Reducing Implicit Prejudice

Abstract

Implicit prejudices are social preferences that exist outside of conscious awareness or conscious control. In this review, we summarize evidence for three mechanisms that influence the expression of implicit prejudice: associative change, contextual change, and change in control over implicit prejudice. We then review the evidence (or lack thereof) for answers to five open issues in implicit prejudice reduction research: 1) what shows effectiveness in real-world application; 2) what doesn't work for implicit prejudice reduction; 3) what interventions produce long-term changes in implicit prejudice; 4) measurement diversity in implicit prejudice reduction research; and 5) the relationship between implicit prejudice and behavior. Addressing these issues provide an agenda for clarifying the conditions and implications of reducing implicit prejudice. Abstract = 115 words REDUCING IMPLICIT PREJUDICE

Implicit Preferences for Straight People over Lesbian Women and Gay Men Weakened from 2006 to 2013

“…Moreover, there is considerable interest and evidence for the malleability of implicit evaluation in the short term (e.g., [11,20]), but much less evidence for long-term or cultural shifts in evaluation (see [10] for a review). In order to determine the magnitude of change at the cultural level, researchers must examine shifts in mean bias across time.…”

“…It prompts a question of significant theoretical interest in attitude research: what has changed? Self-reported attitudes can shift because people change their minds or because expressing one's mind becomes fraught with social consequences [2,10]. It is possible that the shifts towards greater positivity toward lesbian women and gay men in past research are merely indicators of decreased willingness to express negative attitudes.…”

Malleability of implicit associations across development

“…One such factor is the prevalence of implicit, or unconscious, prejudice against out-groups. Substantial work with adults points to the possibility that these implicit cognitions can be modified, but the magnitude of this change is quite small (for a review, see Lai, Hoffman & Nosek, 2013;Gawronski & Bodenhausen, 2006). For example, the average effect size of successful implicit bias change in a recent meta-analysis examining the malleability of implicit biases in adults was d = .36 (Lai, Marini, Lehr, Cerruti, Shin et al, 2014).…”

Bridging the Research to Application Divide: Recommendations for Community-Based Participatory Research in a Military Setting

“…For example, training programs to address current challenges with the inclusion of individuals from diverse racial, ethnic, and cultural backgrounds would benefit from strong communication and collaboration between researchers and the military community. Community utilization of rigorously tested methods for prejudice reduction (e.g., Birtel & Crisp, 2012;Brannon & Walton, 2013;Devine, Forscher, Austin, & Cox, 2012;Lai, Hoffman, & Nosek, 2013) would prove fruitful for the development of programs that aim to promote unit cohesion and ethical climates. With the help of community members to define areas of program need and the adaptation of evidence-based practices, the resulting products have great potential.…”