1

UNDERSTANDINGTHEROLEOFIMPLICITBIASINFUELINGTHESCHOOLTOPRISONPIPELINE

Reading List Summaries

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. Implicit Bias Within the School Environments p.2

II. ImplicitBiaswithintheJuvenileandCriminalJusticeSystem,WithImplicationsforSchooltoPrisonPipeline p.9

III. ImplicitBiasMoreGenerally,WithImplicationforitsOperationwithinthePipelineContext p.18

IV. PotentialRemedies/InterventionswithinthePipelineContext p.22

2

I. STUDIESFOCUSINGSPECIFICALLYONSCHOOLENVIRONMENTS:JulieLandsman,“ConfrontingtheRacismofLowExpectations”EducationalLeadershipVol.62,No.3(November2004). AlthoughLandsmanfocusesonunderstandingtheachievementgap,heremphasis

onthelowexpectationsofpredominantlywhiteteachersfortheeducationalfuturesof

theirminoritystudentsmayeasilybeappliedtootherrealms.Studentsofcolorare

affectedbyteacherswhosystematically(albeitmostoftenunconsciously)underestimate

boththeirintelligenceandtheirpotentialforgood,productivebehaviorintheclassroom.

Toopenhershortpiece,Landsmanpresentsuswithanimage:

InanaffluentsuburbofNewYorkCity,inthemidstoflargebackyardsand

roses�alongstonewallsandthekindofbrokenbeautyIhavealwayslovedfrommyown�childhoodthere,ablackmansitsatthebreakfasttablewithhistwosons,ages7�and9.Helooksfromonetotheotherand,withgreatseriousnessandhope,tells�themtheyarespectacularboys.Ashedoeseverymorning,hetellsthemtheycandoanythinginthisworld,dreamanydream.Thentheboysfinishbreakfastandgoofftothenearbyelementaryschool.

Thefatherhascreatedthisdailyritualbecausehebelievesthathissonswillspendthenextsixtosevenhoursbeinggiventheoppositemessage.HeisarichmanandhasworkedincorporateAmericamostofhislife.HelovesthispartofNewYorkanditsexcellent,well‐appointedschools.Butheandhisfamilyaretakingagamblelivinghere.Thecostisgreat,notjustintermsofpropertytaxes,butintermsofpotentialdamagetohissons'psyches.Asoneofonlytwoorthreestudentsofcolorineachoftheirclasses,theseboyshaveagoodchanceofbeingobjectsofcuriosityandcondescension,orvictimsoflowexpectations.Dailyencouragementisthisfather'swayofcounteringassumptionsthathissonsarelikelytofaceinschool:thattheycannotdotheworkassigned,thattheydonotcomefromafunctionalfamily,andeven—tuckedbackinateacher'ssubconscious—thattheyareinnatelylessintelligentthantheirwhitepeers.

Whereassomepolicy‐makerscontinuetodenyandmakeexcuses,thisfather

assumestheexistenceofapervasive“racismoflowexpectations”eveninhischildren’s

well‐funded,suburbanpublicschool.

3

CarlaMonroe,“WhyAre“BadBoys”alwaysBlack?CausesofDisproportionalityinSchoolDisciplineandRecommendationsforChange,”ClearingHouse:AJournalofEducationalStrategies,IssuesandIdeasVol.79,No.1(Fall2005). Monroetalksaboutthe“disciplinegap,”orthe“overrepresentationofblack,male,

andlow‐incomestudentsonindicesofschooldiscipline”(46). Morespecifically,sheasks,

“howimagesofAfricanAmericanmenandboysinsocietyatlargerelatetoteachers’

notionsabouteffectivedisciplinarystrategiesbasedonstudentraceandgender?”(46)

Schooltrends,Monroesays,reflectcurrentsofthenationalcontextsinwhichtheyexist.She

discussesthreegeneralconditionsthatcontributetodisciplinarydisparities:1)the

criminalizationofblackmales,2)raceandclassprivilege,and3)zerotolerancepolicies.

Monroeconcludesbygivingfourbroadrecommendationsforclosingthegap:

1) ProvideopportunitiesforteacherstointerrogatetheirbeliefsaboutAfrican

Americanstudents,

2) Incorporateandvalueculturallyresponsivedisciplinarystrategies,

3) Broadenthediscoursearoundschooldisciplinarydecisions,and

4) Maintainlearners’interestthroughengaginginstruction.

Ingeneral,schoolinequitiesinvolvingAfricanAmericansarebestaddressedthroughrace‐

consciousapproachesatthelevelofteacherpreparationandprofessionaldevelopment.

ChaunceeD.Smith,“DeconstructingthePipeline:EvaluatingSchool‐to‐PrisonPipelineEqualProtectionCasesThroughaStructuralRacismFramework,”FordhamUrbanLawJournal36(2009). LikeLandsman,Smithacknowledgesthatthedynamicprocessleadingtothe

pipelineinvolvestheintersectionofzero‐tolerancepoliciesandeducational“tracking”

(1013).Theschool‐to‐prisonpipelineis,inotherwords,significantlyinter‐institutional.

AccordingtoSmith,weneedtothinkaboutpipelinepoliciesasgivingrisetolegalclaims.

Shewrites:

Forinstance,becausetheadministrationofzero‐toleranceorotherexclusionarypoliciesoftenresultsinstudentsofcolorbeingdisparatelypushedoutofschoolsuchpoliciesmaygiverisetoclaimsundertheEqualProtectionClauseoftheFourteenthAmendment,TitleVIoftheCivilRightsActof1964,§1983ofTitle42of

4

theUS.Code,andstateequalprotectionandrighttoequalprotectionclauses.(1020)

Smithfocusesonequalprotectionlaw.Sheclaimsthatourcurrentequalprotection

paradigmsfailtoaccountforsystemicinequality(1014).

Motive‐centeredapproachestoequalprotection—likethosesupportedin

Washingtonv.Davis—onlyconsiderinstancesofovert,purposefuldiscriminatorypractice.

Instead,Smitharguesthatexaminingpipelineequalprocesscasesthroughastructural

racismframeworkwouldallowstudentsofcolortobemoreadequatelyprotectedthan

underamotive‐centeredapproach.Byintegratingcriticalracetheoryandsystemsscience,

astructuralracismapproachtoequalprotectionlawwouldmoreaptlyaccountforthe

realitiesofsystemicinequality.Weneedtoconsiderimplicitbiases.Thatis,asSmith

explains,“cognitivepsychologyshowsthat,evenintheabsenceofanoutrightintentto

discriminatepeopleactaccordingtounconsciousbiasesthatmakethembehave

discriminatorily”(1022‐23).Discriminatoryimpactexistsapartfromdiscriminatory

motive.Withregardtotheschool‐to‐prisonpipeline,fragmentedinequitiesaffectedby

institutionalcriminalization,sortingandeconomicdimensions“haveadrasticallyunequal

cumulativeimpactonstudentsofcolor”(1027).Astructuralracismframeworkwould

meaningfullyhelptoaddressthepipeline’s“systemicinvidiousness”(1049).

