Understanding the impact of unconscious bias
This note draws on recent publications exploring the impact of unconscious bias (sometimes known as implicit bias)
on decision-making, both formal and informal. At the end you will find references to the publications cited and some
ideas for action for you as a leader or potential leader.
What is unconscious bias?
Unconscious bias is identified by psychologists as part of everyone’s social identity. It has two main components:
 Our ability to use ‘schemas’ (categories or types) and intuition to reach very quick decisions about people,
things and ideas even when faced with huge amounts of information (heuristic decision-making)
 Our tendency to respond positively to people we perceive to be like us (affinity bias) and to react against
people perceived to be too different to ‘fit in’ or to pose a threat to us (negative bias). Such bias can be the
product of social stereotypes, family influence or experience (real, for example having had one unpleasant
encounter with someone, or perceived, for example reacting to news reports which create positive or
negative images of particular groups).
Research suggests that we all, without exception, have unconscious biases which may influence our decision-making
in favour of or against someone else or ourselves:


Decision making about others at work is both formal (recruitment and selection, merit pay, providing
development opportunities) and informal, when we may not even be aware that we are making decisions
that impact on others (networking outcomes, mentoring style, on-the-hoof conversations).
Decision making at work about ourselves can take the form of stereotype threat – which happens when a
member of a group about which there is a stereotype unconsciously conforms to that stereotype in the way
they behave (e.g. when women are reminded of the stereotype that women are less good at maths than
men, they perform less well in maths tests)
Bias does not necessarily result in discrimination (lawful or unlawful). By becoming aware of our individual biases we
can consciously correct for them. Remaining unaware, or denying biases, may mean that they have a greater
impact. And that impact is more likely to kick in and result in discrimination at times of pressure or when we are
stressed.
Becoming aware of biases
The first step is to become aware of your personal biases. Some you may already be able to name, others may be
buried more deeply. The Implicit Association Test (IAT) developed at Harvard measures the hidden attitudes and
beliefs that determine our preferences for certain groups over others. It uses images flashed on screen which
participants match with a list of words, some carrying positive and others negative associations, to test a wide range
of possible biases, including age, gender and race as well as biases, such as against short men, that do not result in
unlawful discrimination. The outcome measured is not the actual association reached but the time taken to reach it.
It is common, for example, for participants to take longer to associate images of BME people with positive rather
than negative words than it takes them to similarly match images of white people. The implication is that, in a
situation like this, where we know that our views are being tested, we are taking the time to use our conscious mind
to mitigate the impact of buried bias. So the IAT not only demonstrates that we are biased, but that mindfulness
(exercising our conscious mind ) can help to mitigate bias.
The IAT is not without its critics. If you are interested in understanding more about how it works, you can read the
relevant section in the full report published by the Equality Challenge Unit on the subject (ECU 2013, pp 76-85).
Research on the impact of unconscious bias
Research in this field includes:


A survey carried out on behalf of the charity Changing Faces (Changing Faces 2008), which found that nine
out of ten people implicitly judge those with facial disfigurements negatively.
A study carried out by business psychologists Pearn Kandola (Kandola 2010) looking at the associations
between senior and junior positions, and men and women: they found a bias towards associating men with
senior jobs and women with junior ones. This bias was as true of the women in the sample as of the men.



Work with an orchestra (Goldin and Rouse 2000) whose auditions tended to result in the appointment of
men: auditions held with candidates screened from the selectors, who then had no information about the
sex of the candidate, resulted in greater equality in appointments.
Research commissioned by the Department of Work and Pensions (Wood 2009) in which two matched
applications or CVs with names recognised as having different ethnicities were submitted to the same
advertised vacancies: where the recruitment process allowed shortlisters to see applicants’ names, there was
significant discrimination based on perceived name ethnicity.
Economists at the University of Bristol (Burgess and Greaves 2009) who found that teacher assessments of
their black students marked them lower than did external examiners’ assessments. This difference was not
present in the assessment of white students.
It’s unlikely that any of the research subjects involved in these studies wanted to be biased.
Mitigating the impact of unconscious bias
Research suggests that, despite the complex nature of the problem, mitigating the impact of unconscious bias is a
relatively simple matter of adherence to high quality policies and good practice coupled with raising awareness,
acting on that awareness and developing a more mindful approach at key decision-making times.
Evidence from the higher education (e.g. Morley 2013, pp 3-4) and other sectors (e.g. McKinsey 2010) suggests that
compliance with excellent policy and best employment practice is unlikely on its own to succeed in mitigating the
impact of unconscious bias: even in organisations with high-quality policies and practices the under-representation
of minorities and women continues despite best efforts.
Validated experiments in this field include use of the IAT to look at the extent to which bias can be reduced using an
implementation intention. For example, when three groups of volunteers were asked to associate various ‘hire and
fire’ words with dark or light skin-toned faces (no other features other than skin tone changed):



the control group, given no further instructions, showed a preference for hiring light-skinned people;
the group given the goal intention ‘don’t be prejudiced’ demonstrated half the race bias of the control group;
participants given the implementation intention ‘if I see a dark face, then I’ll ignore colour’ demonstrated no
prejudice.
A further study used the IAT to look at the stereotype associating management with maleness and produced similar
outcomes. In this case participants were re-tested after three weeks, when the positive effects measured in the
implementation intention group were still active, suggesting that we can train ourselves to reform habits based on
bias. Other experiments have looked at attitudes to short men, homeless people and football fans.
The report commissioned by the ECU (ECU 2013) contains more recommendations for mitigating the impact of
unconscious bias.
Suggestions actions
Personal
Take steps to become aware of your personal affinity and negative biases: make a note of those you are already
aware of. Find out about others by taking some of the Implicit Association tests.
Try the implementation intention approach when you encounter someone from a group to whom you might respond
with a bias (for or against)
Look out for leadership or management situations you might find yourself in where bias might be particularly
damaging, and create a plan for how to minimise bias in these situations.
Organisational
Take an opportunity to lead a discussion based on your learning in this area and resulting in an action plan.
Lead an initiative to investigate providing a course on understanding and mitigating unconscious bias at your
institution
If you completed the activity on cumulative disadvantage using the paper on Virginia Valian’s work before the Core
Leadership Skills day, consider how you could use the ideas about unconscious bias to address some of the small
disadvantages you identified then.
References
Harvard Implicit Association Test: https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit
Changing Faces: https://www.changingfaces.org.uk/Work
Equality Challenge Unit (2013) Unconscious bias in higher education. London: ECU
Kandola, B. (2009) The value of difference: eliminating bias in organisations. Oxford: Pearn Kandola
Goldin, C. and Rouse, C. (2000) ‘Orchestrating impartiality: the impact of ‘blind’ auditions on female musicians’,
American Economic Review, Vol. 90, No. 4, pp. 715-741.
Wood, M., Hales, J., Purdon, S., Sejersen, T., Hayllar, O. (2009) A test for racial discrimination in recruitment
practice in British cities. London: National Centre for Social Research for the Department of Work and Pensions
Burgess, S. and Greaves, E. (2009) Test Scores, Subjective Assessment and Stereotyping of Ethnic Minorities.
University of Bristol
Written by Judith Secker and Rebecca Nestor for Aurora, 2013