Harvard's 'Are You A Bigot?!?!' Test
(implicit.harvard.edu)
Comments (30)
sorted by:
Aren’t these tests rigged to show that everyone is super racist? At least the ones I’ve seen
Basically, they use psychological tricks that have been common in marketing and commercials to create association biases. Even most black people get slight white bias on these because that’s how they’re designed. The original creators even admitted the thing was completely useless in determining actual biases it was just a “starting a conversation” tool…
The correct conversation of course
Implicit bias tests are a pseudoscience. This shouldn't surprise anyone who is metascientifically knowledgeable, because big, decades-long pseudoscientific lumps of shit like it are common in the "sciences". In fact, about two thirds of medicine, psychology, and many other fields are irreproducible trash. And, if that wasn't bad enough, that irreproducible trash is easy even for a layman to quickly identify, which means most of the scientists in these fields are either corrupt or braindead or some combination of the two.
That layman link is mind boggling. Thanks for posting.
I completely agree. It’s just ridiculous how seriously they are taken.
All "personality" type tests are designed to lead to the conclusion they want. We were taught back in like sophmore year of the undergrad how much effort you have to put in to dodge biases and self fulfillment, which probably 90% of the class failed at over and over and just passed regardless with a "now you know for the future!" message.
One of those lessons was to mislead the test taker on the purpose of the test, so avoid them figuring out what you are doing and then lying. Because if you think you'll look like a bad person, you'll give different answers.
Every one of these tests fail that very basic criteria, including basically every poll or political compass test. Especially as, none of these people are going to put in the aforementioned effort to avoid those problems because that would require a high mastery of the English language and a lot of redrafting after fake attempts.
No surprise at all.
they are trying to recreate the concept of original sin... that everyone is racist/sexist/*phobic, and that the only way to atone is to be subservient to them and their demands.
It told me I have a small tendency to have an automatic bias for john f Kennedy over biden.
i'm like, well DUH>
The current senator of president?
I'm already aware of, and comfortable with my biases. Back in my day we called it instinct.
Ah yes, they made me take one in a “diversity class” for college. It’s intentionally designed to be problematic by forcing associations via shading of objects then damning you for clicking them. The majority of everyone get “slight white bias” because of this.
I'm just going to skip the tedious test and assume Harvard assumes all hwyte people are racist.
Took the African/European race one as that's the OG style. As ever it can't find any bias for me. Because it's a skewed test of mental tongue twisters and conditioning resistance, not bias.
It's still disgustingly shady too. It measures exclusively European - bad and African - good pairings for one half, then switches to European - good and African - bad for the other half, when people will obviously improve their sorting speed with practice. They even have a bullshit little disclaimer at the end about minimizing this by randomising which section is first and having a few practice questions at the start, like people stop improving after the first 30 seconds. It would be patently simple to randomise the pairings and eliminate the problem entirely, but they decide to leave a glaring flaw there for unknown reasons.
I also took the test several times and there were always more sections where European-good/African-bad follows a simple repetitive pattern and African-good/European-bad is the point it breaks the repetition, rather than the reverse. So It's ambiguous as to whether the randomisation is weighted toward that or I was just unlucky.
I intentionally sorted everything "good" into the black section and everything "bad" into white, and this is the result I got. This isn't even pseudoscience, it's just designed to call you racist unless you're 100% biased against white people, in which case it calls you normal.
I don't need a test for that. Everyone can see it.
Insert chadface.jpg here.
Huh, neat. In accordance with my test scores, I am receiving a fresh pair of jackboots.
You go to Harvard, of course you do.
Saw the link in a book. ;)
I meant in general, but accept your excuse.
It's about ten minutes long. Most of the -isms and -phobias' are included. Tell me how it goes. ;)
Oh shit, it's that test Hank Hill took.
I'm wondering if the disclaimer at the end that the IAT is not 100% reliable isn't there because they're worried about falsely labeling people racist, but because they're scared of people passing their manipulation test and being able to objectively discuss racial statistics without being labeled closet racists.
“Are you a bigot!?”
“Yes, now leave me the fuck alone.”
I took the religion test... It showed me mooslims vs joos and still lectured me i'm biased towards christianity
In what fucking context? any random conversation? as a friend? as a romantic interest? as a sexual partner? as target practice?
The lack of context astounds me.