JosieFoehrenbachBrown,“EscapingtheCirclebyConfrontingClassroomStereotyping:ASteptowardEqualityintheDailyEducationalExperienceofChildrenofColor,”African‐AmericanLawandPolicyRep.Vol.6(2004). FoehrenbachBrownbeginsbythinkingaboutthelegacyofBrownv.Boardof

Education.Afterfiftyyears,shesays,itistimetotakeacloserlookatoursupposed

progress—atthe“educationalfortunesofAfrican‐Americanchildren”sinceMay17,1954.

Theview,ifconsideredhonestly,oughttobeunpleasant.FoehrenbachBrownallegesthat

AmericanpubliceducationremainstrappedinGunnarMyrdal’s“viciouscircle”(135).In

1944,Myrdaldescribedhowwhiteprejudiceimposedconditionsofdeprivationonblacks

throughdiscriminatorypracticesandthenlookedattheresultofthoseconditionsasa

confirmationoftheirprejudicedviewpoint.Inthetwenty‐firstcentury,childrenofcolorare

facingpatternsof“resegregation”and“isolation”thatarestrikingfamiliar(135).

5

FoehrenbachBrown,inanattemptatexplanation,citesProfessorRevaSiegal:“Professor

SiegaldemonstrateshowAmericanlawtoooftendismantlesformallegalstructuresbut

ignoreshowtheinjusticeimposedbythoselegalmechanismscontinuestobeenforced

throughnewvariationsonoldpractice.”Theconsequentcharacterizationofinjusticeasa

sortofobsolete“distantpast”distractsusfrom“evidenceofcontinuinggovernmentaland

socialpracticesthatperpetuatepasthierarchies”(136).Injusticelivesbeyondthelaw.

AccordingtoFoehrenbachBrown,intheyearsfollowingtheBrowndecision,theU.S.

hasfailedtounderstandthefar‐reachingimplicationsof“transitionaljustice”(oflack

thereof)fortherealmofeducationreform.Shearguesthatthosechargedwith

implementingthedecisionhavefailedtodevotesufficientattentionto“thechallengeof

translatingthatlegalnormintoanoperationalrealityintheinstitutionalcontextofthe

Americanpublicschool”(138).Sheparticularlyemphasizestheroleofteachersinrelation

tothis“inattentiontothemechanicsofattitudetransformation”(138).Inotherwords,

FoehrenbachBrownlocatestheoriginsofimplicitbiasinthe“attitudinalremnants”ofthe

difficult—andperhapslargelyunsuccessful—transitionawayfromschoolsegregationafter

theBrowndecision.Evensubconsciousdisparatetreatmenteffectsstudentself‐

perception,senseofindividuality,andculturalbelonging.“[U]nconsciousbias,”shewrites,

“inflictsaconditionofwoundinginvisibilityonchildrenofcolorinourraciallystratified

schoolenvironments”(147).

Howshouldwebestdealwiththeeliminationofsuchharmful“subconscious

contaminants”(145)?Itistimefortheimplementationofrace‐consciousremedial

strategies.Shemakestheclaimthatespeciallythe“problemofteacherstereotypingof

minoritystudentsrepresentsaworthyobjectofcorrectiveaction”(142).Weneedtowork

tocounteractmutual“socialdistance”and“wariness”instudent‐teacherrelations(145).

FoehrenbachBrownreturnstotheideaoftransitionaljusticeandappliesittocreationof

scientificallyconstructedprogramsforanti‐stereotypingtrainingforteachers.Again,any

changeintherightdirectionrequirespoliticalwill.Allthesame,“Adoptionofthetraining

recommendationwouldreflectanhonestrecognitionofhowthedistortedimagesformour

nation’sdiscriminatorypastandouroftenraciallyandethnicallydividedpresentinhibit

ourcapacitytoseeeachotherclearly”(149).Thisrecognitionhasbeeninappropriately

delayed—butitiscertainlynottoolate.

6

CarolJ.Greenhouse,“LifeStories,Law’sStories:SubjectivityandResponsibilityinthePoliticizationoftheDiscourseof‘Identity,’”PoLAR:PoliticalandLegalAnthropologyReviewVol.31,No.1(May2008).

FoehrenbachBrown,intheabovearticle,underlinesthepotentiallydamaging

effectsofimplicitracialbiastothedevelopmentofstudentindividuality.CarolGreenhouse

highlightstherhetoricofidentityandindividualitytheemergedwithintheframeworkof

theBrowndecisionandtheargumentoftheplaintiffs.Shewrites,“Theconceptof

“identity”asitcirculatesasatheoreticalobjectinthehumansciencesintheUnitedStates

isdeeplysuffusedwiththefederaldiscourseoftheBrowneraanditslegacy”(82).

AccordingtoPeggyDavis,acrucialelementoftheplaintiff’sstrategyinBrownwas

theirevocationoftheU.S.asa“multiculturalpoliticalcommunity”(81).Theeffectofthis

strategy,Greenhouseclaims,wasto“openconstitutionalinterpretationtonewparticipants

andperspectives”(81).“Personhood,”shewrites,wasre‐conceptualizedas“forgedoutof

theelementsoffederalcitizenship”(81).Individualityandindividualidentityarenot

necessarilysolelyfunctionsoftheindividual.“Identity”isnotsimplysomethingthatevery

individual“has.”Rather,itisasocialfunctionwithsocialconsequences.Thecourt’s

languageinBrownconjurestwofuturesatonce—theoutcomes(likethechildren

themselves)entirelyvulnerabletosocialactionorinaction.Greenhouseexplains:

Onefutureispromising,asAfricanAmericanchildrengrowuptobefulfilledandproductivecitizens.Theotherisbleak,assomeAfricanAmericanchildrenaredamagedbythestigmaofracialprejudice,andgrowupdiscouraged,idle–evendangerous(82).

Educationisarightofcitizenship.Andagain,“personhood”emergesfrom“the

elementsoffederalcitizenship”(81).Anyconceptionofidentityorindividual“rights,”in

turn,cannotbeseparatedfromsocialreality.Greenhouseimpliesanunderstandingof

implicitbiasthatlawslikethefailedCRAof1990failedtoencompass.Inequalityshouldbe

understoodnotas“thesourceofdifference,butthesymptomofdifferencesbeyondthedirect

scopeoflaw.”(84)Atleastfornow.

