2012-03-23 Mustan teinipojan ampuminen kuohuttaa Yhdysvalloissa (Trayvon Martin)

[Ajattelija2008]

MV-lehdestä löytyi tällainen uutinen:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/10/04/alabama-high-school-student-assaulted-over-black-lives-matter-post-police-say.html
Poliisi epäilee mustien pahoinpidelleen rasistisesti valkoisen opiskelijan Brian Oglen, koska Ogle kritisoi netissä Black lives matter -liikettä.

Tuossa jälleen yksi muistutus, että rasismi on ongelma USA:ssa, nimittäin väkivaltainen rasismi, jota mustat kohdistavat muihin rotuihin. Täällä Suomessa mm. Yle ja Sanoma tekevät parhaansa tuodakseen tuon mustan rasismin Suomeenkin.

[Aksiooma]

MV-lehdestä löytyi tällainen uutinen:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/10/04/alabama-high-school-student-assaulted-over-black-lives-matter-post-police-say.html
Poliisi epäilee mustien pahoinpidelleen rasistisesti valkoisen opiskelijan Brian Oglen, koska Ogle kritisoi netissä Black lives matter -liikettä.

Tuossa jälleen yksi muistutus, että rasismi on ongelma USA:ssa, nimittäin väkivaltainen rasismi, jota mustat kohdistavat muihin rotuihin. Täällä Suomessa mm. Yle ja Sanoma tekevät parhaansa tuodakseen tuon mustan rasismin Suomeenkin.

Tässä Colin Flahertyn video samasta tapauksesta: https://youtu.be/jDqpIuxIRDY

[Jorma M.]

Epäilen että 90% näistä poliisi-ampuu-mustia-muttei-mansikkia -uutisista on suicide by cop -ilmiötä. Tai sitten vain valkoisia vihaavien organisoimia salaliittoja. Tavoitteena saada presidentiksi Hillary tai joku muu korruptoitunut limanuljaska.

[MustaLeski]

Valkoinen poliisi sai potkut, kun ei ampunut aseistettua mustaa miestä

Entinen sotilas osasi hillitä hermonsa tilanteessa, esimiehet eivät ymmärtäneet.

Viime aikoina Yhdysvalloissa on uutisoitu useista tapauksista, joissa valkoinen poliisi on ampunut mustan, usein aseettoman miehen.

Tästä on noussut kansanliike, Black Lives Matter, mustien hengellä on merkitystä. Joitain poliiseja on tuomittu, jotkut on vapautettu syytteistä.

Uusi julki tullut tapaus on päinvastainen. Valkoinen poliisi ei ampunut kotihälytyksen jälkeen mustaa miestä, jolla oli ase kädessään. Poliisi sai potkut.

"Näytä minulle kätesi"

Tapaus sattui toukokuussa Weirtonissa Länsi-Virginiassa. Hätäkeskukseen tuli soitto aseistetusta miehestä, apua tarvittiin heti.

Kutsuun vastasi lähimpänä oli 25-vuotias poliisi Stephen Mader, joka oli partiossa yksinään. Mader oli aikaisemmin palvellut merijalkaväessä Afganistanissa ja aloittanut poliisina vain vähän aikaa sitten.

Mader saapui talolle, josta soitti oli tullut. Oven ulkopuolella seisoi musta mies, 23-vuotias Ronald Williams, kädet selkänsä takana.

- Huusin hänelle, että näytä minulle kätesi. Hän laski kädet sivulleen ja näin, että hänellä oli hopean värinen pistooli, kertoo Mader NPR-uutissivustolle.

Mader ei tiennyt sitä, että sisällä oleva tyttöystävä oli soittanut uudestaan hätäkeskukseen ja kertonut, että aseessa ei ole ammuksia ja että mies on humalassa.

Mader otti esiin oman aseensa ja käski Williamsia pudottamaan aseensa.

- En voi tehdä sitä. Ammu minut, vastasi Williams.

Tukijoukot saapuvat

Sotilaille oli Afganistanissa koulutettu varsinkin sodan loppuvaiheessa, että tärkeintä on voittaa ihmisten sydämet puolelleen. Suojella siviilejä ja käyttää asetta vain äärimmäisessä hädässä.

Ennen ampumista heidän piti odottaa, että vastassa oli vihamielisesti käyttäytyvä viholliseksi tunnistettu henkilö.

