TOW #12: "The Roots of Implicit Bias"

"Implicit bias" is a subject that has been hotly debated over the past year, due to an increase in police brutality targeting the black community. The 2016 election, however, gave rise to a new discussion of race issues, as Hillary Clinton argued that "implicit bias is a problem for everyone, not just police" in the first presidential debate. For decades, scientists have been studying the issue that even well-meaning people have hidden prejudices against members of other racial groups. These prejudices can result in discrimination in various settings with devastating consequences. In this article, published in the Opinion section of the New York Times, psychologists Daniel A. Yudkin and Jay Van Bavel take a look at the validity of "implicit bias" from both a scientific and sociocultural perspective. The use of both perspectives helps audiences connect with and be more compliant to accepting the findings.

The issues discussed in this article tend to be controversial for some people, and Yudkin and Bavel take that into account by providing counterarguments for some of the stronger perspectives out there. They discuss the fact that "implicit bias is not about bigotry per se... [and] is grounded in a basic human tendency to divide the social world into groups" (3). By doing this early on in their piece, they try not to alienate readers coming in with extremely radical views. Additionally, they describe how this type of bias can be "overcome with rational deliberation" (4), providing hope to pessimistic readers.

The extensive experiment described in the article is incredibly influential and adds a layer of logical reasoning to the argument presented. Not only does this help solidify the basis behind readers who already believe in a sort of implicit bias, it adds a new layer of scientific and statistical evidence to help sway readers who may not be as willing to believe these ideas. The fact that much of the article relies on this experiment alone, combined with some anecdotal evidence, shows how effective this logical/statistical approach can be when attempting to persuade or convince an audience of something.

The conclusion of the article adds a layer of hope, saying that the research "suggests that people have the capacity to override their worst instincts - if they are able to reflect on their decision making as opposed to acting on their first impulse". The conclusion also furthers the argument, suggesting that these findings be used to help creating training programs for prosecutors and law enforcement officers in an attempt to remove any racial bias. In our current political atmosphere full of racially-charged threats, it is important that articles like these are being written to help show the flaws in our current way of thinking and help promote solutions to ultimately better our society.