[HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Reader sexism

[Laura Ingalls Huntley]

Tim:
>Too true. If you want to experience this in yourself
>(warning - it's 
>a scary realization) try the implicit attitude tests now at:
>* Intro http://www.tolerance.org/hidden_bias/
>* Tests http://www.tolerance.org/hidden_bias/02.html

         
I have taken these tests before, and while I appreciate the message this website is trying to put out, I can't help but feel that their methods of testing for "unconscious bias" are a little..well, sketchy.

To begin with, the first time I took one of their tests (which was designed to test if you associate liberal arts with women and math/sciences with men), I received a score of "inconclusive".  The site suggested that I retake the test, but that if I really wanted to know what a result of "inconclusive" meant, I had to click on a link which directed me to a page which basically accused me of cheating.  

If you read between the lines on this page, however, you would discover that what a test result of "inconclusive" *really* meant was that you did not produce the desired results: i.e. you either made no mistakes (you'll have to actually take the test to figure out what I'm saying, BTW) or did not make mistakes in any specific pattern.  Namely, that you had no "hidden biases" that their test could pick up.

But they don't actually *say* anywhere that "you have no hidden biases that our test could pick up".  That is because the site's makers, for whatever reason, chose to start with the assumption that *every* person taking their tests MUST have a hidden bias towards each of their issues and that people who apparently *didn't* must be either cheating or following the rules incorrectly.  Not very scientific, is it?    

Secondly, the fact is, that the way the tests are designed, the first word-word or word-picture association exercises essentially *train* you to associate whatever concepts they put together.  In the gender bias test this would be "male" with "math or science" and "female" with "liberal arts".  Then, when the do the old switch-a-roo, of course you're bound to make "mistakes" (which they would have you believe are actually unconscious preferences)So who's cheating now?

I agree with the point of the site, that the various "-isms" are often ignored and that people often *do* have these so-called hidden-biases that need to be recognized and dealt with, but I strongly resent the shady method they employ in order to prove this point.  I also find it extremely disappointing and counter-productive that people who are supposed to be on the Good side would sink to the level of *duping* people into listening to what they have to say. (Furthermore, I find it rather insulting to my intelligence, to tell the truth)

So, the point is, don't be *too* hard on yourself if this particular site accuses you of racism or sexism or whatever it may be.  They cheat.

Shame on them.

laura


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]