reading list summaries table of contents · reading list summaries table of contents ... but he and...
TRANSCRIPT
1
UNDERSTANDINGTHEROLEOFIMPLICITBIASINFUELINGTHESCHOOLTOPRISONPIPELINE
Reading List Summaries
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Implicit Bias Within the School Environments p.2
II. ImplicitBiaswithintheJuvenileandCriminalJusticeSystem,WithImplicationsforSchooltoPrisonPipeline p.9
III. ImplicitBiasMoreGenerally,WithImplicationforitsOperationwithinthePipelineContext p.18
IV. PotentialRemedies/InterventionswithinthePipelineContext p.22
2
I. STUDIESFOCUSINGSPECIFICALLYONSCHOOLENVIRONMENTS:JulieLandsman,“ConfrontingtheRacismofLowExpectations”EducationalLeadershipVol.62,No.3(November2004). AlthoughLandsmanfocusesonunderstandingtheachievementgap,heremphasis
onthelowexpectationsofpredominantlywhiteteachersfortheeducationalfuturesof
theirminoritystudentsmayeasilybeappliedtootherrealms.Studentsofcolorare
affectedbyteacherswhosystematically(albeitmostoftenunconsciously)underestimate
boththeirintelligenceandtheirpotentialforgood,productivebehaviorintheclassroom.
Toopenhershortpiece,Landsmanpresentsuswithanimage:
InanaffluentsuburbofNewYorkCity,inthemidstoflargebackyardsand
roses�alongstonewallsandthekindofbrokenbeautyIhavealwayslovedfrommyown�childhoodthere,ablackmansitsatthebreakfasttablewithhistwosons,ages7�and9.Helooksfromonetotheotherand,withgreatseriousnessandhope,tells�themtheyarespectacularboys.Ashedoeseverymorning,hetellsthemtheycandoanythinginthisworld,dreamanydream.Thentheboysfinishbreakfastandgoofftothenearbyelementaryschool.
Thefatherhascreatedthisdailyritualbecausehebelievesthathissonswillspendthenextsixtosevenhoursbeinggiventheoppositemessage.HeisarichmanandhasworkedincorporateAmericamostofhislife.HelovesthispartofNewYorkanditsexcellent,well‐appointedschools.Butheandhisfamilyaretakingagamblelivinghere.Thecostisgreat,notjustintermsofpropertytaxes,butintermsofpotentialdamagetohissons'psyches.Asoneofonlytwoorthreestudentsofcolorineachoftheirclasses,theseboyshaveagoodchanceofbeingobjectsofcuriosityandcondescension,orvictimsoflowexpectations.Dailyencouragementisthisfather'swayofcounteringassumptionsthathissonsarelikelytofaceinschool:thattheycannotdotheworkassigned,thattheydonotcomefromafunctionalfamily,andeven—tuckedbackinateacher'ssubconscious—thattheyareinnatelylessintelligentthantheirwhitepeers.
Whereassomepolicy‐makerscontinuetodenyandmakeexcuses,thisfather
assumestheexistenceofapervasive“racismoflowexpectations”eveninhischildren’s
well‐funded,suburbanpublicschool.
3
CarlaMonroe,“WhyAre“BadBoys”alwaysBlack?CausesofDisproportionalityinSchoolDisciplineandRecommendationsforChange,”ClearingHouse:AJournalofEducationalStrategies,IssuesandIdeasVol.79,No.1(Fall2005). Monroetalksaboutthe“disciplinegap,”orthe“overrepresentationofblack,male,
andlow‐incomestudentsonindicesofschooldiscipline”(46). Morespecifically,sheasks,
“howimagesofAfricanAmericanmenandboysinsocietyatlargerelatetoteachers’
notionsabouteffectivedisciplinarystrategiesbasedonstudentraceandgender?”(46)
Schooltrends,Monroesays,reflectcurrentsofthenationalcontextsinwhichtheyexist.She
discussesthreegeneralconditionsthatcontributetodisciplinarydisparities:1)the
criminalizationofblackmales,2)raceandclassprivilege,and3)zerotolerancepolicies.
Monroeconcludesbygivingfourbroadrecommendationsforclosingthegap:
1) ProvideopportunitiesforteacherstointerrogatetheirbeliefsaboutAfrican
Americanstudents,
2) Incorporateandvalueculturallyresponsivedisciplinarystrategies,
3) Broadenthediscoursearoundschooldisciplinarydecisions,and
4) Maintainlearners’interestthroughengaginginstruction.
Ingeneral,schoolinequitiesinvolvingAfricanAmericansarebestaddressedthroughrace‐
consciousapproachesatthelevelofteacherpreparationandprofessionaldevelopment.
ChaunceeD.Smith,“DeconstructingthePipeline:EvaluatingSchool‐to‐PrisonPipelineEqualProtectionCasesThroughaStructuralRacismFramework,”FordhamUrbanLawJournal36(2009). LikeLandsman,Smithacknowledgesthatthedynamicprocessleadingtothe
pipelineinvolvestheintersectionofzero‐tolerancepoliciesandeducational“tracking”
(1013).Theschool‐to‐prisonpipelineis,inotherwords,significantlyinter‐institutional.
AccordingtoSmith,weneedtothinkaboutpipelinepoliciesasgivingrisetolegalclaims.
Shewrites:
Forinstance,becausetheadministrationofzero‐toleranceorotherexclusionarypoliciesoftenresultsinstudentsofcolorbeingdisparatelypushedoutofschoolsuchpoliciesmaygiverisetoclaimsundertheEqualProtectionClauseoftheFourteenthAmendment,TitleVIoftheCivilRightsActof1964,§1983ofTitle42of
4
theUS.Code,andstateequalprotectionandrighttoequalprotectionclauses.(1020)
Smithfocusesonequalprotectionlaw.Sheclaimsthatourcurrentequalprotection
paradigmsfailtoaccountforsystemicinequality(1014).
Motive‐centeredapproachestoequalprotection—likethosesupportedin
Washingtonv.Davis—onlyconsiderinstancesofovert,purposefuldiscriminatorypractice.
Instead,Smitharguesthatexaminingpipelineequalprocesscasesthroughastructural
racismframeworkwouldallowstudentsofcolortobemoreadequatelyprotectedthan
underamotive‐centeredapproach.Byintegratingcriticalracetheoryandsystemsscience,
astructuralracismapproachtoequalprotectionlawwouldmoreaptlyaccountforthe
realitiesofsystemicinequality.Weneedtoconsiderimplicitbiases.Thatis,asSmith
explains,“cognitivepsychologyshowsthat,evenintheabsenceofanoutrightintentto
discriminatepeopleactaccordingtounconsciousbiasesthatmakethembehave
discriminatorily”(1022‐23).Discriminatoryimpactexistsapartfromdiscriminatory
motive.Withregardtotheschool‐to‐prisonpipeline,fragmentedinequitiesaffectedby
institutionalcriminalization,sortingandeconomicdimensions“haveadrasticallyunequal
cumulativeimpactonstudentsofcolor”(1027).Astructuralracismframeworkwould
meaningfullyhelptoaddressthepipeline’s“systemicinvidiousness”(1049).
