Unconscious-bias training is pseudoscience wasting money, time, & resources

#1
C C Offline
Cynical Sindee: Racism paranoia is neither humanitarian driven nor a phobia slash mental disorder -- it's big business and career building.
- - - - -

https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/09/28...-nonsense/

INTRO: How would you react if your employer introduced mandatory astrology training at your workplace? What would you make of an organisation that spent thousands of pounds teaching its employees that their character is predetermined by the alignment of the stars and that, despite what they might consciously think or how they choose to behave, their actions are ultimately dictated by invisible cosmic forces? Now imagine that your employer claims to be fighting the scourge of racism by introducing this training.

Bizarre as it may seem, employers across the UK are dangerously close to doing just that. Workers up and down the country are finding themselves forced to undergo mandatory unconscious-bias training – ostensibly to make them less racist. But unconscious-bias training has, at its heart, a psychological test with barely more scientific credibility than astrology. In effect, employers are throwing vast sums of money at a discredited pseudoscientific method which will do nothing to tackle racism and discrimination in the workplace. Meanwhile, practical changes that might truly benefit black and minority-ethnic employees are ignored.

Unconscious-bias training is an outgrowth of the Implicit Association Test (IAT). When it was first introduced in 1998, the results claimed to show that 90 to 95 per cent of IAT participants were implicitly racially prejudiced. While the test-takers might not have thought of themselves as racist, their responses on the test suggested that they were unconsciously biased against black people. This proved a seductive narrative for committed anti-racists, particularly those whose careers depended on portraying Britain and America as systemically racist. The test seemed to show that vast swathes of people were still ‘unconsciously’ racist, in spite of the dramatic decline in racist attitudes over the past 25 years.

The diversity industry has grown to be hugely profitable. It is now worth a cool $8 billion a year in the United States. Assisted by the IAT’s veneer of scientific respectability, unconscious-bias training has been marketed as an essential tool for any business serious about addressing racial inequality. But reams and reams of research have discredited the IAT, undermining the entire premise of unconscious-bias training in the process. Time and again, meta-analysis has failed to find a correlation between a person’s score on the IAT and how discriminatory their behaviour is... (MORE)
Reply
#2
Syne Offline
When I took some of the implicit bias tests (there's one for every type of bias imaginable), just out of curiosity, it said I had little to no appreciable biases. That said, studies have shown little relation between implicit biases and conscious thought or actions. So changing the former has no real effect on the latter. Complete waste of time and money, aside from the real likely intent to just virtual-signal. And like all virtue-signalling, it exists only to expressly keep from making any real, beneficial changes. See every Democrat policy as example.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Article Despite challenging RFK Jr .... AAP is itself a promoter of alarmist pseudoscience C C 1 477 Jul 15, 2025 03:05 PM
Last Post: Syne
  Article Pivot penalty: science's bias against researchers outside their established field C C 0 288 Jul 4, 2025 05:53 PM
Last Post: C C
  Article Tests to detect marijuana-impaired driving based on ‘pseudoscience’ C C 0 333 Jun 30, 2025 03:34 PM
Last Post: C C
  Article Weird phrase plaguing science papers. We traced it back to glitch in AI training data C C 1 513 Apr 16, 2025 09:35 PM
Last Post: Magical Realist
  Bias in science can & must be exposed + Dangerous myth of value-free science C C 0 462 Nov 30, 2024 12:15 AM
Last Post: C C
  Article Scientists on trial: Follow the money C C 0 290 May 24, 2024 05:31 PM
Last Post: C C
  Climate sensitivity and confirmation bias (Hossenfelder versus Zeke & Andrew) C C 0 455 Mar 5, 2024 05:30 PM
Last Post: C C
  Article Occam's razor the only feature that differentiates science from pseudoscience? C C 3 727 Dec 20, 2023 05:21 PM
Last Post: Zinjanthropos
  Article Top five worst ‘uses’ for crystals in the world of wellness and pseudoscience C C 0 335 Nov 10, 2023 06:59 PM
Last Post: C C
  Research 'Grave consequences': scientists warn of extreme bias in brain aging research C C 0 372 Oct 31, 2023 01:50 AM
Last Post: C C



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)