Tag Archives: personal bias

Unconcious Bias

Implicit bias refers to the attitudes or stereotypes that affect our understanding, actions, and decisions in an unconscious manner. Typically you are even aware of youhave made an assessment.

This could be as asimple as someone dressed in dirty torn clothes appoaching you on the street.  Thier purpose may be to ask for directions.

Many would unconciously assess this person as a beggar just from their dress and depending on your bias toward street charity, you may take action to avoid them or draw out your money before they even reach you (embarrassing if all they seek is directions).

Consequences

Implicit bias can have positive or negative consequences depending on the context or your perspective.  If the afformentioned example did involve someone seeking a donation and you successfully avoided them, for you the conseqence could be positive.  For the person in need, not so much.

The main drawback to implicit or unconcious bias is your behaviour might not be appropriate or more importantly might not be what would choose to do, given some thoughtful analysis.

This could lead to regret or even second guessing on your part.  What if I had just thought about it, I probably would not have done that.

Conscious Bias

Closely associated with the automatic bias, is the case where a bias is acted on purposefully because the benefits are thought to outweigh the consequences.

Police and customs agents are well known for this approach.  Identifying a smuggler or a miscreant before the crime is committed can be very difficult.

Profiling and targeting based on statistical analysis can be a shortcut  to this identification, although it’s easily seen this approach can catch innocents in it’s net.

Whether concious or unconcious, bias is a behaviour to be avoided as much as possible.  Self awareness and reasoned analysis may take more effort, but as with most things greater effort/better results.

 

Judging

Everyone’s behaviour is impacted in some ways by their personal,  organizational (e.g., home, non-profit, corporation, govt, corporate) and  societal (aka – cultural) bias.

Efforts can be made to override these bias which ultimately inform your behaviour but true impariality is impossible to achieve.

Some roles, for example a judge or a jury member, are founded on expectation of factual based analysis and associated recommendations or decisions.

Even in these cases though true neutrality is not possible.  Your environment, values and prejudices cannot be removed fully no matter how hard you try.

Attempting to put aside these personal filters and view with an open mind is admirable and a task well worth undertaking.   The closer we can come to achieving neutrality the fairer the assessment.

Two Sides

Consider a refugee or political escapee petitioning a government to grant them asylum.  The country they are from claims this person is a terrorist or political agitator.

Their target country seeks to make a fair assessment.  Is this individual being unfairly persecuted or are they an agitator or terrorist.

The assessment of course begs the question, by whose standards.  Which bias, if any, should be applied to the ultimate judgement.

If the refugee has made it safely to their new home, the judgement will be driven by that countries filters otherwise they will probably waste away in a prison.

In one country, this person may be viewed as a terroist and in another as an oppressed fugitive who is being unjustly persecuted. Who is right?  So often the answer is driven by our built in bias.

Is a Fair Assessment Possible

In North America we attempt to ensure fairness in judgement by designing and following practices which have a focus on removing bias and encouraging fairness.

While the North American judicial systems are not perfect and have been shown to occassionally arrive at erroneous judgement, I find it comforting they strive for fairness  as an ideal.