JosieFoehrenbachBrown,“EscapingtheCirclebyConfrontingClassroomStereotyping:ASteptowardEqualityintheDailyEducationalExperienceofChildrenofColor,”African‐AmericanLawandPolicyRep.Vol.6(2004). FoehrenbachBrownbeginsbythinkingaboutthelegacyofBrownv.Boardof
Education.Afterfiftyyears,shesays,itistimetotakeacloserlookatoursupposed
progress—atthe“educationalfortunesofAfrican‐Americanchildren”sinceMay17,1954.
Theview,ifconsideredhonestly,oughttobeunpleasant.FoehrenbachBrownallegesthat
AmericanpubliceducationremainstrappedinGunnarMyrdal’s“viciouscircle”(135).In
1944,Myrdaldescribedhowwhiteprejudiceimposedconditionsofdeprivationonblacks
throughdiscriminatorypracticesandthenlookedattheresultofthoseconditionsasa
confirmationoftheirprejudicedviewpoint.Inthetwenty‐firstcentury,childrenofcolorare
facingpatternsof“resegregation”and“isolation”thatarestrikingfamiliar(135).
5
FoehrenbachBrown,inanattemptatexplanation,citesProfessorRevaSiegal:“Professor
SiegaldemonstrateshowAmericanlawtoooftendismantlesformallegalstructuresbut
ignoreshowtheinjusticeimposedbythoselegalmechanismscontinuestobeenforced
throughnewvariationsonoldpractice.”Theconsequentcharacterizationofinjusticeasa
sortofobsolete“distantpast”distractsusfrom“evidenceofcontinuinggovernmentaland
socialpracticesthatperpetuatepasthierarchies”(136).Injusticelivesbeyondthelaw.
AccordingtoFoehrenbachBrown,intheyearsfollowingtheBrowndecision,theU.S.
hasfailedtounderstandthefar‐reachingimplicationsof“transitionaljustice”(oflack
thereof)fortherealmofeducationreform.Shearguesthatthosechargedwith
implementingthedecisionhavefailedtodevotesufficientattentionto“thechallengeof
translatingthatlegalnormintoanoperationalrealityintheinstitutionalcontextofthe
Americanpublicschool”(138).Sheparticularlyemphasizestheroleofteachersinrelation
tothis“inattentiontothemechanicsofattitudetransformation”(138).Inotherwords,
FoehrenbachBrownlocatestheoriginsofimplicitbiasinthe“attitudinalremnants”ofthe
difficult—andperhapslargelyunsuccessful—transitionawayfromschoolsegregationafter
theBrowndecision.Evensubconsciousdisparatetreatmenteffectsstudentself‐
perception,senseofindividuality,andculturalbelonging.“[U]nconsciousbias,”shewrites,
“inflictsaconditionofwoundinginvisibilityonchildrenofcolorinourraciallystratified
schoolenvironments”(147).
Howshouldwebestdealwiththeeliminationofsuchharmful“subconscious
contaminants”(145)?Itistimefortheimplementationofrace‐consciousremedial
strategies.Shemakestheclaimthatespeciallythe“problemofteacherstereotypingof
minoritystudentsrepresentsaworthyobjectofcorrectiveaction”(142).Weneedtowork
tocounteractmutual“socialdistance”and“wariness”instudent‐teacherrelations(145).
FoehrenbachBrownreturnstotheideaoftransitionaljusticeandappliesittocreationof
scientificallyconstructedprogramsforanti‐stereotypingtrainingforteachers.Again,any
changeintherightdirectionrequirespoliticalwill.Allthesame,“Adoptionofthetraining
recommendationwouldreflectanhonestrecognitionofhowthedistortedimagesformour
nation’sdiscriminatorypastandouroftenraciallyandethnicallydividedpresentinhibit
ourcapacitytoseeeachotherclearly”(149).Thisrecognitionhasbeeninappropriately
delayed—butitiscertainlynottoolate.
6
CarolJ.Greenhouse,“LifeStories,Law’sStories:SubjectivityandResponsibilityinthePoliticizationoftheDiscourseof‘Identity,’”PoLAR:PoliticalandLegalAnthropologyReviewVol.31,No.1(May2008).
FoehrenbachBrown,intheabovearticle,underlinesthepotentiallydamaging
effectsofimplicitracialbiastothedevelopmentofstudentindividuality.CarolGreenhouse
highlightstherhetoricofidentityandindividualitytheemergedwithintheframeworkof
theBrowndecisionandtheargumentoftheplaintiffs.Shewrites,“Theconceptof
“identity”asitcirculatesasatheoreticalobjectinthehumansciencesintheUnitedStates
isdeeplysuffusedwiththefederaldiscourseoftheBrowneraanditslegacy”(82).
AccordingtoPeggyDavis,acrucialelementoftheplaintiff’sstrategyinBrownwas
theirevocationoftheU.S.asa“multiculturalpoliticalcommunity”(81).Theeffectofthis
strategy,Greenhouseclaims,wasto“openconstitutionalinterpretationtonewparticipants
andperspectives”(81).“Personhood,”shewrites,wasre‐conceptualizedas“forgedoutof
theelementsoffederalcitizenship”(81).Individualityandindividualidentityarenot
necessarilysolelyfunctionsoftheindividual.“Identity”isnotsimplysomethingthatevery
individual“has.”Rather,itisasocialfunctionwithsocialconsequences.Thecourt’s
languageinBrownconjurestwofuturesatonce—theoutcomes(likethechildren
themselves)entirelyvulnerabletosocialactionorinaction.Greenhouseexplains:
Onefutureispromising,asAfricanAmericanchildrengrowuptobefulfilledandproductivecitizens.Theotherisbleak,assomeAfricanAmericanchildrenaredamagedbythestigmaofracialprejudice,andgrowupdiscouraged,idle–evendangerous(82).
Educationisarightofcitizenship.Andagain,“personhood”emergesfrom“the
elementsoffederalcitizenship”(81).Anyconceptionofidentityorindividual“rights,”in
turn,cannotbeseparatedfromsocialreality.Greenhouseimpliesanunderstandingof
implicitbiasthatlawslikethefailedCRAof1990failedtoencompass.Inequalityshouldbe
understoodnotas“thesourceofdifference,butthesymptomofdifferencesbeyondthedirect
scopeoflaw.”(84)Atleastfornow.
