Making sense of ourselves
Making sense of ourselves

Start this free course now. Just create an account and sign in. Enrol and complete the course for a free statement of participation or digital badge if available.

Free course

Making sense of ourselves

1.5 Interpreting the findings

Why might this pattern of results be of interest to prejudice researchers?

Looking at Fazio et al.’s findings, it could be argued that they show that white Americans have deep-seated, automatic, negative associations with the category ‘Black Americans’. These associations facilitate (thus speed up) the classification of negative words, but interfere with (thus slow down) the classification of positive words. In other words, reaction times indicate implicit prejudices that emerge in ways that individuals find difficult to control; in fact, individuals are often unaware of the degree to which they harbour such prejudices.

But is this really prejudice?

Implicit measures of prejudice are controversial. Some researchers have argued that the subtle negative associations measured by research such as Fazio et al.’s (1995) study are not the same thing as the overt negative feelings and beliefs studied in traditional prejudice research. Critics, such as Hal Arkes and Philip Tetlock have argued, for example, that implicit measures set the ‘bar too low’ and that the negative associations tapped by reaction time measures fall well short of bona fide prejudice. For example, such associations may reflect shared cultural knowledge of such associations rather than an individual’s personal feelings or beliefs. Alternatively, it may show bias in favour of certain groups without necessarily showing prejudice against others. In other words, ‘… relative difference in RT [reaction time] between two target sets does not necessarily imply hostility or prejudice toward either group.’ (Arkes and Tetlock, 2004, p. 267).

Countering this argument, other researchers have pointed out that implicit prejudice measures are often good predictors of other negative behaviours towards minority groups, strengthening confidence in their validity. In Fazio et al.’s (1995) study, for example, participants who had high scores on the implicit prejudice task, similar to the one you have just completed, later behaved in a less friendly fashion during an interaction with a black experimenter.

It is also noted that such measures overcome many of the limitations of explicit prejudice measures, notably the problem of social desirability. Because these measures tap responses that are automatic and difficult to control, such responses are far more difficult to fake.

It is worth noting, in conclusion, that although implicit prejudices are more difficult for individuals to control, we should not assume that they cannot be changed.


Take your learning further

Making the decision to study can be a big step, which is why you'll want a trusted University. The Open University has 50 years’ experience delivering flexible learning and 170,000 students are studying with us right now. Take a look at all Open University courses.

If you are new to University-level study, we offer two introductory routes to our qualifications. You could either choose to start with an Access module, or a module which allows you to count your previous learning towards an Open University qualification. Read our guide on Where to take your learning next for more information.

Not ready for formal University study? Then browse over 1000 free courses on OpenLearn and sign up to our newsletter to hear about new free courses as they are released.

Every year, thousands of students decide to study with The Open University. With over 120 qualifications, we’ve got the right course for you.

Request an Open University prospectus371