Blind Spots Redux
It seems our readings have had a theme the past couple of weeks—blind spots. Last week it was the challenge of recognizing the limitations of an economic system that has enveloped the world. This week it is the challenge of recognizing one’s own implicit or unconscious biases. Pragya Agarwal—British behavioral and data scientist, activist, and journalist—wrote Sway in the hope that “…by addressing the biases at the individualistic level, we can begin to understand the societal and structural inequities and injustices.”[1]
Sway’s argument is based on neuro, evolutionary, and behavioral science. Her grounding in these fields recalls previous authors we have read whose theses are also supported by research in these fields—especially Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman.
Overall, given Agarwal’s focus on the social and political implications of implicit bias, I would classify this book under the social sciences. Structured with an introduction, four main sections, an epilogue, appendix, references, and index, Agarwal robustly develops her argument—we all carry within us unconscious biases. Agarwal’s commitment is to compassionately, but rigorously explore how human beings develop unconscious/implicit biases (she uses the terms interchangeably), the purposes these types of biases serve (especially when they create “prejudice and discriminatory behaviour [sic] through a negative association with a certain group or community”[2]), and offer suggestions for how one can begin to address one’s biases.
I found most intriguing Agarwal’s description of our brains. She writes, “Our brains have evolved to reason adaptively rather than rationally or truthfully.”[3] In other words, to survive, human beings have had to adapt to the changing world around them. Human beings have had to quickly assess potential or actual dangers and react, rather than reason.[4] This fast, intuitive thinking (remember Kahneman) and decision making mostly happens beyond our conscious awareness.[5] Agarwal references Kahneman’s work with his long-time thinking and writing partner, Amos Tversky.[6]
In my NPO reading, I investigated Jean Patterson’s research on sensemaking and intercultural competency.[7] She writes: “Sensemaking is driven by plausibility more than accuracy; believable, reasonable and coherent versions of reality are more important than facts.”[8] Her point is that our social context and narrative influences how we understand reality to a greater degree than do rational facts. Agarwal’s work adds another dimension to Patterson’s point—the unconscious and implicit dimension of our biases that are driven by our evolutionary need to survive perceived threats.
How might we begin to become aware of these less than rational biases that drive our perceptions of reality in a more powerful way than do facts? Agarwal prescribes Kahneman’s System 2 thinking: “Taking our time with important decisions can help us de-automatize. This means that we do not fall back on our unconscious biases, but instead activate our logical and rational thinking and actively bust any biases that can affect our decisions.”[9] This is the same prescription given by Patterson: “Intercultural communication competence then is the ability to deliberately and consciously examine one’s own ways of thinking and acting in order to develop strategies appropriate for each intercultural interaction.”[10]
As I continue to develop my NPO and test my prototypes, taking implicit/unconscious bias into account will be important to helping participants move from reactionary postures to thoughtful engagement with one another across cultural contexts.
[1] Agarwal, Pragya. 2021. Sway: Unravelling Unconscious Bias. London: Bloomsbury Sigma, 24.
[2] Ibid., 13.
[3] Ibid., 44.
[4] Ibid., 30.
[5] Ibid., 29ff.
[6] Ibid., 417, 426.
[7] Patterson, Jean A. 2009. “Organisational Learning and Leadership: On Metaphor, Meaning Making, Liminality and Intercultural Communication.” International Journal of Learning and Change 3, no. 4: 382–93. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJLC.2009.026220.
[8] Ibid., 386.
[9] Agarwal, 411.
[10] Patterson, 387.
About the Author
Elmarie Parker
10 responses to “Blind Spots Redux”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Elmarie, you always write so well! At the end of your post you speak of incorporating some of this learning into your prototyping – is that still a general thought or have you identified specific ways to do that? I would be interested to know where you land with that as I believe it would benefit my project as well. Also, in your work in the Middle East, how have you seen bias factor into the divides you are seeking to bridge? (I know that’s a really big question – feel free to just give one example!)
Hi Roy. Thank you for your comments and thoughtful questions regarding my post. You ask if I’ve identified some specific ways to identify biases in the context of my NPO. One of the prototypes I am testing is the effectiveness of the Intercultural Development Inventory (IDI) to utilize in the discovery of how to equip young adults (16-23 years old) in my NPO for cross-cultural engagement as they transform society through the practice of justice, equity, reconciliation, and perseverance. This assessment, in part, allows participants to begin to identify how they understand and interact with many types of difference and thus begin to understand their particular biases–implicit and explicit. I’m looking forward to seeing what I learn as this prototype is tested.