7
KatayoonMajd,“StudentsoftheMassIncarcerationNation,”HowardLawJournalVol.54(2011).
AccordingtoMajd,“Schoolshave—unwittinglyornot—servedas‘accomplices’tothe
projectofmassincarceration”(360).Crimecontrolhasbecomethedefiningparadigmfor
educationofpolicy.LoicWacquantcallspublicschools“institutionsofconfinement”whose
“primarymissionisnottoeducatebuttoensure‘custodyandcontrol;”(361).Moreover,
thestudentsmostimpactedbyhighlypunitiveschoolpoliciesaresimilardemographically
tothosemostlikelytofindthemselveswithinthecriminaljusticesystem.Thatis,poor
menofcolor.Majdwrites,“Inthisway,schoolsreproduceandreinforcethesocial
inequitiesthatexistinthelabormarket”(363).AfricanAmericanmen,inparticular,are
oftenforcedoutentirely.
Juvenilecourtsundoubtedlyplayanimportantroleinthecriminalizationof
students.Schoolswouldnotbeabletocontinuehavingyoutharrestedwithintheirwallsif
thecourtswerenotwillingtohearcasesforoffenseslike“disorderlyconduct”and
“disturbingthepeace.”What’smore,oncewithinthesystem,studentsoftenfind
themselvessetuptofail.“Courtinvolvement,”Majdpointsout,“becomeanother,high‐
stakesmeansofsurveillanceratherthanawaytorehabilitateyouth”(371).Theterm
“school‐to‐prisonpipeline”initselfdemonstratesthetroublesomeinter‐institutional
natureofmassincarceration.Ifoneentrancepointiscutoff,itislikelythatanewonewill
emergesomewhere.The“symbioticrelationship”thathasdevelopedbetweenthe
educationandcriminaljusticesystemsmeansthatchallengingpoliciesinjustonesystemis
notlikelytofullyaddresstheproblem(372).
Inmorethanoneway,schoolsarecasualtiesofmassincarceration(382).Beyond
thefactthatschoolshaveimitatedthenation’sobsessionwithpunitiveness,theyhavealso
hadtodealwithagrowingnumberofstudentswithaparentorguardianbehindbars.
Additionally,schoolbudgetshavesufferedascorrectionscosthaveskyrocketed.
DismantlingmassincarcerationintheU.S.willmeanreversingitsspreadintotherealmof
education.Collaborativereformefforts,Majdargues,willbekey.
KellyWelchandAllisonAnnPayne,“RacialThreatandPunitiveSchoolDiscipline,”SocialProblemsVol.57,No.1(February2010).
8
Usinganationalsampleof294publicschools,thisstudyteststheracialthreat
hypothesiswithinschoolstodetermineiftheracialcompositionofstudentspredicts
greateruseofpunitivecontrols,regardlessoflevelsofmisbehavioranddelinquency.
WelchandPaynefoundsupportfortheracialthreathypothesis.Schoolswithalarger
percentageofblackstudentsarenotonlymorelikelytousepunitivedisciplinary
responses,butarealsomorelikelytouseextremelypunitivepractices(likezerotolerance
policies).Theyalsoemployfewmildpracticesandrestitutivetechniques.Moreover,
racialthreatismorepronouncedandinfluentialwhenschooldelinquencyanddisorderare
actuallyattheirlowest.
9
II. STUDIESADDRESSINGIMPLICITBIASWITHINTHEJUVENILEANDCRIMINALJUSTICESYSTEM,WITHIMPLICATIONSFORSCHOOLTOPRISON
PIPELINE:JenniferEberhardt,R.RichardBanks,LeeRoss,“DiscriminationandImplicitBiasinaRaciallyUnequalSociety,”CaliforniaLawReviewVol.94(2006). Howmuchbiasremainsinpeople’sheartsandminds?(1169)Whatwoulditmean
toberaciallyunbiased?Eberhardtetal.recognizethat,“incorporatinginequalityinto
antidiscriminationanalysisunderscoresthedifficultyofthechallengeswefacein
attemptingtorefashiontheraciallegacyofourpast”(1171).Intheend,theymakean
argumentthatverymuchresemblesBanks’claimabouttheessentialindeterminacyof
“nondiscrimination.”
Thisarticlelooksatstudiesthatexaminetheinfluenceofraceandimplicitbiaseson
investigativedecisionmaking,theuseoflethalforce,andcriminalsentencing.Onestudy
(byEberhardtandcolleagues)observedanimplicitassociationbetweenraceand
perceivedcriminality.PoliceofficerswereexposedtoagroupofBlackfacesoragroupof
Whitefacesandasked,“Wholookscriminal?”Thestudyfoundthatpoliceofficersnotonly
viewedmoreBlackfacesascriminal,butalsoviewedthoseBlackfacesratedasthemost
“stereotypicallyBlack”asthemostcriminalofall.Shootingbehaviorstudieshave
consistentlyfoundthatcomputerizedimagesofunarmedBlackmeninvideogame
simulationsweremorelikelytobe“shot”thanwereimagesofunarmedwhitemen.And,
withregardtocapitalsentencingresearch,themostcommonfindingisthatkillersofWhite
victimsaremorelikelytobesentencedtodeaththanarekillersofBlackvictims.These
studies—fewamongmany—demonstratedisparitieswhichpointtoconsiderableracial
discrimination.
Anyefforttoeliminatedisparitiesintherealmofcriminaljustice,however,willbe
complicated.Theeliminationofonedisparityislikelytoproducemoreanddistinct
disparities.AfricanAmericansbothdisproportionatelycommitandarevictimizedby
violentcrime.Anyconventionalsolutionwillbeatradeoff.Moreover,inasocietyas
chronicallyunequalasours,thequestionofwhatshouldcountasracialbiasisitself
contestable.Withthisinmind,Eberhardtetal.contendthatourapparentnational
10
consensusthat“discriminationiswrong”oughttoberejectedasanormativefantasy.That
is,“Theascendanceoftheantidiscriminationprincipleandthedisavowalofracismhave
relocatedratherthanresolveddisagreementaboutthemeaningofracialequalityinthisfirst
decadeofthetwenty‐firstcentury”(1190).Instead,weshouldrealisticallyconsider
questionsofracialfairnessbylookingdirectlyattheharmsandbenefitsofparticular
policies.
