Implicit Bias Symposium (with links to videos)
Posted by The Situationist Staff on July 19, 2011
Welcome & Introduction by Dean’s Office
- Kirk Stark, Vice Dean, UCLA, Law
Implicit Bias and the Courts — Substantive Framing and Introduction
- Jerry Kang, Co-Director PULSE, UCLA, Law
1. State of the Science – Implicit Biases / in the Courtroom. This panel will share and present findings from psychology about how biases, including but not limited to implicit biases measured through reaction-time instruments, may influence the courtroom and related judicial institutions. This panel will provide attendees with a state-of-the-art description of the predictive and ecological validities of various bias measures, with careful exposition of which theories, mechanisms, and findings enjoy which sorts of scientific “consensus.”
- Nilanjana Dasgupta, U. Mass Amherst, Psychology
- Justin Levinson, U. Hawaii, Law
- Anthony Greenwald, U. Washington, Psychology
Moderator: Phillip Atiba Goff, UCLA, Psychology
Video: Substantive Framing & Panel 1: State of the Science: Implicit Biases in the Courtroom
(volume is quite low — you will have to turn up your speakers; volume for other streams are normal)
2. State of the Field — Institutional Responses So Far. This panel will focus on the various ways in which legal institutions, including the judiciary and legal procedures, have responded to the emerging evidence of implicit biases. Judicial educators, judges, and academics will describe and assess what has been done, and to what effect– given various economic, political, and scientific constraints.
- David Faigman, UC Hastings, Law
- Pam Casey, National Center on State Courts
- Dist. Court Judge Mark Bennett, N.D. Iowa
- Judge Michael Linfield, LA Superior Court
Moderator: Ingrid Eagly, UCLA, Law
1 – 2:20 pm
Box Lunch and Public Interview with Anthony Greenwald, U. Washington, Psychology (Inventor of the Implicit Association Test). Interviewers: PULSE co-directors Jerry Kang & Jennifer Mnookin.
2:20 – 4 pm
3. Possibilities and Complications: Theoretical and Practical, Legal and Scientific. The morning panels will have brought the audience up to speed on the state of the art. This panel pulls back the lens to explore the various theoretical possibilities and practical complications connected to measuring biases, measuring their consequences, and implementing potential debiasing strategies. Both legal and scientific complexities will be addressed.
- Rachel Godsil, Seton Hall Law
- Jeffrey Rachlinski, Cornell, Law
- Devon Carbado, UCLA, Law
- Jerry Kang, UCLA, Law
Moderator: Jennifer Mnookin, UCLA, Law
4:00 – 4:30 pm
Afternoon break & refreshments
4:30 – 6 pm
4. Back to Reality — Roundtable Discussion: Concrete Solutions and Next Steps. The last panel will bring back all the panelists for a final robust, interdisciplinary, and unscripted conversation about the challenges and opportunities highlighted throughout the day. What can and should be done now? What research agenda will provide the knowledge necessary to lessen the impact of implicit bias within the courtroom and the judiciary? What forces, besides the scientific merits, might drive the conversation and debate?
Moderator: Jerry Kang, UCLA, Law