The existence of implicit bias is beyond reasonable doubt: A refutation of ideological and methodological objections and executive summary of ten studies that no manager should ignore

John T. Jost, Laurie A. Rudman, Irene V. Blair, Dana R. Carney, Nilanjana Dasgupta, Jack Glaser, Curtis D. Hardin

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

In this article, we respond at length to recent critiques of research on implicit bias, especially studies using the Implicit Association Test (IAT). Tetlock and Mitchell (2009) claim that "there is no evidence that the IAT reliably predicts class-wide discrimination on tangible outcomes in any setting," accuse their colleagues of violating "the injunction to separate factual from value judgments," adhering blindly to a "statist interventionist" ideology, and of conducting a witch-hunt against implicit racists, sexists, and others. These and other charges are specious. Far from making "extraordinary claims" that "require extraordinary evidence," researchers have identified the existence and consequences of implicit bias through well-established methods based upon principles of cognitive psychology that have been developed in nearly a century's worth of work. We challenge the blanket skepticism and organizational complacency advocated by Tetlock and Mitchell and summarize 10 recent studies that no manager (or managerial researcher) should ignore. These studies reveal that students, nurses, doctors, police officers, employment recruiters, and many others exhibit implicit biases with respect to race, ethnicity, nationality, gender, social status, and other distinctions. Furthermore-and contrary to the emphatic assertions of the critics-participants' implicit associations do predict socially and organizationally significant behaviors, including employment, medical, and voting decisions made by working adults.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)39-69
Number of pages31
JournalResearch in Organizational Behavior
Volume29
DOIs
StatePublished - 2009

Fingerprint

Research Personnel
Police
Politics
Ethnic Groups
Nurses
Students
Psychology
Research
Managers
Discrimination (Psychology)
Doctors
Discrimination
Social status
Skepticism
Voting
Ideology
Cognitive psychology
Charge
Nationality
Value judgements

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Psychology
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
  • Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

Cite this

The existence of implicit bias is beyond reasonable doubt : A refutation of ideological and methodological objections and executive summary of ten studies that no manager should ignore. / Jost, John T.; Rudman, Laurie A.; Blair, Irene V.; Carney, Dana R.; Dasgupta, Nilanjana; Glaser, Jack; Hardin, Curtis D.

In: Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 29, 2009, p. 39-69.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{6ea43cd73cf144009ae153fa4cda5cb0,
title = "The existence of implicit bias is beyond reasonable doubt: A refutation of ideological and methodological objections and executive summary of ten studies that no manager should ignore",
abstract = "In this article, we respond at length to recent critiques of research on implicit bias, especially studies using the Implicit Association Test (IAT). Tetlock and Mitchell (2009) claim that {"}there is no evidence that the IAT reliably predicts class-wide discrimination on tangible outcomes in any setting,{"} accuse their colleagues of violating {"}the injunction to separate factual from value judgments,{"} adhering blindly to a {"}statist interventionist{"} ideology, and of conducting a witch-hunt against implicit racists, sexists, and others. These and other charges are specious. Far from making {"}extraordinary claims{"} that {"}require extraordinary evidence,{"} researchers have identified the existence and consequences of implicit bias through well-established methods based upon principles of cognitive psychology that have been developed in nearly a century's worth of work. We challenge the blanket skepticism and organizational complacency advocated by Tetlock and Mitchell and summarize 10 recent studies that no manager (or managerial researcher) should ignore. These studies reveal that students, nurses, doctors, police officers, employment recruiters, and many others exhibit implicit biases with respect to race, ethnicity, nationality, gender, social status, and other distinctions. Furthermore-and contrary to the emphatic assertions of the critics-participants' implicit associations do predict socially and organizationally significant behaviors, including employment, medical, and voting decisions made by working adults.",
author = "Jost, {John T.} and Rudman, {Laurie A.} and Blair, {Irene V.} and Carney, {Dana R.} and Nilanjana Dasgupta and Jack Glaser and Hardin, {Curtis D.}",
year = "2009",
doi = "10.1016/j.riob.2009.10.001",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "29",
pages = "39--69",
journal = "Research in Organizational Behavior",
issn = "0191-3085",
publisher = "JAI Press",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The existence of implicit bias is beyond reasonable doubt

T2 - A refutation of ideological and methodological objections and executive summary of ten studies that no manager should ignore

AU - Jost, John T.

AU - Rudman, Laurie A.

AU - Blair, Irene V.

AU - Carney, Dana R.

AU - Dasgupta, Nilanjana

AU - Glaser, Jack

AU - Hardin, Curtis D.

PY - 2009

Y1 - 2009

N2 - In this article, we respond at length to recent critiques of research on implicit bias, especially studies using the Implicit Association Test (IAT). Tetlock and Mitchell (2009) claim that "there is no evidence that the IAT reliably predicts class-wide discrimination on tangible outcomes in any setting," accuse their colleagues of violating "the injunction to separate factual from value judgments," adhering blindly to a "statist interventionist" ideology, and of conducting a witch-hunt against implicit racists, sexists, and others. These and other charges are specious. Far from making "extraordinary claims" that "require extraordinary evidence," researchers have identified the existence and consequences of implicit bias through well-established methods based upon principles of cognitive psychology that have been developed in nearly a century's worth of work. We challenge the blanket skepticism and organizational complacency advocated by Tetlock and Mitchell and summarize 10 recent studies that no manager (or managerial researcher) should ignore. These studies reveal that students, nurses, doctors, police officers, employment recruiters, and many others exhibit implicit biases with respect to race, ethnicity, nationality, gender, social status, and other distinctions. Furthermore-and contrary to the emphatic assertions of the critics-participants' implicit associations do predict socially and organizationally significant behaviors, including employment, medical, and voting decisions made by working adults.

AB - In this article, we respond at length to recent critiques of research on implicit bias, especially studies using the Implicit Association Test (IAT). Tetlock and Mitchell (2009) claim that "there is no evidence that the IAT reliably predicts class-wide discrimination on tangible outcomes in any setting," accuse their colleagues of violating "the injunction to separate factual from value judgments," adhering blindly to a "statist interventionist" ideology, and of conducting a witch-hunt against implicit racists, sexists, and others. These and other charges are specious. Far from making "extraordinary claims" that "require extraordinary evidence," researchers have identified the existence and consequences of implicit bias through well-established methods based upon principles of cognitive psychology that have been developed in nearly a century's worth of work. We challenge the blanket skepticism and organizational complacency advocated by Tetlock and Mitchell and summarize 10 recent studies that no manager (or managerial researcher) should ignore. These studies reveal that students, nurses, doctors, police officers, employment recruiters, and many others exhibit implicit biases with respect to race, ethnicity, nationality, gender, social status, and other distinctions. Furthermore-and contrary to the emphatic assertions of the critics-participants' implicit associations do predict socially and organizationally significant behaviors, including employment, medical, and voting decisions made by working adults.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=70649099959&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=70649099959&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.riob.2009.10.001

DO - 10.1016/j.riob.2009.10.001

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:70649099959

VL - 29

SP - 39

EP - 69

JO - Research in Organizational Behavior

JF - Research in Organizational Behavior

SN - 0191-3085

ER -