Banaji, M. R., & Greenwald, A. G. (2013). Blindspot : Hidden biases of good people. Bantam Books.
Book Review #2
by Mahzarin R. Banaji, MD and Anthony G. Greenwald
About the authors:
Mahzarin Banaji and Anthony Greenwald are both highly acclaimed psychologists. Together, they have made significant contributions to the field of social psychology, studying implicit biases and unconscious cognition. They are also co-creators of the Implicit Association Test (IAT).
Dr. Banaji is a professor, author and speaker at Harvard University. She focuses her research on thinking and feeling as they unfold in the social context, and sheds light on the dynamics of social attitudes and beliefs. Dr. Greenwald is a professor, editor, and writer who teaches at the University of Washington. He has conducted extensive research on unconscious cognition and subliminal perception.
Purpose and Audience:
“Blindspot” is the metaphor the authors use to describe the unconscious (hidden) preferences, biases, and prejudices that individuals develop concerning different people groups, most commonly impacting our perceptions of age, gender, race, ethnicity, religion, social class, sexuality, disability status, and nationality. The authors examine this phenomenon, demonstrate its pervasiveness, and discuss ways to counteract these innate biases. It is written in such a way as to make the science behind it easier to digest and help well-intentioned, good people learn how to “outsmart the machine” (i.e., our brains).
Identification of key themes or ideas:
Mindbugs: Because of the way our brains are wired — to fill in gaps regarding missing data, so that we better understand what we are seeing (i.e., make sense of our world) —the mind will often inaccurately interpret our reality for the sake of cohesion; think optical illusions. The writers call these adaptive mechanisms mindbugs. They impact perception, behavior, and decision-making. Becoming aware of how these mindbugs work is essential for recognizing the disparities between intentions and actions and for working towards a more just and productive society.
Implicit Bias: This book’s central theme is Implicit Bias. Using the Implicit Association Test (IAT) that they and their colleagues developed, the writers demonstrate particular mechanisms within the mind that help us form associations and correlations about various people, groups, and things. These associations and correlations lead to biases and preferences, which then develop into prejudices and discrimination… even for the most well-intentioned minds.
Implicit Association Tests (IAT): The IAT is a test that measures automatic associations and preferences by asking participants to perform sorting tasks. The results of these tests reveal automatic preferences for certain categories and associations. Assorted versions of the test include assess ageism (young and old), racism (white and black), genderism (male and female), and those on religion, social class, sexuality, disability, status, and nationality.
Stereotypes: Mental associations that categorize individuals based on specific traits associated with their group, such as age, race, gender, and occupation. These associations influence our perceptions and judgments. While stereotypes may have been born out of a hint of truth, they can be false or harmful when applied to individuals. The writers explore how the human brain uses categories to quickly perceive and categorize strangers based on multiple identifiers, contributing to the formation of stereotypes. It explains how stereotypes, although universal and sometimes adaptive, can lead to prejudgments that may not accurately represent individuals.
Points of interest, points of personal agreement, and points of disagreement
Points of Interest
- Using various images or tasks, the authors clearly illustrate how the different parts of our mind unconsciously work together to fill in missing information about things we witness to help us better understand or make “sense” of our experience. The problem is that we sometimes fill in the various gaps from our perceived experience with information that can be faulty. It is a marvel how the brain does this, but it can lead us to make inaccurate conclusions about reality.
- Mindbugs inform our understanding about reality based on information availability and certain anchor points. We then form opinions and judgments based on these “truths,” and the fact is our reality may vary greatly from actuality. We may even remember things that were genuinely not there. These “blind spots” extend to broader areas in our lives, including people and cultures.
- Studies have shown that even those fighting for stigmatized groups may have hidden biases against their own group. (Chapter 4)
- I found myself often wondering about the accuracy and reliability of these Implicit Association Tests. While they are intriguing, it doesn’t appear that their limitations have been fully explored. Because of this, it does feel like a sales job at times on the part of the authors for the IAT.
- The book does a great job of helping readers to identify their biases, but does little to offer concrete strategies to address those biases. I hoped to see more in terms of actionable steps to help readers overcome their hidden biases.
- Strategies such as exposure to counterstereotypes, like diverse role models in the media, have shown potential in modifying automatic associations that contribute to hidden biases.
