I’m sorry to report that my poor little blog has been hacked again. This time, the hack is affecting users’ ability to log on to comment. Until I get this squared away, please email me your comments. Sorry for the inconvenience!
Originally posted here:
Hacked again!
The New York Times takes a look at the ongoing controversy over one of the newest and most popular tests in psychology that claims to be able to detect hidden ‘impicit’ biases.
The test is the Implicit Association Test or IAT and we’ve discussed in it more detail before but it essentially relies on the fact that if you have an pre-existing association between two concepts, say, the concepts ‘blonde’ and ’stupid’, making similar associations, by categorising words or pictures for example, will be faster than associating ‘blonde’ and ‘clever’ - because you’re going to be quicker doing whichever classification best matches associations you already have.
The test has famously found that automatic negative associations with minority groups are rife in society, even among people of those groups themselves.
However, a recent study looked at the real world effect of this and found something quite curious:
The doctors who scored higher on the bias test were less likely than the other doctors to give clot-busting drugs to the black patients, according to the researchers, who suggested addressing the problem by encouraging doctors to test themselves for unconscious bias. The results were hailed by other psychologists as some of the strongest evidence that unconscious bias leads to harmful discrimination.
But then two other researchers, Neal Dawson and Hal Arkes, pointed out a curious pattern in the data. Even though most of the doctors registered some antiblack bias, as defined by the researchers, on the whole doctors ended up prescribing the clot-busting drugs to blacks just as often as to whites. The doctors scoring low on bias had a pronounced preference for giving the drugs to blacks, while high-scoring doctors had a relatively small preference for giving the drugs to whites — meaning that the more “biased” doctors actually treated blacks and whites more equally.
This has been one part of an ongoing debate that has suggested that the IAT is not all it’s cracked up to be, while the originators of the test have fired back with the heavyweight review [pdf] of over 100 studies, defending their position and the IAT’s credentials.
The debate is important because the IAT has become one of psychology’s central tools for separating conscious and unconscious associations and has been applied to pretty much everything from racism to diagnosing psychopaths.
Link to NYT article ‘In Bias Test, Shades of Gray’.
View post:
Shaking the foundations of the hidden bias test
Psychologists — and some philosophers — spend a huge amount of time seeking grant money; I’m sure so also for many of the other sciences. I’ve become increasingly convinced that this is not the best way for leading researchers to be employing their time and talents. What if granting agencies simply selected (through a rotating committee of experts) a large number of established researchers and simply gave them research money without their having to ask, tracking only that it has been used for legitimate research purposes? There would still have to be ample room of course for unselected researchers to submit applications to obtain research funds and for researchers (selected or not) to submit applications for unusually large disbursements for especially worthy and expensive projects.
Wouldn’t that give a lot of people more time simply to do their work?
Originally posted here:
Against Grant Applications
February 12, 2009 is the 200th birthday of Charles Robert Darwin, arguably one of the most influential scientists of modern times. 2009 also marks the 150th anniversary of the publication of On the Origin of the Species. We can expect lots of exciting special events and reflections from the scientific community in the run-up to these anniversaries. Already, the folks at Nature have launched their Darwin 200 website, with loads of interesting essays and features.
Our Collection of Books by Darwin
Thanks to Mr. F’s diligent perusal of the used book markets, we are able to enjoy three of Darwin’s books at home: On the Origin of the Species, The Descent of Man, and my personal favorite, Darwin’s Journal. When our nephew Scott, who throws the shot and discus for UCSB, was training (and eating) at our house, I happened to be reading Darwin’s account of the menu at his Argentinian hosts’ table: boiled beef and roasted beef. Although Darwin expressed astonishment at the lack of vegetables or other side dishes, Scott thought the Argentinians were on the right track.
Reading Darwin’s original works is to be recommended. All too often, you hear both the Theory of Evolution and Darwin himself vastly misunderstood and misrepresented by people who have never read the originals. While reading, take some time to enjoy Darwin’s amazing illustrations. Not only was he a gifted observer, but he was a superb artist. I stand in awe.
Darwin's Drawing of Indigenous People in Tierra del Fuego
See the rest here:
Happy Birthday, Charles Darwin!
Two recent news stories give us an evocative look back at human societies in Turkey thousands of years ago. This article from Smithsonian.com describes the ongoing excavation of a site in Turkey called Gobekli Tepe. The site, which features a series of stone circles made of megaliths erected around 11,000 years ago (roughly 6,000 years [...]
Read the original post:
Echoes of ancient minds in Turkey
Recent Comments