You also asked how I have seen bias factor into the divides I am seeking to bridge. Agarwal’s writing on what happens in our brains when we view people who look different from ourselves comes into play here (p. 90). Lebanon is a very ethnically diverse country. We often hear from local people the ways they distinguish ‘us’ from ‘them’ in a Lebanese context. People are finely attuned to ethnic difference in Lebanon and the wider Middle East. The same is true in a US context. On top of more conscious bias against the Middle East in general, and women who wear hijab in particular, we in the USA also live with the unconscious bias against people whose ethnicities are different from our own. It is a central component of my NPO to offer young adults from both Lebanon and Oregon the opportunity to deepen their intercultural competencies, and thus begin to better understand and address their implicit (and explicit) biases towards one another.
Elmarie: My favorite part of this book was also Pragya’s analysis of the human brain. So interesting. It reminded my of Lieberman and his in depth, “The Molecule and More” But you make a great connection with Kahneman–I saw a lot of similarities there, too. Do you see your co-workers having a lot of biases in your work? You mentioned some frustration with your company when we had our interview this past week, is why I’m curious. Great post.
Hi Troy. Thank you for your comments and question regarding my post. Yes, indeed, Lieberman’s “Molecule of More” also ties into Agarwal’s work in “Sway.” I’m so grateful for the neuro-behavioral foundation we are accessing through our readings and their application to leadership issues.
You ask, do I see my co-workers having a lot of biases in my work[place]. These issues of implicit bias and microagressions have been a key topic in our Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) seminars. I think they have helped all of us become much more aware of our particular implicit biases and we are learning how to become a more conscious and thoughtful organization in how we communicate and work with one another across our ethnic and cultural differences. There have been times along the way where this DEI training has been done in less helpful ways (for my own journey) and other ways that have been very helpful. The distinction for me comes down to how the presenter/trainer shares their knowledge and their invitation to grow and how that interacts with my own learning style and personal journey. I think that is probably true for all of us, so what one person finds helpful another finds harmful. I’m working on my capacity to extend grace towards this reality of difference in all of our journeys and styles. I’m also working on more deeply taking responsibility for my own growth and differentiate myself from a presenter’s journey and any of the emotional freight they may or may not bring to their training sessions.
Elmarie: Just a thought, but it may be an interesting component to embed a bias assessment into your NPO as part of the process you’re developing. Do you have something in that vein already incorporated into the prototypes you’re working on?
Hi Kayli. Thank you for your suggestion. Right now, one of the prototypes I am testing is the effectiveness of the Intercultural Development Inventory (IDI) to utilize in the discovery of how to equip young adults (16-23 years old) in my NPO for cross-cultural engagement as they transform society through the practice of justice, equity, reconciliation, and perseverance. This assessment, in part, allows participants to begin to identify how they understand and interact with many types of difference and thus begin to understand their particular biases–implicit and explicit. I’m looking forward to seeing what I learn as this prototype is tested.
Are you aware of other implicit biases assessment tools that you have found effective in your context?
Ty Elmarie for your thoughts on going beyond our biases to interact to bring forth cultural engagements. I personally experienced and still witness “the unconscious and implicit dimension of our biases that are driven by our evolutionary need to survive perceived threats” in my Korean American communities. My NPO is focused on helping the emerging youth to break off survive theology in them to thrive as 2nd and 3rd generation Korean Americans. Are there any books you can recommend on overcoming unconscious and implicit need to survive?
Hi Jonathan. Thank you for sharing a bit more about your NPO work. You are taking up a challenging dimension in your community! You ask about resources aimed at overcoming unconscious and implicit survival biases. I’m finding the research work by Patterson (in my footnotes to my blog) very helpful. The field of Sensemaking is very intriguing as it relates to this issue of how we move through our realities as individuals and communities. A related field is Transformation Theory (based in Attachment theory). For this I am reading through Fleming, Ted, Alexis Kokkos, and Fergal Finnegan, eds. 2019. European Perspectives on Transformation Theory. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan. I hope these are helpful resources and point you towards yet others.
Excellent summary of the book.
I am curious, do you see a difference in the way biases play out in the Middle East? What are the similarities and differences?
Elmarie, Agarwall makes the claim that humans are not naturally rational. What are the real challenges you see in attempting to have communities practice that which is not natural? How would Friedman invite us to respond?