Some Potential Problems with Implicit Bias Interventions Qua Indirect Prejudice Interventions

Abstract Implicit bias interventions, qua attempts to decrease implicit bias measures, are often indirect prejudice interventions. As such, they face a number of potential problems. In particular, implicit bias interventions are more susceptible to generate unforeseen side-effects, are more prone to overcompensation, and less clearly decrease prejudicial behaviour, than at least some direct prejudice interventions. These particular problems are not widely recognized (even though other problems with these interventions are well known, e.g. those raised by Oswald et al. in J Personal Soc Psychol 105:171–192, 2013; Lai et al. in J Exp Psychol Gen 145(8):1001–1016, 2016; Forscher et al. in J Personal Soc Psychol 117(3):522–559, 2019). In this paper I describe the three problems in detail, and explain why they result from indirectness. I thereby hope to show that the problems beset an entire approach to deprejudicing, and point towards deeper problems than unfortunate empirical results found for particular implicit measures. The problems do not point towards finding new indirect measures and interventions to replace old ones, but away entirely from indirect measures, toward direct measures and interventions.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Topoi
Published
2025-03-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-025-10172-w
Primary Topic
Social and Intergroup Psychology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Some Potential Problems with Implicit Bias Interventions Qua Indirect Prejudice Interventions

Martin L. Jönsson
Topoi
Social and Intergroup Psychology
article

Some Potential Problems with Implicit Bias Interventions Qua Indirect Prejudice Interventions

Martin L. Jönsson
article en

Abstract

Abstract Implicit bias interventions, qua attempts to decrease implicit bias measures, are often indirect prejudice interventions. As such, they face a number of potential problems. In particular, implicit bias interventions are more susceptible to generate unforeseen side-effects, are more prone to overcompensation, and less clearly decrease prejudicial behaviour, than at least some direct prejudice interventions. These particular problems are not widely recognized (even though other problems with these interventions are well known, e.g. those raised by Oswald et al. in J Personal Soc Psychol 105:171–192, 2013; Lai et al. in J Exp Psychol Gen 145(8):1001–1016, 2016; Forscher et al. in J Personal Soc Psychol 117(3):522–559, 2019). In this paper I describe the three problems in detail, and explain why they result from indirectness. I thereby hope to show that the problems beset an entire approach to deprejudicing, and point towards deeper problems than unfortunate empirical results found for particular implicit measures. The problems do not point towards finding new indirect measures and interventions to replace old ones, but away entirely from indirect measures, toward direct measures and interventions.

TopoiVol. 44(4)
Lund University (SE)
Lunds Universitet
Openalex Percentile: Top 94%
Social and Intergroup Psychology
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Some Potential Problems with Implicit Bias Interventions Qua Indirect Prejudice Interventions — Martin L. Jönsson · Topoi (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS