13 research outputs found

    Attributing Discrimination to Implicit Bias: Consequences for Perceived Accountability and Punishment

    No full text
    The term implicit bias is becoming more popular among the general public. Although researchers have spent decades studying implicit bias and its effects on behavior, little is known about how laypeople make sense of discrimination that is attributed to implicit bias. In this dissertation, I explore how attributing discrimination to implicit bias shapes the extent to which people hold perpetrators accountable and support punishing them for their discriminatory behavior attributed to implicit, compared to explicit bias. I begin in Chapter 1 by reviewing the limited literature that has attempted to address this topic, discussing how implicit bias attributions relate to our existing moral and legal frameworks. I hypothesize that because implicit biases are typically defined as unconscious, people will hold perpetrators less accountable for discriminatory behaviors attributed to them. In Chapter 2, I find support for this hypothesis with evidence that when people read news articles detailing scientific research on discrimination caused by implicit (relative to explicit) bias, they hold the perpetrators less accountable and are less supportive of punishing them. In Chapter 3, I build on this research by exploring if this reduced accountability effect for discrimination attributed to implicit bias is attenuated for women in regards to gender discrimination. Although I find consistent evidence that women, who share a gender group membership with the victim, hold the perpetrator more accountable and are more supportive of punishment in general, I find no evidence that sharing a gender group membership moderates the effect of bias attribution. That is, both men and women hold perpetrators of gender discrimination less accountable and are less supportive of punishment when the behavior is attributed to implicit versus explicit bias. In Chapter 4, I test a viable intervention for reduced accountability effects when discrimination is attributed to implicit bias: perspective-taking with the victim. Despite existing evidence that perspective-taking with the victim ought to encourage people to focus on the harm rather than the intent of the perpetrator, I find no evidence that perspective-taking with the victim increases accountability and punishment for discrimination attributed to implicit relative to explicit bias. However, Chapter 4 builds on the previous chapters by demonstrating that when discrimination is attributed to implicit bias people perceive the behavior to be less intentional than when the same behavior is attributed to explicit bias. In Chapter 5, I close by discussing the implications of this work and possible future directions

    Is kinesiophobia associated with changes in left/right judgment and emotion recognition during a persisting pain condition? : A cross-sectional study

    No full text
    Hintergrund Ziel dieser Studie ist es, die Auswirkungen einer Kinesiophobie auf die Emotions- sowie Lateralitätserkennung zu untersuchen. Material und Methoden 67 Probanden mit chronischen muskuloskeletalen Schmerzen wurden untersucht. Hierbei erzielten 24 Probanden einen Wert von >37 auf der Tampa-Skala für Kinesiophobie und wurden in die Querschnittstudie eingeschlossen. Die Fähigkeit zur Erkennung mimisch codierter Basisemotionen wurde mittels des Facially-Expressed-Emotion-Labeling(FEEL)-Tests und die Lateralitätserkennung anhand eines speziellen Face-Mirroring-Assessment-and-Treatment-Programms ermittelt. Die Toronto-Alexithymie-Skala (TAS) 26 diente zur Erfassung einer Alexithymie. Ergebnisse Der FEEL-Score der Probanden mit Kinesiophobie war signifikant niedriger (p = 0,019). Die Basisemotionen Angst (p = 0,026), Ärger (p = 0,027) und Überraschung (p = 0,014) verdeutlichten einen signifikanten Unterschied zwischen den Ergebnissen der Querschnittstudie und gesunden Probanden. Der Alexithymiefragebogen TAS-26 zeigte lediglich in der TAS 1 (Schwierigkeiten bei der Identifikation von Gefühlen; p = 0,008) einen signifikanten Unterschied zwischen Probanden mit Kinesiophobie. Schlussfolgerung Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass kinesiophobische Patienten Veränderungen in der Emotions- und Lateralitätserkennung sowie alexithyme Merkmale aufweisen.Background The aim of this study is to investigate the effects of kinesiophobia on emotion recognition and left/right judgement. Materials and methods A total of 67 patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain were tested. In all, 24 patients achieved a score >37 on the Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia and were included in the study. The ability to recognize basic emotions coded through facial expression was assessed using the Facially Expressed Emotion Labeling (FEEL) test. Left/right judgement was evaluated using a special Face-mirroring Assessment and Treatment program. The Toronto Alexithymia Scale-26 (TAS-26) was used to assess if the patients showed signs of alexithymia. Results The FEEL score of patients with kinesiophobia was significantly lower (p = 0.019). The recognition of the basic emotions fear (p = 0.026), anger (p = 0.027), and surprise (p = 0.014) showed significant differences in comparison to unaffected subjects. The basic emotion surprise was recognized more often by patients with kinesiophobia (p = 0.014). Only Scale 1 of the TAS-26 (identification problems of emotions) showed a significant difference between patients with kinesiophobia (p = 0.008) and healthy subjects. Conclusion The results show that kinesiophobic patients have altered recognition of emotions, problems in left/right judgement, and show signs of alexithymia

    The Misperception of Gender Economic Equality

    No full text
    Economic resources are distributed unequally by gender, yet we have an incomplete understanding of how people perceive gender inequality in the U.S. Across three studies (N = 1107), we investigate the antecedents and consequences of perceptions of gender economic inequality. In Studies 1 and 2, compared with federal data, participants consistently overestimated contemporary gender equality (e.g., 2010’s) and progress toward gender equality from 1970s – 2010s. Using a racially diverse sample (i.e., Black, Latino, and White male respondents), Study 3 examined perceptions of gender economic equality at seven timepoints between 1973 and 2011. Participants in Study 3 underestimated gender equality in the past and began to overestimate gender equality from 2000, in a linear fashion. Both hostile sexism and belief in a just world consistently predicted overestimates of current gender economic equality (S1-S3). Overestimates predicted lower support for policies meant to address gender inequality (S1). We discuss practical and theoretical implications
    corecore