I took the Presidents and Gender-Science tests. Taking the tests was difficult for me, and my brain. I found myself wanting to take the time to get the answers right, and override my initial reactions. As psychologists and scientists, we have often been taught to take a step back, gather information, make observations, and ultimately ask more questions before making decisions or acting. So I found myself fighting the urge to make quick decisions. I assume this could have made my results less valid. In any event, I was not particularly surprised with the results, but the level of intensity associated with them. For instance, the Gender-Science test showed that I highly associated women with liberal arts and men with the sciences. I had a feeling I might think this way, but it was interesting to see how much I did.
The Dateline video on IAT tests caused me to wonder about participants backgrounds, based on the results featured in the segment. Although we (the audience) was privy to the current careers of the individuals tested, I would have liked more information about their families, hometowns and past experiences. I wondered what may have been the difference between someone who associated White with good and Black with bad, regardless of the race of the person. What defining moments, if any, may have shaped their lives in terms of race?
Implicit associations have serious implications for learning. It seems, according to James, that we build upon our old associations to learn new things. Moreover, these old associations are continuously reinforced in our minds. In terms of learning, James wrote, “whatever appears in the mind must be introduced; and when introduced, it is as the associate of something already there" (James, 1962, p. 59). James said that education is "the organization of acquired habits of conduct and tendencies to behavior" (James, 1962, p. 15). Therefore, the process of learning is all about associations and connections: they serve as the organizing force in education. This fact makes me wonder if striving for objectivity is futile. Even our cues are many and diversified, as James suggested for teachers to encourage, the fact is that our society and especially family lives play a large part in these cues. The more a cue is introduced and reinforced by society, the less likely a person will be able to resist them, based on sheer numbers. In my mind society is as much of a teacher as the classroom teacher is. Therefore the real process of learning and associations depends on how a student's time and attention is spent over many years.
The new information we take in is connected to our old associations in our memory and habits of thinking. Just as James suggested, “our mind is essentially an associating machine” and memory is “explained as a result of the association of ideas” (James, 1962, p. 58). Because of this, it is probably very difficult to change these associations, once set in our minds.
Elois,
ReplyDeleteI also watched the Dateline video about racial bias and can agree with you in wanting to know more about the participants of the study. Although the implicit associations tests have been researched, I wondered what other variables could be involved that would possibly confound the test results? When taking the tests, I also found myself focuing on making sure I was accurate rather than associating the words/pictures into categories. As far as memory and associations is concerned, I truly believe that they work hand-in-hand. You can't have memory without an association, and as you stated, once the association has taken root in our minds, it is near impossible for something else to take precedence over what has already been set in our minds.