Unconscious Bias, Groups, and Collaboration
In Sway: Unravelling Unconscious Bias, Pragya Agarwal wants readers to recognize the urgency of understanding implicit/unconscious bias.[1] Using “‘implicit bias’ and ‘unconscious bias’ interchangeably,”[2] Agarwal defines the terms as “biases that exist without our conscious knowledge, the ones that manifest themselves in our actions and reactions often without us realising it, rearing their heads when we least expect it and sometimes taking us by surprise.”[3] The problem behind unconscious bias would seem to be a wicked problem – hard to tackle and never fully solvable. After all, unconscious bias, according to Agarwal, is “problematic to capture and accurately pinpoint because it is hidden and can often be in complete contrast to what we consider our beliefs and associations to be.”[4] Thankfully, in God’s common grace, it would seem that people can become more and more aware of their own biases, even their unconscious / implicit biases, even if the problem can’t be wiped out completely.[5] Agarwal writes, “Being aware of how our own implicit biases are shaped by our own upbringing and our life experiences can help us minimise these in our roles as parents, carers, friends, and educators.”[6]
Here’s reality: People are biased. In fact, Agarwal believes everyone is biased to some extent.[7] Here’s another thing: “bias is not always negative.”[8] But often it isn’t good. Sometimes, “bias is misdirected and creates prejudice and discriminatory behavior through a negative association with a certain group or community.”[9]
Let’s take the very nature of groups…
Bias and groups
Researchers agree that people have a bias to belong to groups. Wanting to relate to other people and belong is not a bad thing. It’s how God made us. It’s through groups or tribes that people make sense of the world and solve all kinds of problems. At the same time, because people are broken, they also have a tendency toward tribalism, believing their group has all the right answers or the best ideas, above other groups and their ideas. They might say… “Our products are better than yours.” Or, “Our party’s candidate has all the answers. Your group’s candidate is evil.” It becomes us vs. them. Yet this desire, or bias, to belong to a group or do things as a tribe can be a good thing. However, just as the tribe can slip into tribalism, bias can likewise devolve. If the “positive bias creates a negative discrimination against someone else, or if it gives an undue advantage to the favoured group over someone else, then it becomes problematic.”[10]
Most of the time, we go about life without an awareness of our own biases. Even those who embrace philosophical liberalism’s commitment toward egalitarian ideals should consider their potential bias. Argawal writes, “We are reluctant to re-evaluate our beliefs and like to believe that we are all egalitarian and carry no biases.”[11] She wants us to recognize that bias is real and in the case of unconscious or implicit bias, we may not realize how deep the wells of our biases are. In the case of our ecclesial tribes, we want to think that we are gracious toward others, treating all image bearers with dignity and respect, but do we? We sometimes think that our group’s take on a particular passage of scripture, or doctrinal position, or theological distinctiveness is the best and perhaps only right perspective. In some cases, we may even pretend to get along with others under the banner of orthodoxy or “unity with diversity,” while at the same time secretly or unconsciously hoping those with whom we disagree would just go away. Our bias for our own tribe can even come out in our “religious” jokes with people from other groups or tribes. More on that in a second.
Bias, denominations, and collaboration
Don’t get me wrong, it’s good to have theological distinctives. Many would agree, I think, that it isn’t always a bad thing to align ourselves into groups/denominations,[12] but we need to have a gracious hand toward others who disagree and even be willing to find common cause with them. In Center Church, Tim Keller wrote about the need for different denominations to work together, particularly in cities filled with all kinds of people and ideas. Rather than tribalistic dynamics, we need movement dynamics. Keller wrote, “In fact, part of what we see in the dynamism of a movement is people who ‘knock heads’ and then come up with creative new initiatives because they share a vision and yet are very different in terms of denominations, temperaments, and personalities. If this bias (emphasis mine) for cooperation is absent in a city, the movement dynamic typically stalls or erodes.”[13]
Having a bias toward cooperation when it comes to alleviating the effects of sin’s entrance into the biblical storyline is crucial in a city. This doesn’t always happen, however, especially when different churches and denominations try to cooperate. So I’ll close with one of Agarwal’s suggestions in her epilogue under “So how do we tackle unconscious bias?”[14] —
About the jokes and exclusion…
There are many ways that different denominations can cooperate with others who do not share their theological (or even religious) commitments. But could it be that our religious or “denominational-differences” jokes, or even our sometimes silent exclusion of other groups and failure to provide equal voice at a movement-type table, is a form of what Agarwal might call a “microaggression” – behavior that is “communicated via verbal or nonverbal messages…targeted at people based on their membership of a marginalised group…’othering’ them, highlighting (what we believe to be) their inferior status and marginalising them even further.”[15] If that is the case, Christians and their denominations would do well to heed Agarwal’s recommendation: “If you are the microaggressor, use empathy and do not get defensive. Try to acknowledge and recognise your unconscious biases, reflect on them and the hurt your words might have caused.”[16]
[1] Pragya Agarwal, Sway: Unraveling Unconscious Bias, Oxford: Bloomsbury Sigma, 2020, Kindle Version, 9 of 428.
[2] Ibid., 13 of 428.
[3] Ibid., 13 of 428.
[4] Ibid., 15 of 428.
[5] Ibid., 19 of 428.
[6] Ibid., 381 0f 428.