7

KatayoonMajd,“StudentsoftheMassIncarcerationNation,”HowardLawJournalVol.54(2011).

AccordingtoMajd,“Schoolshave—unwittinglyornot—servedas‘accomplices’tothe

projectofmassincarceration”(360).Crimecontrolhasbecomethedefiningparadigmfor

educationofpolicy.LoicWacquantcallspublicschools“institutionsofconfinement”whose

“primarymissionisnottoeducatebuttoensure‘custodyandcontrol;”(361).Moreover,

thestudentsmostimpactedbyhighlypunitiveschoolpoliciesaresimilardemographically

tothosemostlikelytofindthemselveswithinthecriminaljusticesystem.Thatis,poor

menofcolor.Majdwrites,“Inthisway,schoolsreproduceandreinforcethesocial

inequitiesthatexistinthelabormarket”(363).AfricanAmericanmen,inparticular,are

oftenforcedoutentirely.

Juvenilecourtsundoubtedlyplayanimportantroleinthecriminalizationof

students.Schoolswouldnotbeabletocontinuehavingyoutharrestedwithintheirwallsif

thecourtswerenotwillingtohearcasesforoffenseslike“disorderlyconduct”and

“disturbingthepeace.”What’smore,oncewithinthesystem,studentsoftenfind

themselvessetuptofail.“Courtinvolvement,”Majdpointsout,“becomeanother,high‐

stakesmeansofsurveillanceratherthanawaytorehabilitateyouth”(371).Theterm

“school‐to‐prisonpipeline”initselfdemonstratesthetroublesomeinter‐institutional

natureofmassincarceration.Ifoneentrancepointiscutoff,itislikelythatanewonewill

emergesomewhere.The“symbioticrelationship”thathasdevelopedbetweenthe

educationandcriminaljusticesystemsmeansthatchallengingpoliciesinjustonesystemis

notlikelytofullyaddresstheproblem(372).

Inmorethanoneway,schoolsarecasualtiesofmassincarceration(382).Beyond

thefactthatschoolshaveimitatedthenation’sobsessionwithpunitiveness,theyhavealso

hadtodealwithagrowingnumberofstudentswithaparentorguardianbehindbars.

Additionally,schoolbudgetshavesufferedascorrectionscosthaveskyrocketed.

DismantlingmassincarcerationintheU.S.willmeanreversingitsspreadintotherealmof

education.Collaborativereformefforts,Majdargues,willbekey.

KellyWelchandAllisonAnnPayne,“RacialThreatandPunitiveSchoolDiscipline,”SocialProblemsVol.57,No.1(February2010).

8

Usinganationalsampleof294publicschools,thisstudyteststheracialthreat

hypothesiswithinschoolstodetermineiftheracialcompositionofstudentspredicts

greateruseofpunitivecontrols,regardlessoflevelsofmisbehavioranddelinquency.

WelchandPaynefoundsupportfortheracialthreathypothesis.Schoolswithalarger

percentageofblackstudentsarenotonlymorelikelytousepunitivedisciplinary

responses,butarealsomorelikelytouseextremelypunitivepractices(likezerotolerance

policies).Theyalsoemployfewmildpracticesandrestitutivetechniques.Moreover,

racialthreatismorepronouncedandinfluentialwhenschooldelinquencyanddisorderare

actuallyattheirlowest.

9

II. STUDIESADDRESSINGIMPLICITBIASWITHINTHEJUVENILEANDCRIMINALJUSTICESYSTEM,WITHIMPLICATIONSFORSCHOOLTOPRISON

PIPELINE:JenniferEberhardt,R.RichardBanks,LeeRoss,“DiscriminationandImplicitBiasinaRaciallyUnequalSociety,”CaliforniaLawReviewVol.94(2006). Howmuchbiasremainsinpeople’sheartsandminds?(1169)Whatwoulditmean

toberaciallyunbiased?Eberhardtetal.recognizethat,“incorporatinginequalityinto

antidiscriminationanalysisunderscoresthedifficultyofthechallengeswefacein

attemptingtorefashiontheraciallegacyofourpast”(1171).Intheend,theymakean

argumentthatverymuchresemblesBanks’claimabouttheessentialindeterminacyof

“nondiscrimination.”

Thisarticlelooksatstudiesthatexaminetheinfluenceofraceandimplicitbiaseson

investigativedecisionmaking,theuseoflethalforce,andcriminalsentencing.Onestudy

(byEberhardtandcolleagues)observedanimplicitassociationbetweenraceand

perceivedcriminality.PoliceofficerswereexposedtoagroupofBlackfacesoragroupof

Whitefacesandasked,“Wholookscriminal?”Thestudyfoundthatpoliceofficersnotonly

viewedmoreBlackfacesascriminal,butalsoviewedthoseBlackfacesratedasthemost

“stereotypicallyBlack”asthemostcriminalofall.Shootingbehaviorstudieshave

consistentlyfoundthatcomputerizedimagesofunarmedBlackmeninvideogame

simulationsweremorelikelytobe“shot”thanwereimagesofunarmedwhitemen.And,

withregardtocapitalsentencingresearch,themostcommonfindingisthatkillersofWhite

victimsaremorelikelytobesentencedtodeaththanarekillersofBlackvictims.These

studies—fewamongmany—demonstratedisparitieswhichpointtoconsiderableracial

discrimination.

Anyefforttoeliminatedisparitiesintherealmofcriminaljustice,however,willbe

complicated.Theeliminationofonedisparityislikelytoproducemoreanddistinct

disparities.AfricanAmericansbothdisproportionatelycommitandarevictimizedby

violentcrime.Anyconventionalsolutionwillbeatradeoff.Moreover,inasocietyas

chronicallyunequalasours,thequestionofwhatshouldcountasracialbiasisitself

contestable.Withthisinmind,Eberhardtetal.contendthatourapparentnational

10

consensusthat“discriminationiswrong”oughttoberejectedasanormativefantasy.That

is,“Theascendanceoftheantidiscriminationprincipleandthedisavowalofracismhave

relocatedratherthanresolveddisagreementaboutthemeaningofracialequalityinthisfirst

decadeofthetwenty‐firstcentury”(1190).Instead,weshouldrealisticallyconsider

questionsofracialfairnessbylookingdirectlyattheharmsandbenefitsofparticular

policies.

TamarBirckhead,“DelinquentbyReasonofPoverty,”WashingtonUniversityJournalofLaw&PolicyVol.38(2012). Thisarticleexploresthedisproportionaterepresentationoflow‐incomechildren

withintheU.S.juvenilejusticesystem.Birckheadarguesfirmlyagainstwhatshecalls

“need‐based”delinquency.Sheexplainsthat“theemphasisonfamilies’needswhen

adjudicatingdelinquencyhasadisproportionateeffectonlow‐incomechildren,resultingin

highratesofrecidivismandperpetuatingnegativestereotypesbasedonclass”(54).

In2008,courtswithjuvenilejurisdictionhandled1.7milliondelinquencycases.

Morethan500,000ofthesecasesresultedinchildrenbeingplacedonprobation

supervision.Morethan80,000youthwereconfinedinjuvenilefacilities.Atthesametime,

over300,0000cases(18%ofalldelinquencycases)weredismissedatintakeandan

additional25%ofcaseswerehandledinformally.Inotherwords,Birckheadwrites,“police

officers,civilians,probationofficers,judges,andlawyersmakedecisionsthatcumulatively

ensurethatsomechildrenenterandremaininthejuvenilecourtsystem,whileothersare

divertedoutofit”(58).Race,ethnicity,butalsosocio‐economicstature(separatefrom

both),partiallyexplainthisresult.

FranklinD.GilliamJr.andShantoIyengar,“TheSuperpredatorScript,”(1998).AneetaRattan,CynthiaS.Levine,CarolS.Dweck,JenniferL.Eberhardt,“RaceandtheFragilityoftheLegalDistinctionbetweenJuvenilesandAdults,”(May2012).

BothGilliamandIyengar’s1998studyandamuchmorerecentstudybyEberhardt

etal.demonstratetheeffectofraceonjuvenilejustice.

11

TheresultsofGilliamandIyengar’sworkshowthat,justbyalteringtheraceofthe

mugshotdisplayedfor5secondsina15‐minutenewscast,wecanapparentlymanipulate

peoples’attitudestowardsharshjuvenilejustice.Thatis,theyfoundthatexposuretothe

study’s“superpredatornewsframe”(anAfricanAmericanorLatinoyouth)increasesa

desireforharsherpunitiveactionamongwhitesandAsiansbyabout11percent.By

contrast,exposuretothesame“superpredatornewsframe”decreasessupportforthistype

ofsolutionby25percentamongAfricanAmericansandHispanics.

Eberhardt’s2012studyexamineswhetherWhiteAmericans,agroup

overrepresentedinjurypools,thelegalfield,andthejudiciarywouldperceivejuvenile

statusasamitigatingfactortothesamedegreewhenprimedtothinkofBlacksversus

Whites.TheysimilarlyfoundthatsimplybringingtomindaBlack(vs.White)juvenile

offenderledparticipantstoviewjuvenilesingeneralassignificantlymoresimilartoadultsin

theirculpabilityandtoexpressmoresupportforseveresentencing(suchaslifewithout

parole).Aone‐wordprimingcondition—changingtheraceoftheoffender—seemsto

underminethelegaldifferencebetweenjuvenileandadultculpability.Thefindingsofboth

studies,inshort,suggestthefragilityofjuvenilelegalprotectionswhenraceisinvolved.

SandraGrahamandBrianLowery,“PrimingUnconsciousRacialStereotypesaboutAdolescentOffenders,”LawandHumanBehaviorVol.28,No.5(October2004).

SandraGrahamandBrianLoweryconductedanothersimilarstudywitha

participantgroupofpoliceofficersandjuvenileparoleofficers.

Unliketheformertwostudies,however,GrahamandLoweryemployedapriming

schemebasedonDevine’smethodology:flashingcontent‐codedwordsatahighspeedsuch

thatparticipantswouldbeprimedbutwouldremainunawareofthecontentoftheprime.

TheyprimedhalfoftheparticipantswithwordsstereotypicallyrelatedtoAfrican

Americans,suchas“Harlem,”“ghetto,”and“dreadlocks,”andprimedtheotherhalfof

participantswithrace‐neutralcontentwordssuchas“sunset,”“mosquito,”and“toothache.”

Theythenpresentedparticipantswithtwohypotheticalcrimereportsdetailingjuveniles

(whoseracewasnotidentified)engagingincriminalmisbehavior,andmeasuredwhether

theprimingaffectedjudgmentsofthosebehaviors.Theresultsofthestudyconfirmedthat

12

theprimingactivatedracialstereotypesofAfricanAmericansandaffectedthewaythe

participantsmadejudgmentsaboutanumberoftraits(e.g.hostilityandimmaturity),

culpability,expectedrecidivism,anddeservedpunishment.Bothpoliceofficersandjuvenile

probationofficerswhohadbeenprimedwithAfricanAmericanwordsmadeharsher

judgmentsofthejuveniles.Participantsintheprimedconditionreportedmorenegative

traitratings,greaterperceivedculpabilityandlikelihoodtoreoffend,andtheysupported

harsherpunishmentsforthehypotheticaljuveniles.Theseeffectswerenotrelatedtoself‐

reported,consciouslyheldattitudesaboutAfricanAmericans.

GeorgeS.BridgesandSaraSteen,“RacialDisparitiesinOfficialAssessmentsofJuvenileOffenders:AttributionalStereotypesasMediatingMechanisms,”AmericanSociologicalReviewVol.63,No.4(August1998).

Thisstudyexaminescourtofficials’perceptionsofjuvenileoffenders,focusingon

therelationshipbetweenraceandofficers’judgmentaboutthecausesofthecrime.Three

mainfindingsshowtherelationshipbetweenrace,perceivedcauseofcrime,and

recommendedsentence:

1. Probationofficersconsistentlyportrayblackyouthsdifferentlythanwhiteyouthsin

theirwrittencourtreports,morefrequentlyattributingblacks'delinquencyto

negativeattitudinalandpersonalitytraits.Theirdepictionsofwhiteyouthsmore

frequentlystresstheinfluenceoftheindividual'ssocialenvironment.

2. Theseattributionsshapeofficials’assessmentsofboththethreatoffuturecrime

andsentencerecommendations.Courtofficialsrelymoreheavilyonnegative

internalattributionsthanontheseverityoftheyouth'scrimeorhisorherprior

criminalhistoryindeterminingthelikelihoodofrecidivism.

3. Attributionsaboutyouthsandtheircrimes,therefore,areamechanismbywhich

raceinfluencesjudgmentsofdangerousnessandsentencingrecommendations.

StephenM.FeilerandJosephF.Sheley,“Legalandracialelementsofpublicwillingnesstotransferjuvenileoffenderstoadultcourt,”JournalofCriminalJusticeVol.27,No.1‐2(January1999).

