Re: Hold on for a moment. My question was wrong
Re: Hold on for a moment. My question was wrong -- Jim Top of thread Post Reply Forum
Posted by:
aunt bea ®

10/31/2017, 12:13:12
Author Profile

Edit
Alert Forum Admin




Post Reply
One was not an abstract. You can download the PDF.

I can't comment as to whether the MacDonald article is prominent and influential. I only saw it when you posted it here and I never heard of the magazine or institute.

But let's talk about the validity of the study/test. By the way, I have known about this and took the test probably 15 years ago already. The main point about the article I think is that it questions the test as a predictor of discriminatory behavior. The writer is not debunking the test per se, only its conclusions in this context. Based on my own learning about neurobiology and behavior, I think it is extremely difficult if not impossible to use this kind of test to even measure attitude on a personal level let alone to predict behavior. I do think as a population statistic it is absolutely valid in terms of measuring implicit attitudes. The writer doesn't refute that (I don't think).

So what can we say about discriminatory behavior? The science is definitely not there yet to predict behavior on a personal level in just about any area. One person with prefrontal cortical damage becomes a murderer, another doesn't.

But broad-based measures of statistical tendencies have revealed a lot of interesting things. Let's look at a realm that ought to interest you as a lawyer. It has been demonstrated that judges give harsher sentences when they are hungry. You ought to make sure that the sentencing in your cases doesn't happen right before lunch.

So far so good right? But other studies have revealed that African-Americans with darker skin color get longer prison sentences. So yes, discriminatory behavior can and has been measured in all kinds of real and dramatic scenarios.

Even if the AIT was accurate on an individual level, the reason why it would not help too much with predicting the behavior of that person is because our decisions are alway a battle between the quicker, more emotional limbic part of the brain and the slower, more deliberative frontal cortex. That test is supposedly measuring the limbic response because it happens so fast. But that individual can check that impulse with a cognitive decision. Interestingly that needs more energy so that when people are mentally tired they will tend to be more impulsive and affective in their decisions. Also some individuals are much better at controlling their affective/impulsive  tendencies. So someone might have a strong bias measured by that test but never act on it.

So about the AIT being used by governments and businesses. I think it can be useful as a way of increasing self-awareness in people. But it can also make people feel unnecessarily bad about themselves.

Finally, one of the big problems with the test is that its measurement techniques are very inaccurate. You are measuring the speed of people pressing buttons. It is pretty easy to trick the test. That is why it is only useful as a broad statistical tool. If you want more accuracy, you would have to hook subjects up to an MRI or something similar and measure what is actually going on in their brain. There are lots of studies that do this, but obviously they can't be so broad-based like this test is.

Have you actually taken the test? If not you should before talking about it so much.






Previous Current page Next

Replies to this message