rigorous methodological designs) met their aims. Evidence further indicates that awareness raising is possible across delivery methods, that is, online and and effects can be long-lasting. However, all UBT evaluations should measure and manage bias awareness and, ideally, measure the long-term effects of awareness raising on bias. This is because teaching participants about stereotypes has the potential for back-firing effects by making negative stereotypes more accessible. Further study of this effect is needed. Implicit bias The evidence for UBT changing short-term implicit bias is consistent. Implicit bias is likely to be reduced, but not eradicated, through UBT. Bias reduction strategies such as using counter-stereotypic exemplars and evaluative conditioning effectively reduce implicit bias. Mindfulness has also shown to be an effective strategy for reducing implicit bias and potentially discriminatory decision making. However, these strategies are not commonly used in short-term UBT and the observed effects so far are mostly restricted to academic lab experiments. However, where they have been used in long-term habit-breaking type interventions (Devine et al., 2012), they have had positive effects for implicit bias reduction. Implicit bias reduction can have effects across all participant groups but appears to be more effective for those with stronger implicit biases pre-intervention. Of the 11 studies which aimed to reduce implicit bias, eight were rated level four or five on the MSSM. There is strong evidence that implicit biases can be reduced eight weeks post-intervention when a sophisticated, habit-breaking design that is and includes awareness-raising and bias mitigation strategies is used. Given the link between implicit bias and prejudiced behaviour (Rooth, 2010), the findings for sophisticated UBT designs for reducing implicit biases in the long term are promising. Explicit bias Compared with implicit bias, the evidence suggests that UBT is less likely to be effective in changing explicit bias. This evidence is mostly based on measuring before-and-after changes in self-reported attitudes. As expected, due to the nature of explicit bias, change in explicit bias is unlikely to occur as a result of UBT. There are three main reasons why UBT interventions are unlikely to measure a change in explicit bias. People tend to believe that they do not hold explicit prejudiced attitudes.
rigorous methodological designs) met their aims. Evidence further indicates that awareness raising is possible across delivery methods, that is, online and and effects can be long-lasting. However, all UBT evaluations should measure and manage bias awareness and, ideally, measure the long-term effects of awareness raising on bias. This is because teaching participants about stereotypes has the potential for back-firing effects by making negative stereotypes more accessible. Further study of this effect is needed. Implicit bias The evidence for UBT changing short-term implicit bias is consistent. Implicit bias is likely to be reduced, but not eradicated, through UBT. Bias reduction strategies such as using counter-stereotypic exemplars and evaluative conditioning effectively reduce implicit bias. Mindfulness has also shown to be an effective strategy for reducing implicit bias and potentially discriminatory decision making. However, these strategies are not commonly used in short-term UBT and the observed effects so far are mostly restricted to academic lab experiments. However, where they have been used in long-term habit-breaking type interventions (Devine et al., 2012), they have had positive effects for implicit bias reduction. Implicit bias reduction can have effects across all participant groups but appears to be more effective for those with stronger implicit biases pre-intervention. Of the 11 studies which aimed to reduce implicit bias, eight were rated level four or five on the MSSM. There is strong evidence that implicit biases can be reduced eight weeks post-intervention when a sophisticated, habit-breaking design that is and includes awareness-raising and bias mitigation strategies is used. Given the link between implicit bias and prejudiced behaviour (Rooth, 2010), the findings for sophisticated UBT designs for reducing implicit biases in the long term are promising. Explicit bias Compared with implicit bias, the evidence suggests that UBT is less likely to be effective in changing explicit bias. This evidence is mostly based on measuring before-and-after changes in self-reported attitudes. As expected, due to the nature of explicit bias, change in explicit bias is unlikely to occur as a result of UBT. There are three main reasons why UBT interventions are unlikely to measure a change in explicit bias. People tend to believe that they do not hold explicit prejudiced attitudes.
research-report-113-unconcious-bias-training-an-assessment-of-the-evidence-for-effectiveness-word.docx