- Minua kohti ei osoitettu aseella. Minut on koulutettu niin, että silloin ei ammuta, kertoo entinen sotilas.

Millerin hälyttämät tukijoukot saapuivat nopeasti. He vetivät aseensa esiin ja käskivät Williamsia pudottamaan aseensa.

- Tässä vaiheessa hän alkoi osoittaa pyssyllään meitä.

Yksi apuun tulleista poliiseista ampui neljä laukasta kohti Williamsia, yksi osui päähän. Hän kuoli tapahtumapaikalle.

Veteraanit hyviä poliiseja

Pari päivää myöhemmin Mader sai potkut, koska hän oli vaarantanut muiden poliisien hengen, kun ei ollut ampunut Williamsia.

NPR:n haastattelemien asiantuntijoiden mukaan sotaveteraaneista on tullut hyviä poliiseja.

- He ovat tottuneet näkemään ihmisillä aseita ja he pystyvät kylmäpäisesti arvioimaan tilanteen todellisen vaarallisuuden, kertoo yksi asiantuntija.

Minkä potkut antanut poliisipäällikkö näki vaarallisena epäröintinä, oli asiantuntijan mukaan kypsyyttä ja itsehillintää vaaratilanteessa.

http://www.iltalehti.fi/ulkomaat/201612092200038283_ul.shtml

[Ajattelija2008]

http://m.iltalehti.fi/ulkomaat/201612272200045701_ul.shtml
Iltalehti kertoo, että Chicagossa oli verinen joulu, 12 surmattiin. Mutta valemedia ei kerro, että kyseessä on mustien rikollisten keskinäinen väkivalta ja että väkivalta on yltynyt "Black Lives Matter"-liikkeen vaikutuksesta, kun poliisi ei halua yhtä hanakasti enää puuttua mustien rötöstelyihin.

Tarvitaan MV-lehden kaltainen oikea media kertomaan totuus, valemedia Iltalehti ei sitä kerro.

[Kallan]

Valkoinen poliisi sai potkut, kun ei ampunut aseistettua mustaa miestä
---
- He ovat tottuneet näkemään ihmisillä aseita ja he pystyvät kylmäpäisesti arvioimaan tilanteen todellisen vaarallisuuden, kertoo yksi asiantuntija.

Minkä potkut antanut poliisipäällikkö näki vaarallisena epäröintinä, oli asiantuntijan mukaan kypsyyttä ja itsehillintää vaaratilanteessa.

http://www.iltalehti.fi/ulkomaat/201612092200038283_ul.shtml

Ikinä ei ole hyvä; jos valkoinen poliisi ampuu mustan miehen (erittäin hyvästä syystä, esim. henkilö vaarallinen) niin kausti tulee koska media uutisoi asiasta yksipuolisesti jättäen asioita kertomatta. No, nyt poliisi tekee tilannearvion kokemuksen perusteella eikä ammu - ja hänet erotetaan. Tietysti uutinen otsikoidaan hyvin kyseenalaisella tavalla.

[MustaLeski]

Hyvä video, kannattaa katsoa:

Why Do Blacks Hate White People? (Chicago Kidnapping etc.)

[Veturinainen]

Edesmennyt Trayvon-poika palkitaan elämäntyöstään korkeakoulututkinnolla.

Florida university to award degree to Trayvon Martin

Trayvon Martin's getting a college degree.

The slain Florida teenager -- killed by George Zimmerman five years ago -- will be awarded a posthumous bachelor's degree in aeronautical science from Florida Memorial University.

Martin's parents, Sybrina Fulton and Tracy Martin, will accept the degree on his behalf during the school's spring commencement on May 13. Fulton is an alumnus of the school, a historically black university in Miami Gardens.

The aeronautics degree is in "honor of the steps he took during his young life toward becoming a pilot," the school said in a Facebook post. Florida Memorial's Department of Aviation and Safety has a designated Cessna pilot training center, and the school also houses the Trayvon Martin Foundation.

Florida Memorial wanted to award the degree to Martin now because, if he had lived and attended the college, he would have been graduating this year, said school President Roslyn Clark Artis.

On her Twitter page, Fulton thanked the university for honoring her son. She said he became interested in aviation after attending summer camps at Florida Memorial.