TamarBirckhead,“DelinquentbyReasonofPoverty,”WashingtonUniversityJournalofLaw&PolicyVol.38(2012). Thisarticleexploresthedisproportionaterepresentationoflow‐incomechildren
withintheU.S.juvenilejusticesystem.Birckheadarguesfirmlyagainstwhatshecalls
“need‐based”delinquency.Sheexplainsthat“theemphasisonfamilies’needswhen
adjudicatingdelinquencyhasadisproportionateeffectonlow‐incomechildren,resultingin
highratesofrecidivismandperpetuatingnegativestereotypesbasedonclass”(54).
In2008,courtswithjuvenilejurisdictionhandled1.7milliondelinquencycases.
Morethan500,000ofthesecasesresultedinchildrenbeingplacedonprobation
supervision.Morethan80,000youthwereconfinedinjuvenilefacilities.Atthesametime,
over300,0000cases(18%ofalldelinquencycases)weredismissedatintakeandan
additional25%ofcaseswerehandledinformally.Inotherwords,Birckheadwrites,“police
officers,civilians,probationofficers,judges,andlawyersmakedecisionsthatcumulatively
ensurethatsomechildrenenterandremaininthejuvenilecourtsystem,whileothersare
divertedoutofit”(58).Race,ethnicity,butalsosocio‐economicstature(separatefrom
both),partiallyexplainthisresult.
FranklinD.GilliamJr.andShantoIyengar,“TheSuperpredatorScript,”(1998).AneetaRattan,CynthiaS.Levine,CarolS.Dweck,JenniferL.Eberhardt,“RaceandtheFragilityoftheLegalDistinctionbetweenJuvenilesandAdults,”(May2012).
BothGilliamandIyengar’s1998studyandamuchmorerecentstudybyEberhardt
etal.demonstratetheeffectofraceonjuvenilejustice.
11
TheresultsofGilliamandIyengar’sworkshowthat,justbyalteringtheraceofthe
mugshotdisplayedfor5secondsina15‐minutenewscast,wecanapparentlymanipulate
peoples’attitudestowardsharshjuvenilejustice.Thatis,theyfoundthatexposuretothe
study’s“superpredatornewsframe”(anAfricanAmericanorLatinoyouth)increasesa
desireforharsherpunitiveactionamongwhitesandAsiansbyabout11percent.By
contrast,exposuretothesame“superpredatornewsframe”decreasessupportforthistype
ofsolutionby25percentamongAfricanAmericansandHispanics.
Eberhardt’s2012studyexamineswhetherWhiteAmericans,agroup
overrepresentedinjurypools,thelegalfield,andthejudiciarywouldperceivejuvenile
statusasamitigatingfactortothesamedegreewhenprimedtothinkofBlacksversus
Whites.TheysimilarlyfoundthatsimplybringingtomindaBlack(vs.White)juvenile
offenderledparticipantstoviewjuvenilesingeneralassignificantlymoresimilartoadultsin
theirculpabilityandtoexpressmoresupportforseveresentencing(suchaslifewithout
parole).Aone‐wordprimingcondition—changingtheraceoftheoffender—seemsto
underminethelegaldifferencebetweenjuvenileandadultculpability.Thefindingsofboth
studies,inshort,suggestthefragilityofjuvenilelegalprotectionswhenraceisinvolved.
SandraGrahamandBrianLowery,“PrimingUnconsciousRacialStereotypesaboutAdolescentOffenders,”LawandHumanBehaviorVol.28,No.5(October2004).
SandraGrahamandBrianLoweryconductedanothersimilarstudywitha
participantgroupofpoliceofficersandjuvenileparoleofficers.
Unliketheformertwostudies,however,GrahamandLoweryemployedapriming
schemebasedonDevine’smethodology:flashingcontent‐codedwordsatahighspeedsuch
thatparticipantswouldbeprimedbutwouldremainunawareofthecontentoftheprime.
TheyprimedhalfoftheparticipantswithwordsstereotypicallyrelatedtoAfrican
Americans,suchas“Harlem,”“ghetto,”and“dreadlocks,”andprimedtheotherhalfof
participantswithrace‐neutralcontentwordssuchas“sunset,”“mosquito,”and“toothache.”
Theythenpresentedparticipantswithtwohypotheticalcrimereportsdetailingjuveniles
(whoseracewasnotidentified)engagingincriminalmisbehavior,andmeasuredwhether
theprimingaffectedjudgmentsofthosebehaviors.Theresultsofthestudyconfirmedthat
12
theprimingactivatedracialstereotypesofAfricanAmericansandaffectedthewaythe
participantsmadejudgmentsaboutanumberoftraits(e.g.hostilityandimmaturity),
culpability,expectedrecidivism,anddeservedpunishment.Bothpoliceofficersandjuvenile
probationofficerswhohadbeenprimedwithAfricanAmericanwordsmadeharsher
judgmentsofthejuveniles.Participantsintheprimedconditionreportedmorenegative
traitratings,greaterperceivedculpabilityandlikelihoodtoreoffend,andtheysupported
harsherpunishmentsforthehypotheticaljuveniles.Theseeffectswerenotrelatedtoself‐
reported,consciouslyheldattitudesaboutAfricanAmericans.
GeorgeS.BridgesandSaraSteen,“RacialDisparitiesinOfficialAssessmentsofJuvenileOffenders:AttributionalStereotypesasMediatingMechanisms,”AmericanSociologicalReviewVol.63,No.4(August1998).
Thisstudyexaminescourtofficials’perceptionsofjuvenileoffenders,focusingon
therelationshipbetweenraceandofficers’judgmentaboutthecausesofthecrime.Three
mainfindingsshowtherelationshipbetweenrace,perceivedcauseofcrime,and
recommendedsentence:
1. Probationofficersconsistentlyportrayblackyouthsdifferentlythanwhiteyouthsin
theirwrittencourtreports,morefrequentlyattributingblacks'delinquencyto
negativeattitudinalandpersonalitytraits.Theirdepictionsofwhiteyouthsmore
frequentlystresstheinfluenceoftheindividual'ssocialenvironment.
2. Theseattributionsshapeofficials’assessmentsofboththethreatoffuturecrime
andsentencerecommendations.Courtofficialsrelymoreheavilyonnegative
internalattributionsthanontheseverityoftheyouth'scrimeorhisorherprior
criminalhistoryindeterminingthelikelihoodofrecidivism.
3. Attributionsaboutyouthsandtheircrimes,therefore,areamechanismbywhich
raceinfluencesjudgmentsofdangerousnessandsentencingrecommendations.
StephenM.FeilerandJosephF.Sheley,“Legalandracialelementsofpublicwillingnesstotransferjuvenileoffenderstoadultcourt,”JournalofCriminalJusticeVol.27,No.1‐2(January1999).