13

Thisstudyexaminestheissueofpublicsupportforharshertreatmentofcriminals

byanalyzingthevariablesunderlyingLouisianacitizens’willingnesstotreatjuvenile

offendersasadults.FeilerandSheleyexplorebothlegal(e.g.assaultivenatureofthe

crime)andextralegalelements(e.g.raceoftheoffender).212NewOrleansresidentswere

surveyedbytelephone.Eachparticipantwasaskedtoevaluatetwovignettesinvolving

eitheraburglaryorarobbery.Afterlisteningtothevignette,theparticipantwasasked

whethertheoffendershould“besenttojuvenilecourtortoadultcourt.”

Thestudyfoundthatageoftheoffender,thetypeofweaponwithwhichthevictim

wasthreatened,andwhetherornotthevictimwasphysicallyassaultedwereassociated

withagreaterwillingnesstotransferacasetoadultcriminalcourt.Raceoftheoffender,

thoughnotstrongly,wasalsoinfluentialinaparticipant’swillingnesstotransferayouthto

adultcourt.Theraceoftheparticipantdidnotmoderatethisinfluence.Thisisimportant

because,asFeilerandSheleyexplain,“SinceBlackaswellasWhiterespondentsweremore

likelytodesiredifferentialtreatmentforBlackyouth,thepossibilityofunconsciousbiasseems

quitelikely,asitappearstobeinactualjuvenilecourtdecisions.”

JeffreyJ.Rachlinski,AndrewJ.Wistrich,SheriJohnson,andChrisGuthrie,“DoesUnconsciousBiasAffectTrialJudges?,”(July2007). Theaimofthisstudywastomeasuretheinfluenceofimplicitassociationsonlegal

judgmentsmadeby133sittingtrialjudges.Theraceofthedefendantwasmanipulatedin

twodifferentways:firstbysublimelyprimingjudgeswithwordsassociatedwithAfrican

Americans(likeintheGrahamandLowerystudy)andsecondbyexplicitlyidentifyingthe

defendant’srace.Tomeasureimplicitassociationsinvolvingrace,judgesweregiventhe

IAT(measuringtheirassociationsbetweenwhiteorblackfacesandpositiveornegative

words).

Thestudyfoundthat,accordingtotheIAT,judgesheldinvidiousimplicit

associationsconcerningAfricanAmericans.Thesefindingsweregenerallyconsistentwith

thetestresultsofotherAmericans.However,theseassociationswereonlyinfluential

whentheraceofthedefendantwasmanipulatedthroughsubliminaltechniques.Whenthe

raceofthedefendantwasexplicitlyidentified,implicitassociationshadnoinfluenceon

14

judgment.Theseresultssuggestthatjudgesareabletocontroltheinfluenceofunconscious

racialbias—butonlywhentheyarefocusedondoingso.Thatis,judgescaneffectively

controltheirownautomaticracialassociationsiftheyaremadeawareoftheneedto

monitortheseresponses.

RashmiGoel,“DelinquentorDistracted?AttentionDeficitDisorderandtheConstructionoftheJuvenileOffender,”Law&InequalityVol.27,No.1(2009).

Thisarticleexplorestheinterrelatingissuesofrace,class,andmentalhealth

operatingwithinthejuvenilejusticesystem.Goelarguesthatweneedtoseriously

considertheconvergenceofrace,povertyandADHDinthedeterminationofdelinquency

inordertounderstandtheshortcomingsofourjuvenilejusticesystem.Nearlyhalfofall

juvenilesincustody(ofwhommorethanhalfareyouthofcolor)haveADHD.Moreyouth

ofcolorthanWhiteyouthareadjudicateddelinquentandthensubsequentlytransferredto

adultcourt.CompoundingthesestatisticsisthefactthatdisparitiesinADHDdiagnosisare

significantalongracialandsocioeconomiclines.Youthofcolorfaceanumberofeconomic

andracialbarrierstodiagnosis—includingracialbiaswithinthemedicalprofession.Once

thedamagehasbeendoneandachildhasnotbeenproperlydiagnosed,implicitbias

continuestooperatepotentlyinthecourtroom.Goelwrites:

TheoperationofunconsciousracismandgroupdynamicsisonlyexacerbatedbythefactthatthemajorityofjuvenilecourtjudgesarestillWhitemen.Unconsciouslyheldbiasesandculturalmisunderstandingsaboutfamiliesofcolormayaffectjudgeswhentheyadjudicatecasesinvolvingyouthoffenders.Judgesofallracesmayhaveunconsciousnegativeassumptionsregardingpeopleofcolorandunlawfulness.Thisisepitomizedbythestereotypeofthe“bigBlackkid”asbestial,uncontrollable,andaggressive.Thisstereotypeisindirectconflictwiththejuvenilecourt'soriginalviewofjuvenileoffendersasmisguidedbutrehabilitatableyouthwholackedculpability.(39)

UndiagnosedyouthofcolorsufferingfromADHDfindthemselvesonthefasttrack

todelinquency.Goeloffersthreerecommendationstoreversetheprocess:1)thepurpose

ofthejuvenilejusticesystemmustbeclarified,2)legalactorsinthejuvenilejusticesystem

15

mustbeeducatedaboutADHD,and3)screeninganddiagnosticmeasuresmustbe

drasticallyimproved.

JustinD.Levinson,“ForgottenRacialEquality:Implicitbias,Decisionmaking,andMisremembering,”DukeLawJournalVol.57(2007). Memoryerrorsarenormalandmeaningful.Inthisarticle,Levinsonmakesthe

argumentthatjudgesandjurorsunknowinglymisremembercasefactsinraciallybiased

ways.Thesememoryfailuresthreatentopropagateracialbiasesthroughoutthelegal

processitself.

Levinsonconductedanempiricalstudythatexaminedhowimplicitracialbias

affectedmockjurors’memoryoflegalfacts.Participantswereaskedtoreadthefactsof

twolegalstories,brieflydistracted,andthenquizzed.Racewastheindependentvariable.

Theresultsarestriking.Forexample,peoplewhoreadabout“Tyrone”weremorelikelyto

rememberaggressivefactsfromthestorytheyreadthanthosewhoreadabout“William”

or“Kawika,”anativeHawaiian.Moreover,Levinsonfoundthattherewasnosignificant

relationshipbetweenmemoryrecallandexplicitracialpreferences;thatistosay,

participantswhodemonstratedmorememorybiaswerenotmorelikelytobeexplicitly

biased(401).Theseresults,alongotherexistingresearchonimplicitsocialcognitionand

memory,pointtotheconclusionthatimplicitmemorybiasesmostlikelyoperateinlegal

decisionmaking.