"He was so excited," she told CNN. "But he couldn't decide whether we wanted to fly planes or fix them." Martin took aviation courses in high school, as well as a few flying lessons.

Fulton hopes the posthumous degree will offer inspiration to other young people to pursue their dreams.

She graduated from the university 20 years ago and says she'll be a jumble of emotions when she accepts his degree.

"It's bittersweet that I'll be walking across that stage again, for my son who is not here," she said.

Fulton and Tracy Martin plan to offer some remarks to the graduates at the commencement, but she admits it will be tough.

"This is extremely emotional for me," Fulton said. "I just hope whatever I say, I can get it out."

Martin was shot and killed in February 2012 by Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch captain in Sanford, Florida. Zimmerman had called 911 to report a suspicious person in his neighborhood and later got into a fight with the 17-year-old. Zimmerman said he shot Martin in self-defense.

The shooting sparked protests nationwide for months.

Zimmerman was acquitted in July 2013.

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/05/04/us/trayvon-martin-college-degree-trnd/

[Lady Deadpool]

Heinäkuussa julkaistiin kanadalaisten tutkijoiden tuotos nimeltään Disproportionate Use of Lethal Force in Policing is Associated with Regional Racial Biases of Residents. Kuten yleensä, myös tämä tutkimus on saanut kohtuullisesti media-aikaa. The Daily Caller on päättänyt puuttua tutkimuksen epäkohtiin.

Tutkimus: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1948550617711229?journalCode=sppa&; (27.7.2017)

http://dailycaller.com/2017/08/06/heres-some-flaws-with-the-latest-study-on-white-racism-and-police-shootings/ (6.8.2017)

Here's Some Flaws With The Latest Study On White Racism And Police Shootings

A new study purportedly showing that the racial biases of white individuals might contribute to the fatal police shootings of black people doesn't really add anything to the debate on police brutality towards the black community.

The July study, "Disproportionate Use of Lethal Force in Policing is Associated with Regional Racial Biases of Residents," reached the conclusion that the implicit biases of whites can explain the disproportional rates at which police officers shoot black people in the U.S.

"Results indicate that only the implicit racial prejudices and stereotypes of White residents, beyond major geographic covariates, are associated with disproportionately more use of lethal force Blacks relative to regional base rates of Blacks in the population," the study claimed.

The three Canadian researchers, Eric Hehman, Jessica K. Flake and Jimmy Calanchini, argued that these racial attitudes of white residents could be "contagious" and spread to the officers working in the community. The study also found that while white racial prejudice could predict "disproportionate lethal force," it also revealed that biggest predictor of this phenomenon was the stereotypes white residents had about black people and weapons.

However, there are multiple issues with the study and how it was conducted that make it hard to hold up as an example of why black Americans are being shot at greater rates than their white counterparts. The researchers themselves even provide multiple caveats to the results of their study.

One major problem the researchers admit is that they aren't able to establish "temporal precedence" because no reliable data on police officers' use of lethal force exists before 2015.

"Reliable data on lethal force do not exist prior to 2015 so we are limited in our ability to establish temporal precedence. Consequently, we can only conclude that an association exists between racial biases and lethal force, and future research can build upon this finding, providing more evidence of causal relationships," the researchers noted.

Temporal precedence helps establish a cause-effect relationship between two events; without the prior data on police use of force, it's hard for the researchers to prove that there is a casual relationship between the disproportionate police shootings of black people and white residents' implicit biases.

Another problem is the researchers used data on implicit bias collected from 2003-2013 but compared it to police use of force data from 2015.

"Another limitation is that our lethal force data is from 2015, whereas our racial bias data were collected between 2003 and 2013," the researchers noted. They added that implicit bias measurements have been relatively stable each year, but it's a little hard to measure data that comes from two different eras to find a relationship between implicit bias and fatal police shootings.

Another big issue in the study is where the researchers drew their data on fatal police shootings. They used information from The Guardian, a newspaper outlet. The Guardian relies on crowdsourcing to track fatal police shootings in America, often drawing on information from their own reporters and other journalists.

"The Counted is the most thorough public accounting for deadly use of force in the US, but it will operate as an imperfect work in progress – and will be updated by Guardian reporters and interactive journalists as frequently and as promptly as possible." the outlet noted about their police tracker.

