Implicit bias training is an increasingly popular way of addressing the problems that workplaces might confront as a result of the operation of implicit bias.
But what are the characteristics of good implicit bias training?
How can we evaluate whether a training session has been successful or not?
At this workshop, we engaged with recent empirical research about what works in implicit bias training, and through guided panel discussions articulated and shared norms of best practice in relation to different aspects of bias training.
This conference examined the interaction between psychological and structural explanations. As well as investigating the normative and practical implications of one’s explanatory mode on attempts to address bias via institutional policy, interpersonal intervention, and collective action.
This event focused on ways that responses to implicit bias can move beyond the individualistic approach often found in empirical psychology, and harness the resources of interpersonal interactions and collective action to combat bias.
What is the relationship between psychological and structural explanations of persistent social injustice?
This was the first of 4 conferences aimed at developing sustained attention on individualistic and structural approaches to discrimination and inequality.
Speakers included: Erin Beeghly (University of Utah); Irene Blair (CU-Boulder); Tiffany Brannon (UCLA); Cory Gooding (University of San Diego); Jules Holroyd (University of Sheffield); Emily Lee (Cal State Fullerton)