Bias-override interventions beat bias reduction for urgent decision contexts

Evidence

Often in implicit bias trainings or research, the assumption is that the goal is elimination or dramatic reduction of implicit biases. This is only partly correct. We divide the interventions into two categories: long term bias concern and bias override. While the de-linking of stereotypes from identities would be ideal, in the context of the CJS, we argue that because the harms of biased decisions and behavior are so immediate and dire, stake holders in the CJS with power over decision-making should focus in the short term on bias override. The goal, obviously, is to identify how best to prevent biases from affecting a decision or undermining an interaction. Over the long term, of course, bias reduction or a continuous concern to prevent bias offers the more transformative outcome. — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law, 1391

Categorization

• DEFINE: Introduces the bias override versus bias reduction distinction central to intervention design.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law: A Definitive Look at…, 1391
• XREF: connects to: Decisions made under time pressure compound stress from feared retrospective judgment — Michael Lipsky, Street-Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of…, 271