[7] Agarwal writes, “Each of us form and carry unconscious biases of some sort. It’s not only the behavior of bigoted, racist or sexist people but of everyone, including you and me. So really the answer is to go to the roots, to understand the processes that shape us, to be aware, to acknowledge that we are all biased – to a certain degree – and that we all discriminate. We judge, we exclude people, we stereotype. Sometimes that’s a little tough to comprehend.” (Agarwal, 18 – 19 of 428) Agarwal goes on to say, “There has been an upsurge in diversity training with the aim of freeing ourselves from our unconscious biases, but we cannot erase our biases completely. Awareness and action are possible; obliteration is not.” (Agarwal, 19 of 428)
[8] Agarwal, 11 of 428. She gives the example of “a parent’s bias that their child is the smartesst, cleverest, most beautiful (as) an evolutionary response, designed to trigger parental love and care,” an example that “can extend to close friends and family, too.”
[9] Ibid., 10 of 428.
[10] Ibid., 11 of 428.
[11] Ibid., 10 0f 428.
[12] In Center Church, Tim Keller writes, “We must continue to align ourselves in denominations that share our theological distinctives.” (See Timothy Keller, Center Church: Doing Balanced, Gospel Ministry in Your City, Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2012, 369)
[13] Timothy Keller, Center Church: Doing Balanced, Gospel Ministry in Your City (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2012), 368.
[14] Agarwal, 381 of 428.
[15] Ibid., 206 of 428.
[16] Ibid., 382 of 428.
About the Author
Travis Vaughn
9 responses to “Unconscious Bias, Groups, and Collaboration”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Travis-
I enjoyed reading your post, and I thought the idea of applying it to how we treat people from different denominations was very relevant. Since so much of this is unconscious, how can we surface it? How do we help ourselves and others sidestep this risk to inter-denominational community?
Jen, these are great questions. I think the first step to surfacing it is simply becoming more aware of how prone we actually are to unconscious bias…having a bias toward our tribe’s/group’s ideas so much so that we almost automatically discount the “other.” I have to realize I’m prone to tribalism (seems like half the authors we’ve read recently affirm this). That’s probably the first step. Perhaps a second step is to invite others from other denominations to give us / me feedback on how they experience me / us / my tribe when it comes to cooperation or collaboration. I’d say there would have to be a great degree of trust between groups to allow for the second exercise to even happen. This would be sort of like doing a 360 evaluation for an employee.
Great post. Reading about interdenominational cooperation reminded me that one of my goals in starting a moms’ group two years ago was in fact to create a cross-denominational initiative. As time has gone on, the group has come to include moms from a number of churches, but all rather closely aligned theologically. Not a bad thing, but maybe I could push a little harder to bring in some new participants from a variety of churches. Well, maybe I’ll get to that after May 2025.
Kim, I would be curious to know what denominational / theological tribes, in France, might be the hardest to consider inviting into a “cross-denominational initiative” like your moms’ group. I’m guessing there are two or three churches / tribes that immediately come to mind. And, as they come to mind, what “ground rules” would need to apply, were they to be invited? Even as I ask those questions, I’m thinking about the post-Christian context where you and your family live and minister. It makes me wonder just how many (really, how few) different churches there are, and how many would know that they’ve been (potentially) excluded from a community’s cross-denominational initiative. Does word like that travel quickly in your community?
Travis,
I resonate with your insights about denominational bias. For more than 10 years, we were highly active in a Presbyterian Church here in Lake Oswego. I’ve sat through dinner conversations or meetings with friends and acquaintances who made jokes about Brad and I attending a liberal church. What we don’t realize when we make comments like that is how damaging it is to someone’s calling from God to serve in any church. In fact, the pastoral team at that particular church were more orthodox in the Scriptures than the Quaker Church in my own home town. Thinking about last week’s book on Postmodernism and truth, in your role as a leader, do you believe it’s insecurity that keeps denominational ties from forming? Or, to one of Agarwal’s points, would you say we need bias to stay in our denominational lanes? Good post!
Pam, I’m sorry to hear about the jokes that were made. My wife and I experienced something similar when we became presbyterians many years ago.
You asked some great questions. I think that there are at least three somewhat interrelated things that keep ties from forming at the denominational (or interdenominational) level. 1. Unhealthy life rhythms with leaders/pastors, 2. Mistrust/distrust within or across the denomination(s), and 3. Unhealthy patterns of communication. Of course, insecurity is a part of that (which is related to #1).
And to your second question, yes, we do need to pursue tribes or groups for our well-being. That’s how God has made us (we are relational beings). That’s when bias is a good thing. But because of sin’s entrance into the story, we are prone to tribalism. This, too, keeps people from forming healthy ties (both strong and weak).
Travis, I love your processing about denominations.
And I realized something about my own: I think for decades my pentecostal denomination has been a marginalized one. The history of scandal in our founding and our reticence to require higher education for our pastors (as well as our egalitarian and ‘Spirit-Filled’ approach) has made us, sometimes, a laughingstock among more respectable denominations.
But I think in the end that has made me/us more open to others on all ends of the spectrum. Foursquare may be a small, strange movement, but we seem to be the pastors in many towns who bring all the other pastors from different sides of the fence together.
Maybe the beauty of being one who is biased against is that you can use that as a superpower and transcend bias to create unity. It’s a developing thought for me but thanks for inspiring it.
Hi, Travis,
I’m late in the game this week, but got much from your post. Appreciate your quote: “Having a bias toward cooperation when it comes to alleviating the effects of sin’s entrance into the biblical storyline is crucial in a city.” Thank you for voicing the need for bias in certain contexts. Your post gave voice to the tension of knowing when bias can serve us and also when it can cripple us. What type of implicit bias do you see as being most pervasive in your ministerial context?
Hi Travis,
I just wanted to say thank you for a great post. I have read it several times and really appreciate what you have shared, especially this statement, “…we need to have a gracious hand toward others who disagree and even be willing to find common cause with them.” What helps you find a common cause with those with whom you disagree?