Measuring discrimination is distorted by both underreporting and hypervigilance.

Evidence

The moderate reliability of the Interpersonal Index may be a result of the response scale used, which contains a subjective component in terms of how much an incident bothered a participant. Previous research on measuring discrimination has suggested that under reporting and hypervigilance are issues to consider when assessing discriminatory incidents, as some participants may minimize unpleasant encounters and others may be quick to attribute bias as the motivating factor behind incidents (Williams, 2016). — Naheed Ahmed, Measurement of Perceived Interpersonal…, 102

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to measurement-validity debates in social science: self-report bias in survey instruments, and to Williams 2016 on discrimination and health measurement. — connects to: Blinding audits cannot undo accumulated experiential advantages from past discrimination. — Anthony G. Greenwald and Mahzarin R. Banaji, Implicit Social Cognition: Attitudes,…, 257
• DEEPTHINKING: The two errors run in opposite directions and cancel unpredictably — a genuinely hard problem for anyone quantifying subjective harms, not just a survey caveat.