What,then,aretheimplicationsofthesefindingsforsocialjustice?Howcanthe

Americanlegalsystemstandforjusticeandfairnesswhenitembracesadecisionmaking

processthatpropagatesracialbias?(420)Levinsonsuggeststhatbothdebiasingand

culturalsolutionsmustbepursuedtocorrectthecontradiction.Withregardtocultural

responsibility,hewrites,“itmustbeunderstoodthatthedeviationfromrational

decisionmakingisnotsimplyacognitiveglitch,butameaningfulculturalstatementthat

reflectsthewaypeopleunknowinglycarrysociety’sweaknesseswiththematalltimes,

evenwhenencodingandrecallingthesimplestoffacts”(420).

16

JustinD.Levinson,HuajianCai,andDanielleYoung,“GuiltybyImplicitRacialBias:TheGuilty/NotGuiltyImplicitAssociationTest,”(August2009). Inthisstudy,Levinsonetal.directlyaskthequestion:doimplicitbiasesaffectjury

guilty/notguiltyverdictsinraciallybiasedways?Theyworrythat“thestillemerginglegal

modelofthehumanmindhasfailedtodevelopnewempiricalteststhatmeasurehow

implicitcognitiveprocessesfunctionnotjustinsocietyingeneral,butspecificallyinlegally

relevantcontextssuchasjurydecision‐making”(2).Toaddressthisapparentlack,they

developedanewIAT(ImplicitAssociationTest):theBlack/White,Guilty/NotGuiltyIAT,in

ordertoexaminewhetherpeopleholdimplicitassociationsbetweenAfricanAmericans

andcriminalguilt.Thestudy,therefore,testsimplicitassociationsspecificallywithinthe

importantdomainoflegaldecision‐makingandthenexamineswhethertheseassociations

matterinthatrealm.

First,theGuilty/NotGuiltyIATwasfoundtooperatedifferentlythanand

independentfromthewellestablishedattitude‐basedIAT.Mostbasically,theoverall

resultsofthestudydemonstratethatparticipantsheldimplicitassociationsbetweenBlack

andGuiltycomparedtoWhiteandGuilty,andthattheseimplicitassociationspredicted

mock‐jurorevaluationsofambiguousevidence.Thesefindings,inshort,confirmedthe

hypothesisthatthereisanimplicitracialbiasinthepresumptionofinnocence.Thestudy

opensmuchbroaderquestionsaboutourlegalsystem.Forinstance,weareleftwondering

whetherthesamestandardsofguiltareappliedequallytoBlackandWhitemen.Doesthe

presumptionofinnocencemeanthesamethingforaBlackversusaWhitedefendant?This

studysuggeststhatthereissubstantialcauseforconcern.

JustinD.LevinsonandDanielleYoung,“DifferentShadesofBias:Skintone,ImplicitRacialBias,andJudgmentsofAmbiguousEvidence,”WestVirginiaLawReviewVol.112(2010). ThisarticleproposesandtestsanewhypothesisthatLevinsonandYoungcallthe

“BiasedEvidenceHypothesis.”Thishypothesissupposesthatwhenracialstereotypesare

activatedjurorsautomaticallyandunintentionallyevaluateambiguoustrialevidencein

raciallybiasedways.

Inanempiricalstudy,halfofparticipatingmockjurorswereshownanevidence

17

slideshowthatincludedasecuritycameraphotoofadark‐skinnedperpetrator.Theother

halfsawanotherwiseidenticalshowwithalighter‐skinnedperpetrator.Theresults

supporttheBiasEvidenceHypothesis:participantswhosawaphotoofadark‐skinned

perpetratorjudgedsubsequentevidenceasmoresupportiveofaguiltyverdict.The

perpetrator’sskintoneevenaffectedjudgmentsofhowguiltythedefendantwas(ona

scaleof0‐100).Thesejudgmentsofevidenceandguiltwerefoundtobeunrelatedto

explicitracialpreferences.Itseems,therefore,thatexposingjurorstosimpleracialcues

(priming)cantriggerstereotypesandaffecthowtheyevaluateevidenceinsubtlebut

harmfulways.Biasevidenceevaluationsmayhelpexplain—tosomedegreeatleast—

racialdisparitiesinthecriminaljusticesystem.

18

III. STUDIESABOUTIMPLICITBIASMOREGENERALLY,WITHIMPLICATIONFORITSOPERATIONWITHINTHEPIPELINECONTEXT:

JerryKang,“TrojanHorsesofRace,”HarvardLawReviewVol.118(February72005). AccordingtoKang,wealloperateonaday‐to‐daybasiswithafullarchiveofracial

schemasthat“automatically,efficiently,andadaptivelyparsetherawdatapushedtoour

senses”(1504).Implicitbiasresearchsuggeststhatwemayhonestlylackintrospective

accesstotheracialmeaningsembeddedwithinourracialschemas.Itseemswehave,

therefore,thesocialpsychologicaltranslationofthecriticalracestudiestheme:“thepower

ofraceisinvisible”(1506).IntheUnitedStates,usingtheIATandsimilartools,social

cognitionistshavedocumentedtheexistenceofimplicitbiasesagainstnumerous

outgroups,including:Blacks,Latinos,Jews,Asians,non‐Americans,women,gays,andthe

elderly.

Moreover,Kangargues(citingseveralimportantstudiesexaminingemployment

discrimination,shooterbiasandstereotypethreat,forexample),thesebiasesaffect

behavior.Or,intermsofhis“racialmechanicsmodel,”we“mapindividualstoracial

categoriesaccordingtotheprevailingracialmappingrules,whichinturnactivatesracial

meaningsthatalterourinteractionwiththoseindividuals”(1535).Similarly,heexplains

“ultimateattributionerror”(UAE)as"thetendencytoacceptthegoodfortheingroupand

thebadfortheoutgroupaspersonalanddispositional,butmoreimportantly,toexplain

awaythebadfortheingroupandthegoodfortheoutgroupwithsituational

attributions."Accordingly,whenweseeaBrownterrorist,weareinclinedtoward

"outgroupessentialism"andinterprettheviolenceaspartoftheirway;bycontrast,when

weseeJohnWalkerLindhorTimothyMcVeigh,weseeonlywaywardsouls,sayingnothing

largeraboutourWhiteselves.Inadditiontobeingfoundinsocialcognitionresearch,the

UAEhasbeendemonstratedinpoliticalscienceexperimentsemployingthenewscast

paradigm.AfteraWhitemugshot,forexample,participantsemphasizesocietalvariablesin

explainingthecausesofcrime;afteraBlackmugshot,participantsemphasizeindividual

nature.