13
Thisstudyexaminestheissueofpublicsupportforharshertreatmentofcriminals
byanalyzingthevariablesunderlyingLouisianacitizens’willingnesstotreatjuvenile
offendersasadults.FeilerandSheleyexplorebothlegal(e.g.assaultivenatureofthe
crime)andextralegalelements(e.g.raceoftheoffender).212NewOrleansresidentswere
surveyedbytelephone.Eachparticipantwasaskedtoevaluatetwovignettesinvolving
eitheraburglaryorarobbery.Afterlisteningtothevignette,theparticipantwasasked
whethertheoffendershould“besenttojuvenilecourtortoadultcourt.”
Thestudyfoundthatageoftheoffender,thetypeofweaponwithwhichthevictim
wasthreatened,andwhetherornotthevictimwasphysicallyassaultedwereassociated
withagreaterwillingnesstotransferacasetoadultcriminalcourt.Raceoftheoffender,
thoughnotstrongly,wasalsoinfluentialinaparticipant’swillingnesstotransferayouthto
adultcourt.Theraceoftheparticipantdidnotmoderatethisinfluence.Thisisimportant
because,asFeilerandSheleyexplain,“SinceBlackaswellasWhiterespondentsweremore
likelytodesiredifferentialtreatmentforBlackyouth,thepossibilityofunconsciousbiasseems
quitelikely,asitappearstobeinactualjuvenilecourtdecisions.”
JeffreyJ.Rachlinski,AndrewJ.Wistrich,SheriJohnson,andChrisGuthrie,“DoesUnconsciousBiasAffectTrialJudges?,”(July2007). Theaimofthisstudywastomeasuretheinfluenceofimplicitassociationsonlegal
judgmentsmadeby133sittingtrialjudges.Theraceofthedefendantwasmanipulatedin
twodifferentways:firstbysublimelyprimingjudgeswithwordsassociatedwithAfrican
Americans(likeintheGrahamandLowerystudy)andsecondbyexplicitlyidentifyingthe
defendant’srace.Tomeasureimplicitassociationsinvolvingrace,judgesweregiventhe
IAT(measuringtheirassociationsbetweenwhiteorblackfacesandpositiveornegative
words).
Thestudyfoundthat,accordingtotheIAT,judgesheldinvidiousimplicit
associationsconcerningAfricanAmericans.Thesefindingsweregenerallyconsistentwith
thetestresultsofotherAmericans.However,theseassociationswereonlyinfluential
whentheraceofthedefendantwasmanipulatedthroughsubliminaltechniques.Whenthe
raceofthedefendantwasexplicitlyidentified,implicitassociationshadnoinfluenceon
14
judgment.Theseresultssuggestthatjudgesareabletocontroltheinfluenceofunconscious
racialbias—butonlywhentheyarefocusedondoingso.Thatis,judgescaneffectively
controltheirownautomaticracialassociationsiftheyaremadeawareoftheneedto
monitortheseresponses.
RashmiGoel,“DelinquentorDistracted?AttentionDeficitDisorderandtheConstructionoftheJuvenileOffender,”Law&InequalityVol.27,No.1(2009).
Thisarticleexplorestheinterrelatingissuesofrace,class,andmentalhealth
operatingwithinthejuvenilejusticesystem.Goelarguesthatweneedtoseriously
considertheconvergenceofrace,povertyandADHDinthedeterminationofdelinquency
inordertounderstandtheshortcomingsofourjuvenilejusticesystem.Nearlyhalfofall
juvenilesincustody(ofwhommorethanhalfareyouthofcolor)haveADHD.Moreyouth
ofcolorthanWhiteyouthareadjudicateddelinquentandthensubsequentlytransferredto
adultcourt.CompoundingthesestatisticsisthefactthatdisparitiesinADHDdiagnosisare
significantalongracialandsocioeconomiclines.Youthofcolorfaceanumberofeconomic
andracialbarrierstodiagnosis—includingracialbiaswithinthemedicalprofession.Once
thedamagehasbeendoneandachildhasnotbeenproperlydiagnosed,implicitbias
continuestooperatepotentlyinthecourtroom.Goelwrites:
TheoperationofunconsciousracismandgroupdynamicsisonlyexacerbatedbythefactthatthemajorityofjuvenilecourtjudgesarestillWhitemen.Unconsciouslyheldbiasesandculturalmisunderstandingsaboutfamiliesofcolormayaffectjudgeswhentheyadjudicatecasesinvolvingyouthoffenders.Judgesofallracesmayhaveunconsciousnegativeassumptionsregardingpeopleofcolorandunlawfulness.Thisisepitomizedbythestereotypeofthe“bigBlackkid”asbestial,uncontrollable,andaggressive.Thisstereotypeisindirectconflictwiththejuvenilecourt'soriginalviewofjuvenileoffendersasmisguidedbutrehabilitatableyouthwholackedculpability.(39)
UndiagnosedyouthofcolorsufferingfromADHDfindthemselvesonthefasttrack
todelinquency.Goeloffersthreerecommendationstoreversetheprocess:1)thepurpose
ofthejuvenilejusticesystemmustbeclarified,2)legalactorsinthejuvenilejusticesystem
15
mustbeeducatedaboutADHD,and3)screeninganddiagnosticmeasuresmustbe
drasticallyimproved.
JustinD.Levinson,“ForgottenRacialEquality:Implicitbias,Decisionmaking,andMisremembering,”DukeLawJournalVol.57(2007). Memoryerrorsarenormalandmeaningful.Inthisarticle,Levinsonmakesthe
argumentthatjudgesandjurorsunknowinglymisremembercasefactsinraciallybiased
ways.Thesememoryfailuresthreatentopropagateracialbiasesthroughoutthelegal
processitself.
Levinsonconductedanempiricalstudythatexaminedhowimplicitracialbias
affectedmockjurors’memoryoflegalfacts.Participantswereaskedtoreadthefactsof
twolegalstories,brieflydistracted,andthenquizzed.Racewastheindependentvariable.
Theresultsarestriking.Forexample,peoplewhoreadabout“Tyrone”weremorelikelyto
rememberaggressivefactsfromthestorytheyreadthanthosewhoreadabout“William”
or“Kawika,”anativeHawaiian.Moreover,Levinsonfoundthattherewasnosignificant
relationshipbetweenmemoryrecallandexplicitracialpreferences;thatistosay,
participantswhodemonstratedmorememorybiaswerenotmorelikelytobeexplicitly
biased(401).Theseresults,alongotherexistingresearchonimplicitsocialcognitionand
memory,pointtotheconclusionthatimplicitmemorybiasesmostlikelyoperateinlegal
decisionmaking.
What,then,aretheimplicationsofthesefindingsforsocialjustice?Howcanthe
Americanlegalsystemstandforjusticeandfairnesswhenitembracesadecisionmaking
processthatpropagatesracialbias?(420)Levinsonsuggeststhatbothdebiasingand
culturalsolutionsmustbepursuedtocorrectthecontradiction.Withregardtocultural
responsibility,hewrites,“itmustbeunderstoodthatthedeviationfromrational
decisionmakingisnotsimplyacognitiveglitch,butameaningfulculturalstatementthat
reflectsthewaypeopleunknowinglycarrysociety’sweaknesseswiththematalltimes,
evenwhenencodingandrecallingthesimplestoffacts”(420).
16
JustinD.Levinson,HuajianCai,andDanielleYoung,“GuiltybyImplicitRacialBias:TheGuilty/NotGuiltyImplicitAssociationTest,”(August2009). Inthisstudy,Levinsonetal.directlyaskthequestion:doimplicitbiasesaffectjury
guilty/notguiltyverdictsinraciallybiasedways?Theyworrythat“thestillemerginglegal
modelofthehumanmindhasfailedtodevelopnewempiricalteststhatmeasurehow
implicitcognitiveprocessesfunctionnotjustinsocietyingeneral,butspecificallyinlegally
relevantcontextssuchasjurydecision‐making”(2).Toaddressthisapparentlack,they
developedanewIAT(ImplicitAssociationTest):theBlack/White,Guilty/NotGuiltyIAT,in
ordertoexaminewhetherpeopleholdimplicitassociationsbetweenAfricanAmericans
andcriminalguilt.Thestudy,therefore,testsimplicitassociationsspecificallywithinthe
importantdomainoflegaldecision‐makingandthenexamineswhethertheseassociations
matterinthatrealm.
First,theGuilty/NotGuiltyIATwasfoundtooperatedifferentlythanand
independentfromthewellestablishedattitude‐basedIAT.Mostbasically,theoverall
resultsofthestudydemonstratethatparticipantsheldimplicitassociationsbetweenBlack
andGuiltycomparedtoWhiteandGuilty,andthattheseimplicitassociationspredicted
mock‐jurorevaluationsofambiguousevidence.Thesefindings,inshort,confirmedthe
hypothesisthatthereisanimplicitracialbiasinthepresumptionofinnocence.Thestudy
opensmuchbroaderquestionsaboutourlegalsystem.Forinstance,weareleftwondering
whetherthesamestandardsofguiltareappliedequallytoBlackandWhitemen.Doesthe
presumptionofinnocencemeanthesamethingforaBlackversusaWhitedefendant?This
studysuggeststhatthereissubstantialcauseforconcern.
JustinD.LevinsonandDanielleYoung,“DifferentShadesofBias:Skintone,ImplicitRacialBias,andJudgmentsofAmbiguousEvidence,”WestVirginiaLawReviewVol.112(2010). ThisarticleproposesandtestsanewhypothesisthatLevinsonandYoungcallthe
“BiasedEvidenceHypothesis.”Thishypothesissupposesthatwhenracialstereotypesare
activatedjurorsautomaticallyandunintentionallyevaluateambiguoustrialevidencein
raciallybiasedways.
Inanempiricalstudy,halfofparticipatingmockjurorswereshownanevidence
17
slideshowthatincludedasecuritycameraphotoofadark‐skinnedperpetrator.Theother
halfsawanotherwiseidenticalshowwithalighter‐skinnedperpetrator.Theresults
supporttheBiasEvidenceHypothesis:participantswhosawaphotoofadark‐skinned
perpetratorjudgedsubsequentevidenceasmoresupportiveofaguiltyverdict.The
perpetrator’sskintoneevenaffectedjudgmentsofhowguiltythedefendantwas(ona
scaleof0‐100).Thesejudgmentsofevidenceandguiltwerefoundtobeunrelatedto
explicitracialpreferences.Itseems,therefore,thatexposingjurorstosimpleracialcues
(priming)cantriggerstereotypesandaffecthowtheyevaluateevidenceinsubtlebut
harmfulways.Biasevidenceevaluationsmayhelpexplain—tosomedegreeatleast—
racialdisparitiesinthecriminaljusticesystem.
18
III. STUDIESABOUTIMPLICITBIASMOREGENERALLY,WITHIMPLICATIONFORITSOPERATIONWITHINTHEPIPELINECONTEXT:
JerryKang,“TrojanHorsesofRace,”HarvardLawReviewVol.118(February72005). AccordingtoKang,wealloperateonaday‐to‐daybasiswithafullarchiveofracial
schemasthat“automatically,efficiently,andadaptivelyparsetherawdatapushedtoour
senses”(1504).Implicitbiasresearchsuggeststhatwemayhonestlylackintrospective
accesstotheracialmeaningsembeddedwithinourracialschemas.Itseemswehave,
therefore,thesocialpsychologicaltranslationofthecriticalracestudiestheme:“thepower
ofraceisinvisible”(1506).IntheUnitedStates,usingtheIATandsimilartools,social
cognitionistshavedocumentedtheexistenceofimplicitbiasesagainstnumerous
outgroups,including:Blacks,Latinos,Jews,Asians,non‐Americans,women,gays,andthe
elderly.
Moreover,Kangargues(citingseveralimportantstudiesexaminingemployment
discrimination,shooterbiasandstereotypethreat,forexample),thesebiasesaffect
behavior.Or,intermsofhis“racialmechanicsmodel,”we“mapindividualstoracial
categoriesaccordingtotheprevailingracialmappingrules,whichinturnactivatesracial
meaningsthatalterourinteractionwiththoseindividuals”(1535).Similarly,heexplains
“ultimateattributionerror”(UAE)as"thetendencytoacceptthegoodfortheingroupand
thebadfortheoutgroupaspersonalanddispositional,butmoreimportantly,toexplain
awaythebadfortheingroupandthegoodfortheoutgroupwithsituational
attributions."Accordingly,whenweseeaBrownterrorist,weareinclinedtoward
"outgroupessentialism"andinterprettheviolenceaspartoftheirway;bycontrast,when
weseeJohnWalkerLindhorTimothyMcVeigh,weseeonlywaywardsouls,sayingnothing
largeraboutourWhiteselves.Inadditiontobeingfoundinsocialcognitionresearch,the
UAEhasbeendemonstratedinpoliticalscienceexperimentsemployingthenewscast
paradigm.AfteraWhitemugshot,forexample,participantsemphasizesocietalvariablesin
explainingthecausesofcrime;afteraBlackmugshot,participantsemphasizeindividual
nature.
