All inside our heads? A critical discursive review of unconscious bias training in the sciences

IF 3.9 1区 社会学 Q2 MANAGEMENT
Christian Möller, Saffron Passam, Sarah Riley, Martine Robson
{"title":"All inside our heads? A critical discursive review of unconscious bias training in the sciences","authors":"Christian Möller,&nbsp;Saffron Passam,&nbsp;Sarah Riley,&nbsp;Martine Robson","doi":"10.1111/gwao.13028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In response to persistent systemic gendered and racial exclusions in the sciences, unconscious or implicit bias training is now widely established as an organizational intervention in Higher Education (HE). Recent systematic reviews have considered the efficacy of unconscious bias training (UBT) but not the wider characteristics and effects of the interventions themselves. Guided by feminist scholarship in critical psychology and post-structuralist discourse theory, this article critically examines UBT across STEMM and in HE institutions with a discursive analysis of published studies. Drawn from systematic searches in 4 databases, we identify three types of UBT reported in 22 studies with considerable variation in intervention types, target groups, and evaluation methods. Guided by limited cognitive problematizations of unconscious bias as a problem located inside individual minds, interventions follow established patterns in neoliberal governmentality and make available specific feeling rules and subject positions. These current Equality, Diversity &amp; Inclusion practices present a new technology of power through which organizations may regulate affect and behavior but leave structural inequalities and barriers to inclusion intact.</p>","PeriodicalId":48128,"journal":{"name":"Gender Work and Organization","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/gwao.13028","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gender Work and Organization","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gwao.13028","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In response to persistent systemic gendered and racial exclusions in the sciences, unconscious or implicit bias training is now widely established as an organizational intervention in Higher Education (HE). Recent systematic reviews have considered the efficacy of unconscious bias training (UBT) but not the wider characteristics and effects of the interventions themselves. Guided by feminist scholarship in critical psychology and post-structuralist discourse theory, this article critically examines UBT across STEMM and in HE institutions with a discursive analysis of published studies. Drawn from systematic searches in 4 databases, we identify three types of UBT reported in 22 studies with considerable variation in intervention types, target groups, and evaluation methods. Guided by limited cognitive problematizations of unconscious bias as a problem located inside individual minds, interventions follow established patterns in neoliberal governmentality and make available specific feeling rules and subject positions. These current Equality, Diversity & Inclusion practices present a new technology of power through which organizations may regulate affect and behavior but leave structural inequalities and barriers to inclusion intact.

Abstract Image

一切都在我们的脑海中?对科学界无意识偏见培训的批判性评论
为了应对科学领域持续存在的系统性性别和种族排斥,无意识或隐性偏见培训现已被广泛确定为高等教育(HE)中的一种组织干预措施。最近的系统性综述考虑了无意识偏见培训(UBT)的有效性,但没有考虑干预措施本身更广泛的特点和效果。本文以批判心理学中的女性主义学术研究和后结构主义话语理论为指导,通过对已发表研究的话语分析,批判性地研究了 STEMM 和高等教育机构中的无意识偏见培训。通过对 4 个数据库的系统搜索,我们在 22 项研究中发现了三种类型的UTBT,这些研究在干预类型、目标群体和评估方法上存在很大差异。在将无意识偏见视为个人内心问题的有限认知问题化的指导下,干预措施遵循了新自由主义政府性的既定模式,并提供了特定的感觉规则和主体地位。当前的这些 "平等、多样性与amp; 包容 "实践提出了一种新的权力技术,组织可以通过这种技术来调节情感和行为,但对结构性的不平等和包容障碍却置之不理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
11.50
自引率
13.80%
发文量
139
期刊介绍: Gender, Work & Organization is a bimonthly peer-reviewed academic journal. The journal was established in 1994 and is published by John Wiley & Sons. It covers research on the role of gender on the workfloor. In addition to the regular issues, the journal publishes several special issues per year and has new section, Feminist Frontiers,dedicated to contemporary conversations and topics in feminism.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信