19

JerryKangandMahzarinR.Banaji,“FairMeasures:ABehavioralRealistRevisionof‘AffirmativeAction,’”CaliforniaLawReviewVol.5(2006). Thepremiseofthearticleisessentiallythatthescienceofimplicitsocialcognition

canhelprevisethemeaningofcertainaffirmativeactionprescriptionsbyupdatingour

understandingofhumannatureanditssocialdevelopment.Evidencefromhundredsof

thousandsofindividualsacrosstheglobeshowsthat:

(1)themagnitudeofimplicitbiastowardmembersofoutgroupsordisadvantagedgroupsislarge,(2)implicitbiasoftenconflictswithconsciousattitudes,endorsedbeliefs,andintentionalbehavior,(3)implicitbiasinfluencesevaluationsofandbehaviortowardthosewhoarethesubjectofthebias,and(4)self,situational,orbroaderculturalinterventionscancorrectsystematicandconsensuallysharedimplicitbias.

Behavioralrealismtakesthisscienceseriously—andforcesthelawtoconfrontitaswell.

Usingabehavioralrealistmethodology,KangandBanajiaimtoreframethe

affirmativeactionconversationinthreemainways.First,insteadoflookingbackwardor

forward,affirmativeactionprogramsoughttorespondto“discriminationinthehereand

now.”Second,wemustrethinkthemeasurementofmerit.Thatis,affirmativeaction

policiesshouldnotbeconsider“preferentialtreatment;”but,instead,anopportunityto

recalibratemeritmeasurementwithimplicitbiasesinmind.Andthird,KangandBanaji

thinkaboutdebiasingprocessesintheaffirmativeactioncontext.Affirmativeaction

programs,forexample,haveoftenbeencreditedforproducingthesortofintegrationthat

providespositivecounterstereotypesand,inturn,worksagainstprejudice—bothovert

andimplicit.

JerryKangandKristinLane,“AFutureHistoryofImplicitSocialCognitionandtheLaw,”(2009). Inthisarticle,KangandLaneofferaso‐called“futurehistory”ofhowanewscientific

consensusmightbereachedthatintegratesimplicitsocialcognitionfindingsintoan

understandingofthelaw.Thisconsensusrequiresreallyseeing(withanopenmind)the

researchonimplicitbias.KangandLanesummarizeoneparticularlycompellingstudy:

20

Participantswatchedavideoofcomputer‐generatedfacesthatmorphedslowlyfroma

frowntoasmileandwereinstructedtohitakeywhentheythoughttheexpression

changed.Ingeneral,peoplesawhostility“linger”ontheBlackfaceforalongerperiodof

time.Moreover,theextentthathostilitywasperceivedaslingeringwaspredictedby

implicitbias(asmeasuredbytheIAT)againstBlacks.Implicitcognitionisanemerging

science,butimplicitbiasesareveryrealandalreadyverydocumentable.

AccomplishingthefuturehistorythatKangandLaneenvision—onethat

incorporatesimplicitcognitionscienceintolaw—throughbehavioralrealisttechniques

involvesathree‐stepprocess:

1) Identifyadvancesinthemindandbehavioralsciencesthatprovideamore

accuratemodelofhumancognitionandbehavior,

2) Comparethatnewmodelwiththelatenttheoriesofhumanbehaviorand

decision‐makingembeddedwithinthelaw.Theselatenttheoriestypicallyreflect

“commonsense”basedonnaïvepsychologicaltheories.

3) And,whenthenewmodelandthelatenttheoriesarediscrepant,asklawmakers

andlegalinstitutionstoaccountforthisdisparity.Anaccountingrequireseither

alteringthelawtocomportwithmoreaccuratemodelsofthinkingandbehavior

orprovidingatransparentexplanationoftheprudential,economic,political,or

religiousreasonsforretainingalessaccurateandoutdatedview.

Behavioralrealismworksagainstfantasyinfavorofreality—againsthypocrisyandself‐

deceptioninourlaw.

R.RichardBanks,“ClassandCulture:TheIndeterminacyofNondiscrimination,”StanfordJournalofCivilRights&CivilLibertiesVol.5(2009). Inthisarticle,Banksagaininterrogatesthedefinitionalambiguitiessurrounding

race,racismanddiscriminatorypracticeintheU.S.Hewrites,“[N]ondiscriminationislike

someotherlegalconcepts:rhetoricallypotent,ifanalyticallyindeterminate”(3).“Moral

intuitionsaboutthedemandsofracialjustice,”Bankspointsout,“arecomplexandmight

dependheavilyonthespecificsoftheparticularcontroversy”(8).Ourintuitionsarehighly

21

context‐dependent.Morespecifically,claimsofdiscriminationoftencombineandconfound

mattersofrace,class,andculture.Thisintertwiningproducesthepossibilityforboth

empiricaluncertaintyand,aspreviouslynoted,conceptualindeterminacy(15).

Americansoccupydifferentracial—butalsoentirelydistinct—cultural,social,and

physicalspaces(17).“Race,”Banksexplains,“saturatesoursocialworld”(17).

Nevertheless,Banksarguesthatwhenitcomestowhatitmeanstobesocio‐economically

disadvantaged,wenecessarilycontemplaterace.Inthecaseofthemostdisadvantaged

blacks—“racialparallelism”simplydoesnotexistinoursociety.Anyconventionalaccount

ofprinciplesofantidiscriminationornondiscriminationwouldbeunabletoaccountforthe

“socialdistinctiveness”ofdisadvantagedblacks.

Banksattemptstounderstandtheclassificationof“discriminatory”practicesand

institutionsthroughapragmaticratherthanaproblematicallyindeterminate

“philosophical”orconceptuallens(19).Hewrites,“[A]practiceisnotpermissiblebecause

itisdiscriminatory[;]rather,apracticeisraciallydiscriminatorybecause,onbalance,its

costsandbenefitswarrantitsprohibition”(19).Discriminationislikemanyotherlegal

topics:clearintheabstractwhilecomparativelyimpotentinconcreteapplication.Thereis

noneedtodefine“discrimination”onceandforall,“becausethereisnodefinitiononwhich

onewouldrelytodecideacase”(22).Bankscontends,therefore,thatthewidespread

embraceofthenondiscriminationmandateisfundamentallymisguided.

