious bias in my reply; it actually is interesting.

One episode of "Through The Wormhole" explored bias. In an experiment, police officers were confronted by images of people on a screen; some were harmless but some were dangerous. They had only a split second to decide whether they were in danger and how to react. Anyway, white officers accidentally shot at images of harmless black people more often than they shot at images of harmless white people. What is interesting is that the black officers did also. I can't remember why though, it's been a while since I've seen it.

[tumbling.dice]

Din Djarin You ever read Freakonomics? I think it covers some of this.

[Din Djarin]

Never heard of!

[tumbling.dice]

Din Djarin From the book cover..."Which is more dangerous, a gun or a swimming pool? Which should be feared more: snakes or french fries? Why do sumo wrestlers cheat? In this groundbreaking book, leading economist Steven Levitt—Professor of Economics at the University of Chicago and winner of the American Economic Association’s John Bates Clark medal for the economist under 40 who has made the greatest contribution to the discipline—reveals that the answers. Joined by acclaimed author and podcast host Stephen J. Dubner, Levitt presents a brilliant—and brilliantly entertaining—account of how incentives of the most hidden sort drive behavior in ways that turn conventional wisdom on its head."

I enjoyed the hell out of it.

[WritersPanic]

Conscious bias is like standard bias. Everybody acknowledges bias is a thing. I think the concept of subconscious bias has a lot of merit. And it could be interesting seeing how others here see it.
Don't you?
And what about WritersPanic ? Does he reject the idea of unconscious bias as it is posed in the OP? Or alltogether?
Unconscious bias seems a nonsensical term to me btw. I mean unconscious means not conscious at all in my book. But subconscious bias is. It's what you're not consciously busy with or aware of.

I think it's a confused perspective. Like the term "Physical Addiction", a mashing of Physical Dependence and Addiction. Since addiction is a condition of the mind, it is not a physical phenomenon at all. People get addicted to sex, food, porn, gambling and whining. It's entirely mental. However, physical dependence is only a physical phenomenon which is why you don't have elderly people knocking over pharmacies to score laxatives.

So I question the term "unconscious bias". Particularly the way it's being applied, as if a defect that MUST be corrected, before it has been fully defined and vetted.

What I do wonder though is what made the white and black police officers off so many friendlies in the test. Could it be that experience is a major contributing factor? After all, experience is the place of cemented learning. However, practice only makes a habit more permanent, not necessarily perfect. How many times would I have to watch a leopard eat a child before developing the "bias" toward the creatures as a whole to this effect? What of the millions of leopards who have never eaten a child? Do I assume they never will? Do I assume they always will?

The way I see this being examined is in a strictly critical and pessimistic vein. Nobody wants to think that this same mechanism might do more good than "evil". However, most of what we call evil is just parts of our primitive nature poking through the veil of being "civilized". Our systems of rules may be the only thing that keeps our neighbors from eating our children.

[WritersPanic]

And on the issue of Kafka......