|
|
|
I didn't say that the Macdonald article was "prominent and influential" but rather the IAT study and the implied bias theory that it supposedly supports. And Macdonald does debunk the test per se, attacking both its validity and reliability. She also attacks its implications and relevance. Perhaps you should read her article again and / or listen to her interview.
Should I take the test? Sure. That never occured to me. Do you know where I can find it?
Macdonald's larger point is that this theory and test that purportedly supports it is misguidedly used to perpetuate PC myths and the white guilt hair shirts we're supposed to wear these days. It's interesting listening to her in the interview where she explains how one of the study's creators has now distanced himself from its findings, the other is a die-hard ideologue who won't entertain serious questions and two of their assistants have broken rank and repudiated the project.
|