19
JerryKangandMahzarinR.Banaji,“FairMeasures:ABehavioralRealistRevisionof‘AffirmativeAction,’”CaliforniaLawReviewVol.5(2006). Thepremiseofthearticleisessentiallythatthescienceofimplicitsocialcognition
canhelprevisethemeaningofcertainaffirmativeactionprescriptionsbyupdatingour
understandingofhumannatureanditssocialdevelopment.Evidencefromhundredsof
thousandsofindividualsacrosstheglobeshowsthat:
(1)themagnitudeofimplicitbiastowardmembersofoutgroupsordisadvantagedgroupsislarge,(2)implicitbiasoftenconflictswithconsciousattitudes,endorsedbeliefs,andintentionalbehavior,(3)implicitbiasinfluencesevaluationsofandbehaviortowardthosewhoarethesubjectofthebias,and(4)self,situational,orbroaderculturalinterventionscancorrectsystematicandconsensuallysharedimplicitbias.
Behavioralrealismtakesthisscienceseriously—andforcesthelawtoconfrontitaswell.
Usingabehavioralrealistmethodology,KangandBanajiaimtoreframethe
affirmativeactionconversationinthreemainways.First,insteadoflookingbackwardor
forward,affirmativeactionprogramsoughttorespondto“discriminationinthehereand
now.”Second,wemustrethinkthemeasurementofmerit.Thatis,affirmativeaction
policiesshouldnotbeconsider“preferentialtreatment;”but,instead,anopportunityto
recalibratemeritmeasurementwithimplicitbiasesinmind.Andthird,KangandBanaji
thinkaboutdebiasingprocessesintheaffirmativeactioncontext.Affirmativeaction
programs,forexample,haveoftenbeencreditedforproducingthesortofintegrationthat
providespositivecounterstereotypesand,inturn,worksagainstprejudice—bothovert
andimplicit.
JerryKangandKristinLane,“AFutureHistoryofImplicitSocialCognitionandtheLaw,”(2009). Inthisarticle,KangandLaneofferaso‐called“futurehistory”ofhowanewscientific
consensusmightbereachedthatintegratesimplicitsocialcognitionfindingsintoan
understandingofthelaw.Thisconsensusrequiresreallyseeing(withanopenmind)the
researchonimplicitbias.KangandLanesummarizeoneparticularlycompellingstudy:
20
Participantswatchedavideoofcomputer‐generatedfacesthatmorphedslowlyfroma
frowntoasmileandwereinstructedtohitakeywhentheythoughttheexpression
changed.Ingeneral,peoplesawhostility“linger”ontheBlackfaceforalongerperiodof
time.Moreover,theextentthathostilitywasperceivedaslingeringwaspredictedby
implicitbias(asmeasuredbytheIAT)againstBlacks.Implicitcognitionisanemerging
science,butimplicitbiasesareveryrealandalreadyverydocumentable.
AccomplishingthefuturehistorythatKangandLaneenvision—onethat
incorporatesimplicitcognitionscienceintolaw—throughbehavioralrealisttechniques
involvesathree‐stepprocess:
1) Identifyadvancesinthemindandbehavioralsciencesthatprovideamore
accuratemodelofhumancognitionandbehavior,
2) Comparethatnewmodelwiththelatenttheoriesofhumanbehaviorand
decision‐makingembeddedwithinthelaw.Theselatenttheoriestypicallyreflect
“commonsense”basedonnaïvepsychologicaltheories.
3) And,whenthenewmodelandthelatenttheoriesarediscrepant,asklawmakers
andlegalinstitutionstoaccountforthisdisparity.Anaccountingrequireseither
alteringthelawtocomportwithmoreaccuratemodelsofthinkingandbehavior
orprovidingatransparentexplanationoftheprudential,economic,political,or
religiousreasonsforretainingalessaccurateandoutdatedview.
Behavioralrealismworksagainstfantasyinfavorofreality—againsthypocrisyandself‐
deceptioninourlaw.
R.RichardBanks,“ClassandCulture:TheIndeterminacyofNondiscrimination,”StanfordJournalofCivilRights&CivilLibertiesVol.5(2009). Inthisarticle,Banksagaininterrogatesthedefinitionalambiguitiessurrounding
race,racismanddiscriminatorypracticeintheU.S.Hewrites,“[N]ondiscriminationislike
someotherlegalconcepts:rhetoricallypotent,ifanalyticallyindeterminate”(3).“Moral
intuitionsaboutthedemandsofracialjustice,”Bankspointsout,“arecomplexandmight
dependheavilyonthespecificsoftheparticularcontroversy”(8).Ourintuitionsarehighly
21
context‐dependent.Morespecifically,claimsofdiscriminationoftencombineandconfound
mattersofrace,class,andculture.Thisintertwiningproducesthepossibilityforboth
empiricaluncertaintyand,aspreviouslynoted,conceptualindeterminacy(15).
Americansoccupydifferentracial—butalsoentirelydistinct—cultural,social,and
physicalspaces(17).“Race,”Banksexplains,“saturatesoursocialworld”(17).
Nevertheless,Banksarguesthatwhenitcomestowhatitmeanstobesocio‐economically
disadvantaged,wenecessarilycontemplaterace.Inthecaseofthemostdisadvantaged
blacks—“racialparallelism”simplydoesnotexistinoursociety.Anyconventionalaccount
ofprinciplesofantidiscriminationornondiscriminationwouldbeunabletoaccountforthe
“socialdistinctiveness”ofdisadvantagedblacks.
Banksattemptstounderstandtheclassificationof“discriminatory”practicesand
institutionsthroughapragmaticratherthanaproblematicallyindeterminate
“philosophical”orconceptuallens(19).Hewrites,“[A]practiceisnotpermissiblebecause
itisdiscriminatory[;]rather,apracticeisraciallydiscriminatorybecause,onbalance,its
costsandbenefitswarrantitsprohibition”(19).Discriminationislikemanyotherlegal
topics:clearintheabstractwhilecomparativelyimpotentinconcreteapplication.Thereis
noneedtodefine“discrimination”onceandforall,“becausethereisnodefinitiononwhich
onewouldrelytodecideacase”(22).Bankscontends,therefore,thatthewidespread
embraceofthenondiscriminationmandateisfundamentallymisguided.
