Implicit Bias and Diversity in Higher Education

Stephen BenardIndiana Universitysbenard@indiana.edu

OverviewAggregate data

Evidence of cognitive biases

How cognitive biases work

Stereotype content

How to reduce cognitive biases

Distribution of Faculty by Race/Ethnicity

Source: US Department of Education, 2007

Percent Female by Rank

Percent Female by Rank, Full-Time Tenure Track Faculty Positions

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Assistant ProfessorRank

Associate Professor Full Professor

Source: US Department of Education, 2007

Salaries

Source: US Department of Education, 1998

Contributing FactorsSupply side/pipeline

Factors resulting in a smaller pool of applicants

Demand side/bias Factors resulting in a lower preference for

women or minority candidates

Contributing FactorsSupply side/pipeline

Factors resulting in a smaller pool of applicants

Demand side/bias Factors resulting in a lower preference

for women or minority candidates

PerceptionsAmong scientists and engineers, men rated

more positively by managers

Among fellowship winners, 72.8% of women and 12.9% of male scientists report discrimination

Sources: DiTomaso et al 2007; Heilman et al 1989; Sonnert and Holton 1996

A Curriculum Vita Experiment

Identical CVs sent to random, national sample of faculty

Manipulate applicant sex (first name)

Applicant experience (assistant/associate CV)

Source: Steinpreis, Anders, and Ritzke 1999

A Curriculum Vita ExperimentIn addition to hiring, male CV advantaged on

SalaryTenure recommendationsResearch, teaching, and service evaluations

No differences in ratings of more experienced CVsFour times as many “cautionary statements” on

experienced female CV

Source: Steinpreis, Anders, and Ritzke 1999

Race in Hiring

Researchers sent ~5,000 resumes to a wide range of jobs in Chicago and Boston

Systematically varied common white/African American names

Source: Bertrand and Mullainathan 2003

StereotypesCognitive association between a group

and a trait or a set of traitsE.g. women and dependence, men and

competence, African American males and aggression

Stereotypes Can Be ImplicitWe may not be aware we hold

particular associations Can develop early in life

Exposure to a stimulus activates related concepts (also implicitly)More accessible in memoryMore likely to be applied in information

processing, behavior

Sources: Bargh, Chen and Burrows 1996; Bargh and Ferguson 2001; Devine 1989; Greenwald and Banaji 1995; Kunda et al. 2002; Srull and Weyer 1979; Wilson and Brekke 1994

Implicit AssociationsCan exist and affect behavior outside

of awareness, even when we disapprove of a stereotype

Implicit associations are measurable

Predict a wide range of behavior

Source: Greenwald and Krieger 2001; Jost et al 2009

Stereotypes about CompetenceWomen and minorities stereotyped as

less competent than men and whites

In task groups, viewed as less likely to make valuable contributionsFewer opportunities to speakLess influencePerformances evaluated less positively

Source: Berger, Cohen, & Zelditch 1972; Pugh and Wahrman 1983; Ridgeway 1982; Smith-Lovin & Brody 1989

Double Standards for CompetenceLower expectations for competence

produces greater skepticism of good performances

Need to perform at higher levels to be seen as equally talented

Source: Foschi 1996, 2000; Foschi, Lai & Sigerson 1994

Double Standards for CompetenceVarying overall qualifications

Male applications preferred (by men) when men more qualified

But no difference in M/F preference when women more qualified

Education vs. ExperienceMale applicants shown preferenceRaters cited whichever qualification favored males as most

important

Source: Foschi, Lai & Sigerson 1994; Norton, Vandello, & Darley 2004

Prescriptive BiasesPenalties for women who behave in

stereotypically male manner Assertive women disliked, seen as pushy,

selfish, less hireableSimilarly-behaving men not penalized

Grades given predict teaching evaluations for women, not men

Source: Heilman et al 2004; Ridgeway 1982; Rudman 1998; Rudman & Glick 1999; Sinclair and Kunda 2000

Reducing the Influence of Implicit Bias: General PrinciplesImplicit bias can be difficult to address

because stereotypes can be activated and applied unconsciously

But it is possible, with conscious effort

This requires both motivation and cognitive resources

Reducing the Influence of Implicit BiasSupport from Leaders

Training

Accountability

Transparency

Creating Effective Searches

TrainingEducate decision makers about

research, mechanisms of unconscious biasvs. other forms of “diversity training”

Requires motivation to reduce bias

Source: Devine et al 2002; McCracken 2000; Rudman et al. 2001; Wilson and Brekke 1994

Accountability

Definition: the implicit or explicit expectation that one may be called on to justify one's beliefs, feelings, and actions to others

Lerner and Tetlock 1999; Tetlock 1983a, 1983b, 1985; and Tetlock and Kim 1987

Why Accountability WorksRequires us to think through our

decisions

Use more effort to process information

Less likely to make snap decisions

Increases motivation and effort to avoid stereotyping

Lerner and Tetlock 1999; Tetlock 1983a, 1983b, 1985; and Tetlock and Kim 1987

When Does Accountability Work Best?

Accountable to higher, impartial authority

Before the final decision has been made

When authority is seen as legitimate

TransparencyAgree on standards of evaluation

before evaluating candidatesEducation vs. experiencePerformance vs. potential

Creating Effective SearchesDefining the search

Creating the search committee

Allow sufficient time

Structuring group discussions

Critically analyze supporting materials

Thank you!

Stephen Benard

Indiana University

sbenard@indiana.edu