IAT blog

As someone who considers themselves open-minded and accepting of all walks of life, I took the IAT with conceptions in mind already of how I would fare. As someone without any conscious biases I expected the IAT to reflect this lack of biases. I took the tests for the gender/job and the black/white faces.

The first test, the black & white bias test, confirmed my conscious belief that I was not biased one way or the other regarding race. I was categorized as someone who does not favor one race over another. This was not surprising, as my whole life I have been around people of all races. My father was a reggae musician for several years up until I was 3 years old, and as a result had many friends of African American descent who babysat me or came to the house from the time I was very young. Early on I learned that people were all different colors and never thought much about race until middle school when race suddenly became a conscious issue between my peers and I. Despite cultural differences that emerged during middle school, I maintained relationships with my friends of various races and have always supported the idea that ALL men are created equal.

The second test, the gender/job correlation test addressed an issue that I care deeply about. Gender roles for females have always outraged me, as I feel that women have been oppressed and under-advantaged because of their societal roles for centuries. Because of these beliefs, I was extremely surprised by the results that I was moderately biased toward men with scientific professions and women with humanities professions. It was especially stunning because when I came to Southwestern I was a biology major aspiring to become a bio-engineer. Furthermore, I refuse to see male doctors and will only rely on female doctors within the field. I thought for a while after reading my results about why I would receive such results. My first reaction, which may not be completely wrong, was to think that it had to do with the order in which the categories appeared. The intuitive societal beliefs were presented first, followed by the non-traditional roles second. I feel that in all three of the tests I was slower when attempting the second condition than the first. Despite this test-order bias, I strongly believe that my results reflected not a personal bias but rather reflected the well-known societal bias toward these career paths and the personality traits associated with them between the genders. Perhaps because of the stereotypes and proportions of actual men and women in these fields that I have personally encountered I am more likely to associate women with the liberal arts and men with the sciences. I need to re-evaluate my own perceptions and assumptions about these professions and the professionals within them.

In order to test my theory that the tests indicate an influence by the effects of the order presentation, I retook the tests in order to determine whether or not order effects were influencing the results. I retook the gender/career IAT, and this time the counter-intuitive or less societal norm condition was presented first. The results indicated a complete flip, in which I was slightly biased toward men having liberal arts professions and women having more science-based professions. This change in results indicates that I am slower at learning the associations for the second condition, after I already have the old associations learned. I feel like while the IAT is valid to some extent, because of order-effects one would need to retry the test at least 3 times to ensure that the results reflect internal beliefs or biases rather than a reflection of the order effect of the conditions.

gotta serve somebody

Self-serving cognitions are a funny thing. We give ourselves the praise when something goes right even if we had no control over the outcome, yet when things go wrong it's everyones fault but ourselves and we don't even notice when we do this (Mezulis et al., 2004; Schlenker et al., 1990; Pronin et al., 2004)! We even go so far as to make predictions about the outcome of an event, and when our predictions are right we think that we influenced that outcome even though it is impossible that we had any impact at all (Pronin et al., 2006). When I think of things that I think that I have some influence over when really I have none at all one bright example comes to mind. I've watched Cowboys football since I was old enough to be set in front of a tv. When the Cowboys start to get down and aren't playing up to par, I put on my Marion Barber jersey and I am fully convinced that because of that jersey their game gets better. Obviously, there is no possible way that me wearing my jersey in Georgetown, TX could effect the play of the players in Irving, TX but I KNOW that if I don't put on that jersey they're going to loose. Of course, when they do start playing better I take the credit and say things like "its a good thing I put my jersey on," and other ridiculous statements. Its funny because the Cowboys are a second half team so the improvement is due to the fact that they get better as the game progresses which is of course a perfectly logical explanation. All I know is I'm still wearing that jersey every game just in case :)

References:

Mezulis, A., Abramson, L., Hyde, J., & Hankin, B. (2004). Is there a universal positivity bias in attributions? A meta-analytic view of individual, developmental, and cultural differences in the self-serving attributional bias. Psychology Bulletin, 130, 711-747.

Pronin, E., Steele, C., & Ross, L. (2004). Objectivity in the eye of the beholder: Divergent perceptions of bias in self versus others. Psychological Review, 111, 781-799.

Pronin, E., Wegner, D., McCarthy, K. & Rodriguez, S. (2006). Everyday magical powers: The role of apparent mental causation in the overestimation of personal influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 218-231.

Schlenker, B., & Trudeau, J. (1990). The impact of self-presentation on private self-beliefs: Effects of prior self-beliefs on misattribution. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 22-32.

Sibling Rivalry

My sister and I are polar opposites. We were born in completely different worlds being 20 years separated; my sister a child of the 60s and me a child of the 80s. One area we definitely disagree in is in the area of politics. I am a far left liberal and, because of her newfound association with a small country southern baptist church, she is a far right conservative. Normally we are able to put our differences aside, but when she makes attributions to people about being poor and under-insured when it applies to her own family it is hard not to point it out.

For years she and her husband have been harping about the lazy poor and how the government shouldn't step in. Similarly they have been talking about how terrible it would be if there were universal health care, because then (obviously) we would be a socialist country. I see things differently, and know that most poor people aren't lazy but are consistently screwed over by their situations, they get sick and miss work but can't pay to get better to get back to work nor can they afford to wait it out. There are thousands of other reasons those without much get left with absolutely nothing. I know that for most of our country's poor, their poverty is due to their situation, not their personality. Our differences in perspectives are due to the fact that my sister committed the Fundamental Attribution Error. Even though I knew the situations had a strong impact on behavior, my sister overlooked this and focused on the peoples behaviors (Ross, 1977).

Ross, L. (1977). The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings: Distortions in the attribution process. Advances in Experimental Psychology, 10, 174-221.

so close and yet so far

During high school, I was a certified overachiever. I played soccer, took Latin, played piano, and participated in many other activities. I hoped that all of these things would help me get in to a good college. When it came time to take my SAT, I wanted to achieve an exceptional score to ensure that I would get into the colleges I wanted to apply to. Because my mom attended Rice during her undergrad days, I had been interested in the school from a very young age. I corresponded with the soccer coach there, who recruited me to come play for the school. My first trial of the SAT proved to not be the grade I wanted at all. I by no means received a grade necessary for the tougher schools like Rice. Because the minimum SAT score for entry into Rice was so far beyond the score I made, I came to the reality that I was not going to get into Rice with only slight disappointment. However, I wanted to improve my scores to allow me entry into some other less prestigious, but still rigorous schools. I took a Kaplan course and tried the SAT one more time. This time, I came within just 20 points of the minimum SAT score required at Rice. When I received these results, I was much more devastated because I was sooo close to achieving my goal.
This phenomenon of feeling much more disappointment when I was closer to my goals is an example of a simulation heuristic, or counterfactual thinking. Neither grade would allow me to be accepted into the schools I wanted, but because I was so close to scoring the appropriate grade the second time I thought back through all the questions in which I'd had to decide between two choices and kicked myself that I hadn't made the right decisions. I thought "if only I had studied a few more vocabulary words, or eaten a slightly better breakfast, or slept an extra hour" I wound be accepted into Rice. Realistically, because I had taken the Kaplan and learned tricks about taking standardized tests, I would probably not have scored a much better grade than the grade I earned the second time. Even if I had, barely making the minimum is not good news for later course success. But because I was able to think so clearly of just doing a little bit better on the test I did take, the news that my grade was not quite up to par was all the more devastating.

Kahneman, D. & Miller, D. (1986). Norm theory: Comparing reality to its alternatives. Psychological Review, 93, 136-153.

Intro

Hi everybody, I'm new to the whole blog thing so bare with me. I'm Erika, I'm a senior psych major/sociology minor. I enjoy very loud rock music, kickass jazz fusion, gardening, and playing with my animals. I had probably the most boring summer of anyone. I took classes at ACC and bummed around georgetown **lame**. At least the lake is kinda close. Anyway, I did get to see some cool rock shows...enjoy Cerebro! (sry the vid is bad quality)