22

IV. STUDIESOUTLININGPOTENTIALREMEDIES/INTERVENTIONSWITHINTHEPIPELINECONTEXT

SheriLynnJohnson,“LitigatingforRacialFairnessAfterMcCleskeyv.Kemp,”(2008). Johnsonemphasizestheimportanceofunderstandinghowprejudiceaffects

particular—inthecontextofherarticle—capitalcases.Shesummarizes:

Psychologistslookingatracialprejudicefocusonthreedifferent,thoughoftenrelated,aspects.Fromacognitiveperspective,prejudiceinfluencesthewaypeoplethinkaboutpersonsorevents,anditinvolvesstereotypes(whichareconscious),associations(whichareoftenunconscious),andbiasedprocessingofotherinformationaboutthetargetsubject.Fromanaffectiveperspective,prejudicecreatesnegativeemptions,rangingfromdislike,tohatred,torevulsion,tofear.Fromaconnotativeperspective,prejudicealterspeople’sbehaviorandmayinvolvediscrimination,avoidance,rudenessorevenviolence.(189)

Allthesame,prejudice,atleastinitsimplicitforms,is—inasense—trainable.Persons

whoaremadeawareofthefactthattheirreactionsarebiased,andthenallowedto

“practice”neutraljudgmentsaremorelikelytomakethemonaday‐to‐daybasis.Thisis

especiallytrueiftheyarepersonallycommittedtoracialequalitynorms,asopposedto

sociallypressuredtoconformtonormsofformalequality.‘Thebestcandidatesfornon‐

prejudicedreactions,”Johnsonwrites,“areagroupwhoarecalled‘chronicegalitarians’—

peoplewhomonitortheirownreactionsandbehaviorinanefforttorootoutstereotypes

andfeelingsofwhichtheydon’tapprove”(193).

PatriciaG.Devine,PatrickS.Forscher,AnthonyJ.Austin,andWilliamT.L.Cox,“Long‐termReductioninImplicitRaceBias:APrejudiceHabit‐breakingIntervention,”(2012).

Thefindingsofthisstudyprovidethefirstrealevidencethatacontrolled,

randomizedinterventioncanproduceenduringreductionsinimplicitbias.“Ourdata,”

Devineetal.explain,“provideevidencedemonstratingthepoweroftheconsciousmindto

intentionallydeploystrategiestoovercomeimplicitbias”(28).Theydevelopeda“multi‐

facetedprejudicehabit‐breaking”interventionthataimedtoengageintentionaleffortto

23

producelong‐termreductionsinimplicitracebias.Theinterventionhadbothaneducation

componentandatrainingcomponent(whichinstructedparticipantsinfivedifferentde‐

biasingstrategies).Allmeasureswereassessedpriortotheinterventionmanipulationand

attwotimepoints—fourandeightweeks—afterthemanipulation.

Thestudyfoundthat,intheinterventioncondition,peoplesimultaneouslyself‐

reportedincreasedconcernaboutdiscriminationandtestedlowerontheBlack‐WhiteIAT

forimplicitbiasesagainstBlacks.Generalconcernwasalsoshowntogrowovertime.In

thisway,theinterventionseemstoincreasebothpersonalawarenessofone’sbiasanda

generalconcernaboutdiscriminationinsociety.Devineetal.stresstheneedtoexplore

whatexactelementsoftheiremphaticallymulti‐facetedinterventionwereresponsiblefor

increasingconcern.Futurestudies,ingeneral,willneedtofocusonthespecifics—on

uncoveringthespecificbehavioral,cognitive,affective,andneuralmechanismsthrough

whichtheinterventionworks.Fornow,thisstudyimportantlydemonstratesthatan

interventioncaneffectthelong‐termregulationofimplicitbiases.

GalenV.Bodenhausen,AndrewR.Todd,andJenniferA.Richeson,“ControllingPrejudiceandStereotyping:Antecedents,Mechanisms,andContexts,”(2008). Thischapterdiscussesthemostprominentresearchtodate(2008)onthe

psychologyofcontrollingprejudiceandstereotyping.CitingDevine,Bodenhausenetal.

define“automaticprejudice”asthatproducedby“thespontaneousactivationofmental

associationsthatarenotnecessarilypersonallyendorsed,butthatareubiquitouslyfound

incontemporarysociety,owingtoongoingculturalrepresentationsofminoritygroupsthat

perpetuatenegativeorstereotypicassociationswiththegroups”(111‐112).Although

Devinecharacterizesautomaticprejudiceasanubiquitousphenomenon,therearenotable

individualandsituationaldifferencesinstereotypeactivation.AccordingtoBodenhausen

etal.,itseemsthatthekeytostereotypeactivationseemstoliemoreinthemotivationsof

theperceiverthanintheavailabilityofcognitiveresources.Howtheperceivedpersonis

categorized(blonde,black,fat,pretty)alsomatters—notallapplicablecategorieswillbe

invokedineverycontext.Prejudicecontrolbecomesparticularlyproblematic,therefore,

whenperceiverscategorizeothersintermsofcategoriesforwhichtheyareawareof

24

undesirableculturalassociations.Awareness,again,doesnotnecessarilyconnote

endorsement.

Changesinsocietalnormsoverthecourseofthe20thcenturyhasmadethe

expressionofprejudiceapowerfulsourceofsocialdevaluation.Thissocialdevaluation

constitutesaso‐calledexternalmotivationtocontrolprejudice.Additionally,peoplemay

ofteninternalizenormsandbecomepersonallymotivatedtoavoidexpressingprejudice.

Regardless,aslongastheyarecognizanttothepotentialforbiasandaremotivatedin

someway,peopleresorttoanumberofcognitivemechanismstocontroltheirprejudices.

Bodenhausenetal.considerstereotypesuppression,perspectivetaking,stereotype

negationtraining,andprimingpeopletothink“creatively”(119).Regulatoryprocesses,

moreover,canbecomemoreautomaticwithpracticeandtime.Nonetheless,initial

activationofbiasedassociationsdoesappeartobethedefaultandinhibitiontheexception.

Strategies,likecorrection,individuation(consideringatarget’spersonalattributes),and

recategorization,canhelptocounteracttheinfluenceoftheseassociationsafteractivation

Situationalfactorscanmakecontrolmoreorlessfeasible.Forexample,wemight

ask,howdosocialnorms,culturalideologies,anddiversecontextsinfluencetheactivation

andcontrolofbiasedthoughts?Socialcontextconstrainsbehavior.Theendorsementof

endorsementandmulticulturalismparticularlypredictsmorepositiveracialattitudes.In

general,increasedinterpersonalinteractionacrossgrouplineshasbeenshownto

significantlyundermineprejudiceanddiscrimination.Prejudiceandstereotypescanbe

deeplyconditionedinthehumanmind.“Thefactthatsomanypeoplehavethedesireto

controlthebiasesthathavebeenhistoricallysocommonplaceisacauseforcelebration,”

Bodenhausenetal.claim.Allthesame,theyalsomaintainthat“itiscertainlynotanoccasion

forcomplacency.”Thereisworktobedone.