Points of Agreement
- Though the unconscious mind has a powerful influence ove our preferences and associations, the reflective side of the brain offers the ability to analyze, understand, and potentially overcome these hidden preferences. (Chapter 4)
- Growing in the area of self-awareness, particularly in the area of our automatic associations, can lead to meaningful change which challenges our ingrained biases. (Chapter 4)
- Banaji and Greenwald conclude the book with a call to action — for individuals to be aware of their biases, seek to understand and modify them, and ultimately strive to outsmart the mindbugs that may lead to unintentional discrimination. While eradication may not be realistic, efforts to weaken or bypass these biases through deliberate actions can lead to a more equitable society. (Chapter 8)
Points of Disagreement
- As the writers demonstrate the brain’s perfunctory (i.e., automatic and systematic) use of categories and stereotypes, they argue that these stereotypes inevitably lead to bias towards people groups. Yet, suppose a person has never experienced a representative from a specific group. In that case, they generally default to the information they have been given (whether it be from news media or a stereotype). It doesn’t mean that they necessarily feel a certain way, or believe that they should feel a certain way about that person or people group. To say that they are going to be biased against them seems presumptive… and even stereotypical.
- The writers argue that hidden bias and discrimination arise from the groups to which we belong, which they attempt to illustrate through various examples. The story of Carla (a professor at Yale), who needed emergency hand surgery, highlights (according to the authors) how individuals can unknowingly discriminate in favor of an in-group member, such as a Yale professor, over a regular person — for when she came in she was labeled as a passionate quilter, but when a student recognized her, she received a higher level of care. This form of discrimination is often hidden in acts of help rather than overt acts of aggression (Chapter 7). I was conflicted over their suggestion, and especially with their illustration. In the example, the ER doctor who had been scrubbing in to do the surgery instead called for the leading hand surgeon when he found out that the patient was a professor at Yale. I couldn’t help but think he “called in a favor” to help this professor out. Right, wrong, or indifferent, you don’t have an unlimited supply of favors to utilize. If you called the leading surgeon for every case that came into your Emergency Room, the surgeon would stop taking your calls. Simultaneously, newer / inexperienced doctors wouldn’t ever get the opportunity to practice and grow as surgeons because everyone would be calling in “the best” doctors. Is that “discrimination,” or is that practicality (or maybe utilitarian)? I agree, we should advocate for social justice, but is it wrong when a person calls in a favor for another individual? Hopefully, we don’t deem a person worthy of a favor because of their race, age, gender, etc. Everyone is worthy of care (the best possible care), but because people (and the system) are not infallible, we must be our own advocates. If we feel like we can get better care elsewhere, we should use our own discretion… and leave if we choose. Does that mean the other provider is less ethical or unethical?
Significance of the book to the counseling field:
Blindspot is a great book for anyone interested in social justice. It’s easy to understand and makes the science and data behind implicit association and unconscious thinking pallatable to any demographic. For those who are looking for more actionable steps to counter prejudice and biased thinking, you will need to look elsewhere. It does serve as a great introduction, though.
Critique of the overall work:
I was surprised at how much I enjoyed reading this book. With the scientific and research data that the book totes behind it, I figured it would be cumbersome and laborious. It wasn’t. The illustrations and examples they include are eye-opening to say the least. The do a great job of showing how we are not as honest as we like to think we are, and this “mindbug” is where biases develop and hide.
I found myself at times wondering about the reliability of their renowned test — the Implicit Association Test. Had I more time to devote to it, I would have liked to take each of the different versions of the test… multiple times to corroborate their findings. Nevertheless, their main conclusions are true, even if the test later proves unreliable. Everyone has blindspots. Becoming aware of the hidden biases we have, recognizing the stereotypes and (innocent) prejudices we hold, allows us to better see people as they are… not as society (or even our minds) tell us they are. Afterall, our minds can decieve us.
As noted elsewhere, I wish more was done by the authors to highlight ways to “outsmart the machine.” It’s still a worthwhile read, and I’m glad I did.
Usefulness of the book for potential clients
This book would serve well as a great primer for clients curious about or just getting into social justice, prejudice, and hidden biases.