The researchers also admitted that their results might not even point to implicit bias as the reason for more police shootings of black people. The results could show that some black people are acting violently against police officers, which results in a "more justifiable use of force," they wrote.

"One interpretation of these results is that Whites' biases create a racially charged atmosphere that contributes to police killing Blacks disproportionately. Alternatively, Blacks in some regions may be more violent when interacting with police, resulting in more justifiable lethal force, in turn influencing the prejudice and stereotypes about Blacks held by people in the region. Importantly, because of the correlational nature of the analyses, we cannot rule out either interpretation."

Regardless of these issues with the study, various media outlets ran headlines declaring that white racism correlated to the fatal shootings of black people in America. Most of the outlets buried the caveats to the study, if they even covered the limitations to it at all.

[Roope]

Hesarissa annetaan ymmärtää, että viattoman Trayvon Martinin ampuja vapautettiin ihonvärinsä takia. Maryan Abdulkarim hokee George Floydin yhteydessä ja Martiniinkin viitaten murhaa, vaikka kuten jutussa muualla todetaan, "Suomessa rikokset vastaisivat lähinnä tappoa ja kuolemantuottamusta".

Väkivallan kasvot

Arla Kanerva HS

[...]

Yhteisöaktivistit Patrisse Khan-Cullors, Alicia Garza ja Opal Tometi olivat alkaneet käyttää #BlackLivesMatter-aihetunnistetta sen jälkeen, kun aseettoman, 17-vuotiaan mustan Trayvon Martinin helmikuussa 2012 ampunut George Zimmerman vapautettiin kaikista syytteistä.

"[Floydin kuolemaa seuranneissa] suurissa mielenosoituksissa on taustalla paitsi ihmisten videoilta näkemä väkivaltainen murha myös tieto siitä, ettei se ollut ensimmäinen kerta", Abdulkarim huomauttaa. "Taustalla on hyvinkin väkivaltainen historia."

Floydin kuoleman kaksivuotispäivänä Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation julkaisi aktivisti D'Zhane Parkerin kirjoittaman kannanoton, jossa tämä ilmaisee pettymyksensä poliitikoihin, presidentti Joe Bidenia myöten. Rahaa ohjataan Parkerin mukaan vääriin paikkoihin, ja sillä ennemminkin vahvistetaan poliisivoimia kuin suojellaan vähemmistöjen asemaa.

"Puolinaiset toimet eivät pelasta kansaamme valkoiselta ylivallalta ja valtion väkivallalta", Parker kirjoittaa.

George Floyd ja Trayvon Martinin, kaksi tavallista, köyhää mustaa miestä, ovat väkivaltaisen kuolemansa jälkeen asettuneet koko maailman tuntemiksi symboleiksi. Onko se hyvä vai huono asia? Abdulkarim pohtii asetelmaa kahdelta kannalta.

"Trayvon Martin ja hänen perheensä olisivat varmaankin toivoneet, että lapsi olisi saanut elää, eikä muuttua hupparipäisen mustan miehen symboliksi, jonka kuvia jaetaan ympäriinsä. Ja kirjasta käy ilmi, että Floydilla oli kovasti suunnitelmia ja yritystä rakentaa elämäänsä niin, että voisi muodostaa yhteyden lapseensa, mutta nämä suunnitelmat jäivät kesken."

Toisaalta symbolit muistuttavat siitä, mikä yhteiskunnassa on pielessä. Mitä pitäisi muuttaa.

"Symbolit ovat meille, jotka olemme vielä olemassa ja kamppailemme."

Historiassa olisi jo riittävästi esimerkkejä maailman muuttamiseksi, Abdulkarim sanoo. Paljon olisi jo pitänyt muuttua.

"On äärimmäisen surullista, että näiden [kuolemien] piti silti tapahtua. Vielä traagisempaa on, jos mitään ei muutu näiden jälkeen."

Helsingin Sanomat 24.7.2022

[WinstonSmith]

Edesmennyt Trayvon-poika palkitaan elämäntyöstään korkeakoulututkinnolla.

Zimmerman ei edes ole valkoinen, vaan meksikolainen. Ja tapaus ole selkeä, koska Tervon Martin hyökkäsi Zimmermanin kimppuun. Toisaalta media vaikenee tapauksista, joissa mustat selkeästi murhaavat valkoisia rasistisin motiivein. Selkeästi nämä haluvat, että valkoisilla ei ole enää oikeutta itsepuolustukseen, jos musta hyökkää kimppuun ja poliisillakaan ei ole enää intoa puuttua mustien tekemiin rikoksiin, joten valkoisista tulee vapaata riistaa, joita voidaan ihan vapaasti metsästää ja tappaa kaduilla, koska valkoinen yhtä kuin rasisti.

[Jack]

Sitä en oikein ymmärrä, miten amerikkalaisen poliisin kohtalokkaaksi kääntynyt kovaotteisuus ja formulakuskien polvistuminen liittyvät toisiinsa, mutta kai ne jotenkin liittyvät.

https://cdn-1.motorsport.com/static/img/amp/4900000/4980000/4980000/4980400/4980456/s6_1005558/1005558.jpg

Rasismin lopettamisen lisäksi olisi ehkä syytä lopettaa myös käänteinen rasismi eli etuoikeuksien antaminen joillekin ihmisille heidän rotunsa perusteella. Syntymässä saaduista etuoikeuksista ei nimittäin mielellään luovuta sittenkään, kun niille ei enää ole varsinaista syytä. Lopputuloksena voi olla kastijako, jossa jotkut ihmisryhmät ovat arvokkaampia kuin jotkut toiset.

Formulasirkuksen ainoan mustan kuljettajan toimintaan on suhtauduttu tavalla, joka tuskin olisi tullut kyseeseen, jos kuljettaja olisi ollut valkoihoinen. Lewis Hamilton esiintyi formulakisoihin liittyvissä tapahtumissa t-paidassa, jossa luki "Arrest the cops who killed Breonna Taylor". Julistuksellaan Hamilton otti kantaa Yhdysvaltojen oikeuslaitoksen toimintaan ja keskeneräiseen rikostutkintaan, mikä on poikkeuksellista. Urheilussa - myös moottoriurheilussa - on nimittäin ollut tapana, että politiikkaa ei sotketa urheiluun, eikä urheilutapahtumia käytetä mielenosoitusareenana.

https://eu.courier-journal.com/story/news/local/breonna-taylor/2020/09/13/lewis-hamilton-wears-arrest-cops-who-killed-breonna-taylor-shirt/5788120002/

Sen tyyppisistä tapauksista, joihin Lewis Hamiltonin julistuksessa otettiin kantaa, päätetään yleensä oikeudessa eikä mediassa ja mielenosoituksissa. Tässä tapauksessa "rotu" näyttää olleen merkittävä tekijä, kun asioita on käsitelty.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Breonna_Taylor

[Skeptikko]

"Another limitation is that our lethal force data is from 2015, whereas our racial bias data were collected between 2003 and 2013," the researchers noted. They added that implicit bias measurements have been relatively stable each year, but it's a little hard to measure data that comes from two different eras to find a relationship between implicit bias and fatal police shootings.

Ylipäätään tämä implisiittinen harha -käsite on vähintäänkin kyseenalainen ja missä määrin, jos ollenkaan, se liittyy johonkin todelliseen syrjintään, on epäselvää:

Implicit bias training - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implicit_bias_training#Criticisms

Kulik et al. found that, in a sample of 2,000, implicit bias training increased the bias against older candidates.[36]

Noon says implicit bias training initiatives are still in their infancy and require further research.[3]

Social psychology research has indicated that individuating information (any information about an individual group member other than category information) may eliminate the effects of implicit bias.[37]

The implicit bias test isn't actually correlated with biased behavior against the groups the person is supposedly biased against:

"t came as a major blow when four separate meta–analyses, undertaken between 2009 and 2015—each examining between 46 and 167 individual studies—all showed the IAT [implicit bias test] to be a weak predictor of behavior. Proponents of the IAT tend to point to individual studies showing strong links between test scores and racist behavior. Opponents counter by highlighting those that, counterintuitively, show a link between biased IAT scores and less discriminatory behavior."[38]
"Goff's work points to studies showing police officers with high anti-black IAT scores are quicker to shoot at African Americans. That finding, though, has been countered by research showing the exact opposite."[38]
"There is also little evidence that the IAT can meaningfully predict discrimination," notes one paper, "and we thus strongly caution against any practical applications of the IAT that rest on this assumption." [38]
Interventions to reduce implicit bias did not result in actual changes in behavior:

"A 2017 meta-analysis that looked at 494 previous studies (currently under peer review and not yet published in a journal) from several researchers, including Nosek, found that reducing implicit bias did not affect behavior."[38]
The paper has since been published on 2019 reviewing 492 previous studies. And found that: "Our findings suggest that changes in implicit measures are possible, but those changes do not necessarily translate into changes in explicit measures or behavior."[39]

Junk Science: Bias in the Implicit Bias Literature | Replicability-Index
https://replicationindex.com/2020/12/04/junk-science-bias-in-the-implicit-bias-literature/

For decades, psychologists have misused the scientific method and statistical significance testing. Instead of using significance tests to confirm or falsify theoretical predictions, they only published statistically significant results that confirmed predictions. This selection for significance undermines the ability of statistical tests to distinguish between true and false hypotheses (Sterling, 1959).

Another problem is that psychologists ignore effect size. Significant results with the nil-hypothesis (no effect) only reject the hypothesis that the effect size is not zero. It is still possible that the population effect size is so small that it has no practical significance. In the 1990s, psychologists addressed this problem by publishing standardized effect sizes. The problem is that selection for significance also inflates these effect size estimates. Thus, journals may publish effect size estimates that seem important, when the actual effect sizes are trivial.

The impressive reproducibility project (OSC, 2015) found that original effect sizes were cut in half in replication studies that did not select for significance. In other words, population effect sizes are, on average, inflated by 100%. Importantly, this average inflation applied equally to cognitive and social psychology. However, social psychology has more replication failures which also implies larger inflation of effect sizes. Thus, most published effect sizes in social psychology are likely to provide misleading information about the actual effect sizes.
...
One possible explanation is that researchers do not care about effect sizes. Researchers may not consider it unethical to use questionable research methods that inflate effect sizes as long as they are convinced that the sign of the reported effect is consistent with the sign of the true effect. For example, the theory that implicit attitudes are malleable is supported by a positive effect of experimental manipulations on the implicit association test, no matter whether the effect size is d = .8 (Dasgupta & Greenwald, 2001) or d = .08 (Joy-Gaba & Nosek, 2010), and the influence of blood glucose levels on self-control is supported by a strong correlation of r = .6 (Gailliot et al., 2007) and a weak correlation of r = .1 (Dvorak & Simons, 2009).

How have IAT researchers responded to the realization that original effect sizes may have been dramatically inflated? Not much. Citations show that the original article with the 10 times inflated effect size is still cited much more frequently than the replication study with a trivial effect size.

Closer inspection of these citations shows that implicit bias researchers continue to cite the old study as if it provided credible evidence.

Axt, Casola, and Nosek (2019) mention the new study, but do not mention the results.

Implicit stereotype - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implicit_stereotype

Researchers from the University of Wisconsin at Madison, Harvard, and the University of Virginia examined 426 studies over 20 years involving 72,063 participants that used the IAT and other similar tests. They concluded two things:

• The correlation between implicit bias and discriminatory behavior appears weaker than previously thought.
• There is little evidence that changes in implicit bias correlate with changes in a person's behavior.[71]

In a 2013 meta-analysis of papers, Hart Blanton, et al. declared that, despite its frequent misrepresentation as a proxy for the unconscious, "the IAT provides little insight into who will discriminate against whom, and provides no more insight than explicit measures of bias."[72]

Are We All Unconscious Racists? Racial Preferences | Implicit Bias
https://www.city-journal.org/html/are-we-all-unconscious-racists-15487.html

Few academic ideas have been as eagerly absorbed into public discourse in recent years as "implicit bias." Embraced by a president, a would-be president, and the nation's top law-enforcement official, the implicit-bias conceit has launched a movement to remove the concept of individual agency from the law and spawned a multimillion-dollar consulting industry. The statistical basis on which it rests is now crumbling, but don't expect its influence to wane anytime soon.
...
The need to plumb the unconscious to explain ongoing racial gaps arises for one reason: it is taboo in universities and mainstream society to acknowledge intergroup differences in interests, abilities, cultural values, or family structure that might produce socioeconomic disparities.
...
The potential reach of the behavioral-realism movement, which George Soros's Open Society Foundation is underwriting, goes far beyond employment-discrimination litigation. Some employers are using the IAT to screen potential workers, diversity consultant Howard Ross says. More and more college administrations require members of faculty-search committees to take the IAT to confront their hidden biases against minority and female candidates.
...
But IAT bias scores have a lower rate of consistency than is deemed acceptable for use in the real world—a subject could be rated with a high degree of implicit bias on one taking of the IAT and a low or moderate degree the next time around. A recent estimate puts the reliability of the race IAT at half of what is considered usable. No evidence exists, in other words, that the IAT reliably measures anything stable in the test-taker.

But the fiercest disputes concern the IAT's validity. A psychological instrument is deemed "valid" if it actually measures what it claims to be measuring—in this case, implicit bias and, by extension, discriminatory behavior. If the IAT were valid, a high implicit-bias score would predict discriminatory behavior, as Greenwald and Banaji asserted from the start. It turns out, however, that IAT scores have almost no connection to what ludicrously counts as "discriminatory behavior" in IAT research—trivial nuances of body language during a mock interview in a college psychology laboratory, say, or a hypothetical choice to donate to children in Colombian, rather than South African, slums. Oceans of ink have been spilled debating the statistical strength of the correlation between IAT scores and lab-induced "discriminatory behavior" on the part of college students paid to take the test. The actual content of those "discriminatory behaviors" gets mentioned only in passing, if at all, and no one notes how remote those behaviors are from the discrimination that we should be worried about.

Even if we accept at face value that the placement of one's chair in a mock lab interview or decisions in a prisoner's-dilemma game are significant "discriminatory behaviors," the statistical connection between IAT scores and those actions is negligible. A 2009 meta-analysis of 122 IAT studies by Greenwald, Banaji, and two management professors found that IAT scores accounted for only 5.5 percent of the variation in laboratory-induced "discrimination." Even that low score was arrived at by questionable methods, as Jesse Singal discussed in a masterful review of the IAT literature in New York. A team of IAT skeptics—Fred Oswald of Rice University, Gregory Mitchell of the University of Virginia law school, Hart Blanton of the University of Connecticut, James Jaccard of New York University, and Philip Tetlock—noticed that Greenwald and his coauthors had counted opposite behaviors as validating the IAT. If test subjects scored high on implicit bias via the IAT but demonstrated better behavior toward out-group members (such as blacks) than toward in-group members, that was a validation of the IAT on the theory that the subjects were overcompensating for their implicit bias. But studies that found a correlation between a high implicit-bias score and discriminatory behavior toward out-group members also validated the IAT. In other words: heads, I win; tails, I win.

Greenwald and Banaji now admit that the IAT does not predict biased behavior. The psychometric problems associated with the race IAT "render [it] problematic to use to classify persons as likely to engage in discrimination," they wrote in 2015, just two years after their sweeping claims in Blind Spot. The IAT should not be used, for example, to select a bias-free jury, maintains Greenwald.
...
Initially, most of the psychology profession accepted the startling claim that one's predilection to discriminate in real life is revealed by the microsecond speed with which one sorts images. But possible alternative meanings of a "pro-white" IAT score are now beginning to emerge. Older test-takers may have cognitive difficulty with the shifting instructions of the IAT. Objective correlations between group membership and socioeconomic outcomes may lead to differences in sorting times, as could greater familiarity with one ethnic-racial group compared with another. These alternative meanings should have been ruled out before the world learned that a new "scientific" test had revealed the ubiquity of prejudice.
...
Joshua Correll, a psychologist at the University of Colorado, has been studying police shoot/ don't shoot decisions for years. His experiments require officers to react to rapidly changing images of potential targets on a computer screen. He has found that officers are no more likely to shoot an unarmed black target than an unarmed white one. Officers are slightly quicker to identify an armed black target as armed than an armed white target, and slower to identify an unarmed black target as unarmed than an unarmed white target. But the faster cognitive processing speeds for stereotype-congruent targets (i.e., armed blacks and unarmed whites) do not result in officers shooting unarmed black targets at a higher rate than unarmed white ones.

Correll's conclusions were confirmed in 2016 with the release of four studies that found either no antiblack bias in police shootings or a bias that favored blacks. Three of the studies—by Roland Fryer, Ted Miller, and the Center for Policing Equity—reviewed data on actual police use of force; a fourth put officers in a more sophisticated life-size video simulator than the computers that Correll uses. That study, led by the University of Washington's Lois James, found that officers waited significantly longer before shooting an armed black target than an armed white target and were three times less likely to shoot an unarmed black target than an unarmed white target. James hypothesized that officers were second-guessing themselves when confronting black suspects because of the current climate around race and policing.

Both experimental and data-based research, in other words, dispel the claim that police officers are killing blacks out of implicit bias. That has not stopped the implicit-bias juggernaut, however. Police departments across the country are subjecting their officers to implicit-bias training at considerable cost; any controversial shooting invariably triggers a pledge to bring in the bias consultants. The New York Police Department next year will start requiring recruits and officers already on the job to attend a full-day seminar in implicit bias, time that could be better spent practicing tactical and communication skills.

Mandatory Implicit Bias Training Is a Bad Idea
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/rabble-rouser/201712/mandatory-implicit-bias-training-is-bad-idea

"Implicit bias" seems to be everywhere. What is it? "Bias," to your average layperson, seems to mean something like prejudice or discrimination. "Implicit" is usually taken to mean unconscious or outside of awareness. So "implicit bias" is, supposedly, something like prejudices of which people are not even aware.

However, the research on so-called implicit bias has its serious critics. Almost everything about implicit bias is controversial in scientific circles. It is not clear, for instance, what most implicit bias methods actually measure; their ability to predict discrimination is modest at best; their reliability is low; early claims about their power and immutability have proven unjustified. And yet some colleges and corporations have been rushing to institute "implicit bias trainings" in attempts to reduce discrimination (attempts that are, in my view, misguided and unlikely to be effective)

Over the last few months, I have had several interesting exchanges with Dr. Mahzarin Banaji, one of the most prominent psychological scientists working in the area of implicit methods, beliefs, attitudes, prejudices, and biases. She, along with Dr. Tony Greenwald, created the concept of implicit bias, which has caught on like wildfire, and was even mentioned in a Hillary Clinton election speech.

My own view is that the research framed on implicit bias has been wildly oversold, and its proponents have often leaped to conclusions not justified by the data.
...
But if it was just a case of oversold science, the issue would be primarily restricted to the scientific community to resolve what is and is not justified. Instead, however, implicit bias training has been instituted at numerous colleges and universities, as well as some corporations, around the country.

My view is that this is wildly premature—and potentially even dangerous. The overselling of implicit bias has, in my view, along with several other related concepts (microaggressions, stereotype threat, white privilege), contributed to the toxic environment on many campuses and in some corporations in which speech is considered "violence," and in which, if you say the wrong thing, you can be denounced, ostracized, and even fired. And by "wrong thing," I am not talking physical threats or sexual harassment. I am talking about making intellectual arguments against affirmative action, acknowledging the evidence that biology contributes to some demographic group differences, or even simply showing a debate regarding Canadian speech laws.

Itsekin mustaihoinen Tiffany L. Green teoteaa, että on vähän näyttöä, että tällainen implisiittisen harhan vastainen uudelleenkoulutus olisi hyödyllistä:

The Problem with Implicit Bias Training - Scientific American
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-problem-with-implicit-bias-training/

In response to these disparities, Michigan and California have mandated implicit bias training for some health professionals.

There's just one problem. We just don't have the evidence yet that implicit bias training actually works.
...
But while implicit bias trainings are multiplying, few rigorous evaluations of these programs exist. There are exceptions; some implicit bias interventions have been conducted empirically among health care professionals and college students. These interventions have been proven to lower scores on the Implicit Association Test (IAT), the most commonly used implicit measure of prejudice and stereotyping. But to date, none of these interventions has been shown to result in permanent, long-term reductions of implicit bias scores or, more importantly, sustained and meaningful changes in behavior (i.e., narrowing of racial/ethnic clinical treatment disparities).

Even worse, there is consistent evidence that bias training done the "wrong way" (think lukewarm diversity training) can actually have the opposite impact, inducing anger and frustration among white employees. What this all means is that, despite the widespread calls for implicit bias training, it will likely be ineffective at best; at worst, it's a poor use of limited resources that could cause more damage and exacerbate the very issues it is trying to solve.