22
IV. STUDIESOUTLININGPOTENTIALREMEDIES/INTERVENTIONSWITHINTHEPIPELINECONTEXT
SheriLynnJohnson,“LitigatingforRacialFairnessAfterMcCleskeyv.Kemp,”(2008). Johnsonemphasizestheimportanceofunderstandinghowprejudiceaffects
particular—inthecontextofherarticle—capitalcases.Shesummarizes:
Psychologistslookingatracialprejudicefocusonthreedifferent,thoughoftenrelated,aspects.Fromacognitiveperspective,prejudiceinfluencesthewaypeoplethinkaboutpersonsorevents,anditinvolvesstereotypes(whichareconscious),associations(whichareoftenunconscious),andbiasedprocessingofotherinformationaboutthetargetsubject.Fromanaffectiveperspective,prejudicecreatesnegativeemptions,rangingfromdislike,tohatred,torevulsion,tofear.Fromaconnotativeperspective,prejudicealterspeople’sbehaviorandmayinvolvediscrimination,avoidance,rudenessorevenviolence.(189)
Allthesame,prejudice,atleastinitsimplicitforms,is—inasense—trainable.Persons
whoaremadeawareofthefactthattheirreactionsarebiased,andthenallowedto
“practice”neutraljudgmentsaremorelikelytomakethemonaday‐to‐daybasis.Thisis
especiallytrueiftheyarepersonallycommittedtoracialequalitynorms,asopposedto
sociallypressuredtoconformtonormsofformalequality.‘Thebestcandidatesfornon‐
prejudicedreactions,”Johnsonwrites,“areagroupwhoarecalled‘chronicegalitarians’—
peoplewhomonitortheirownreactionsandbehaviorinanefforttorootoutstereotypes
andfeelingsofwhichtheydon’tapprove”(193).
PatriciaG.Devine,PatrickS.Forscher,AnthonyJ.Austin,andWilliamT.L.Cox,“Long‐termReductioninImplicitRaceBias:APrejudiceHabit‐breakingIntervention,”(2012).
Thefindingsofthisstudyprovidethefirstrealevidencethatacontrolled,
randomizedinterventioncanproduceenduringreductionsinimplicitbias.“Ourdata,”
Devineetal.explain,“provideevidencedemonstratingthepoweroftheconsciousmindto
intentionallydeploystrategiestoovercomeimplicitbias”(28).Theydevelopeda“multi‐
facetedprejudicehabit‐breaking”interventionthataimedtoengageintentionaleffortto
23
producelong‐termreductionsinimplicitracebias.Theinterventionhadbothaneducation
componentandatrainingcomponent(whichinstructedparticipantsinfivedifferentde‐
biasingstrategies).Allmeasureswereassessedpriortotheinterventionmanipulationand
attwotimepoints—fourandeightweeks—afterthemanipulation.
Thestudyfoundthat,intheinterventioncondition,peoplesimultaneouslyself‐
reportedincreasedconcernaboutdiscriminationandtestedlowerontheBlack‐WhiteIAT
forimplicitbiasesagainstBlacks.Generalconcernwasalsoshowntogrowovertime.In
thisway,theinterventionseemstoincreasebothpersonalawarenessofone’sbiasanda
generalconcernaboutdiscriminationinsociety.Devineetal.stresstheneedtoexplore
whatexactelementsoftheiremphaticallymulti‐facetedinterventionwereresponsiblefor
increasingconcern.Futurestudies,ingeneral,willneedtofocusonthespecifics—on
uncoveringthespecificbehavioral,cognitive,affective,andneuralmechanismsthrough
whichtheinterventionworks.Fornow,thisstudyimportantlydemonstratesthatan
interventioncaneffectthelong‐termregulationofimplicitbiases.
GalenV.Bodenhausen,AndrewR.Todd,andJenniferA.Richeson,“ControllingPrejudiceandStereotyping:Antecedents,Mechanisms,andContexts,”(2008). Thischapterdiscussesthemostprominentresearchtodate(2008)onthe
psychologyofcontrollingprejudiceandstereotyping.CitingDevine,Bodenhausenetal.
define“automaticprejudice”asthatproducedby“thespontaneousactivationofmental
associationsthatarenotnecessarilypersonallyendorsed,butthatareubiquitouslyfound
incontemporarysociety,owingtoongoingculturalrepresentationsofminoritygroupsthat
perpetuatenegativeorstereotypicassociationswiththegroups”(111‐112).Although
Devinecharacterizesautomaticprejudiceasanubiquitousphenomenon,therearenotable
individualandsituationaldifferencesinstereotypeactivation.AccordingtoBodenhausen
etal.,itseemsthatthekeytostereotypeactivationseemstoliemoreinthemotivationsof
theperceiverthanintheavailabilityofcognitiveresources.Howtheperceivedpersonis
categorized(blonde,black,fat,pretty)alsomatters—notallapplicablecategorieswillbe
invokedineverycontext.Prejudicecontrolbecomesparticularlyproblematic,therefore,
whenperceiverscategorizeothersintermsofcategoriesforwhichtheyareawareof
24
undesirableculturalassociations.Awareness,again,doesnotnecessarilyconnote
endorsement.
Changesinsocietalnormsoverthecourseofthe20thcenturyhasmadethe
expressionofprejudiceapowerfulsourceofsocialdevaluation.Thissocialdevaluation
constitutesaso‐calledexternalmotivationtocontrolprejudice.Additionally,peoplemay
ofteninternalizenormsandbecomepersonallymotivatedtoavoidexpressingprejudice.
Regardless,aslongastheyarecognizanttothepotentialforbiasandaremotivatedin
someway,peopleresorttoanumberofcognitivemechanismstocontroltheirprejudices.
Bodenhausenetal.considerstereotypesuppression,perspectivetaking,stereotype
negationtraining,andprimingpeopletothink“creatively”(119).Regulatoryprocesses,
moreover,canbecomemoreautomaticwithpracticeandtime.Nonetheless,initial
activationofbiasedassociationsdoesappeartobethedefaultandinhibitiontheexception.
Strategies,likecorrection,individuation(consideringatarget’spersonalattributes),and
recategorization,canhelptocounteracttheinfluenceoftheseassociationsafteractivation
Situationalfactorscanmakecontrolmoreorlessfeasible.Forexample,wemight
ask,howdosocialnorms,culturalideologies,anddiversecontextsinfluencetheactivation
andcontrolofbiasedthoughts?Socialcontextconstrainsbehavior.Theendorsementof
endorsementandmulticulturalismparticularlypredictsmorepositiveracialattitudes.In
general,increasedinterpersonalinteractionacrossgrouplineshasbeenshownto
significantlyundermineprejudiceanddiscrimination.Prejudiceandstereotypescanbe
deeplyconditionedinthehumanmind.“Thefactthatsomanypeoplehavethedesireto
controlthebiasesthathavebeenhistoricallysocommonplaceisacauseforcelebration,”
Bodenhausenetal.claim.Allthesame,theyalsomaintainthat“itiscertainlynotanoccasion
forcomplacency.”Thereisworktobedone.