https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/selectatest.html
It has a list of different tests which test your unconscious, implicit bias. Feel free to take any of them and post whatever you are comfortable with.
Implicit Bias Test
https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/selectatest.html
It has a list of different tests which test your unconscious, implicit bias. Feel free to take any of them and post whatever you are comfortable with.
Hi, I've done 9 of 15 so far and I will edit this after a do more. I did some when I had a migraine so it's possible that affected my results, but I don't think it did.
According to the tests my strongest biases were for gay and trans people. I'm guessing this is because I relate to them and because most of what I watch has gay and trans people.
I had a moderate bias for thin people, again I'm assuming because of the media I consume and the people I'm around most often.
Slight preferences for black people, older people and disabled people. Since these are only slight I'm not sure that I trust them and I can't think of any reason or situation where I would prefer old people, so these could have just been more by chance. I also had a slight preference for Roosevelt over Trump, although I don't know who Roosevelt is, and a slight association of white people with harmless objects and black people with weapons. I thought that was weird since I apparently have a bias for black people and I'm terrified of weapons.
The only one in which I didn't have a bias was with Native American/Indigenous people and white people.
I thought these tests were really interesting, although they did make me feel a little bad. I'm not entirely sure how to change my biases but I'm thinking about trying to surround myself with more different kinds of people.
Just for some background information I am 15, non-binary and mixed race (black and white mostly but 1/8 native). I don't really consider myself native since it's a small percentage and I'm not involved with the culture of the tribe. I'm also pretty skinny I weigh around 98-99 lbs (44.4-44.9 kg) and I'm 5"2 (≈157 cm). I'm not disabled.
✧⊹♬⊹✧
i've taken many of these over the years and am still curious about how they work. if they didn't ask so many questions before and after the actual test i'd test them out more. i'm particularly interested in why there is usually about 20% that gets the result of not being predisposed either way, as that's usually what i get. i don't think this is because i am not biased, i think it's due possibly to several factors... for one, i usually am aiming for no bias in selection, and as such i treat each category as a meaningless thing like just an empty variable. then there is the matter of how it's not easy doing this keyboard letter matching thing for me, so this probably slows down my response rate. my guess is that the slower response rate makes the responses less biased (as it puts it in the realm of explicit rather than implicit), that perhaps i am not going fast enough for it to work. that said, i have tried these before by imagining one bias or the other beforehand and getting myself in that state of mind, and i can actually seem to get the result i want despite the slower response rate. however, i haven't tested out this "theory" enough (too few attempts, it could be coincidence) and am never going to because i hate answering all the questions before and after each time... it just makes it cumbersome trying to test it out.
the other thing about slower response rate is it's based on trying to "function" and do it "correctly" - so perhaps i do not let go enough (which isn't to say i'm not trying to go as fast as i can). i hate being locked in an error pattern in which i keep pushing the wrong key, as it cascades.
lastly, perhaps the more one takes this kind of test, the more one adapts to it, so the percentage of times a bias is detected decreases.
Probably based on my reading sacred texts from both religions. I don't really have much exposure to any religious Jewish people. I did have some messed up experiences with Christianity as a child/teen.During the IAT you just completed:
Your responses suggested a moderate automatic preference for Judaism over Christianity.
Edit: Now that I think about it I would probably even show a preference for full blown, virgin goat sacrificing, satanism over christianity, if they had that test, so yeah it's kinda personal. Just when I think I have moved beyond it, Eliza happens.No offense meant toward her but she brings up this stuff in me. Probably best to avoid the posts altogether since I do appreciate the beauty in Christianity too. Similar to ways @Suspiria does.
Last edited by Aylen; 10-24-2020 at 05:42 PM.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
Lol! I figured this out based on how much faster I was at the Me/Calm parts than the Me/Anxiety parts. I'm glad they added the confirmation about it at the end, nice to know I was right.
By testing how quickly you could categorize self and calm words versus self and anxious words, we indirectly assess how much these concepts are linked in your mind. The idea is that the more strongly associated the two concepts are in memory, the more quickly you will be able to categorize words into those paired categories.
To those that (mis)type me as E6: again, I'm really not even an anxious or fearful person, lol.
It wants my email...nope
The Barnum or Forer effect is the tendency for people to judge that general, universally valid statements about personality are actually specific descriptions of their own personalities. A "universally valid" statement is one that is true of everyone—or, more likely, nearly everyone. It is not known why people tend to make such misjudgments, but the effect has been experimentally reproduced.
The psychologist Paul Meehl named this fallacy "the P.T. Barnum effect" because Barnum built his circus and dime museum on the principle of having something for everyone. It is also called "the Forer effect" after its discoverer, the psychologist Bertram R. Forer, who modestly dubbed it "the fallacy of personal validation".
Just keep an email that's exclusively for junk. That's what I do, anyway.Originally Posted by Eudaimonia
for people interested in how this test works and criticisms: https://www.researchgate.net/publica..._in_Psychology
(it is normed on the individual themselves not population or group normed and other issues the authors discuss)
I've tried three of them now, religion/sexuality/fat and thin people. All three without any automatic bias. I feel accomplished
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote