Prejudice control begins subconsciously via an automatic conflict detection system
Evidence
Cognitive neuroscience evidence suggests that the process of control involves two mechanisms, each associated with activity in separate neural structures (e.g., Botvinick et al., 1999). The first is a conflict detection system, which monitors ongoing responses and is sensitive to competition between automatic and consciously intended responses. The conflict detection system, which has been associated with activity in the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), is constantly active, requires few resources, and may operate below the level of awareness. When the ACC detects con- flict, it alerts a second, resource-dependent system designed to inhibit unintended responses and replace them with intended responses. This regulatory system has been shown to involve prefrontal cortical activity. Amodio et al. (2004) found that good regulators were more effective at responding without race bias than poor regulators, and that this difference was mediated by the sensitivity of the conflict detection system’s response to race-biased tendencies (i.e., responses indicative of differences in ACC activity). That is, good regulators were more sensitive to the fact that their automatically activated stereotypes were at odds with their intended nonstereotypic responses and they were more efficient in recruiting controlled processes online as the response unfolded. Because the ACC operates automatically, these findings suggest that mechanisms of control are set in motion very early in the response stream and do not necessarily require conscious appraisals for the engagement of control. In this case, “putting the brakes on prejudice” involves preconscious mechanisms which both detect the potential for failure and recruit the needed controlled processes to avert biased responses and replace them with intended responses. — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 2111 (
#corroborates, via linked claim)
Allport recognized, however, that for some people, overcoming rather than circumventing prejudice was the overarching goal. For example, Allport (1954/1979) noted that some people are likely to find their defenses wanting such that “they can neither repress, rationalize, nor compromise with any comfort” (p. 338). These people are aware of, and do not hide from, the conflict between their values and their actions. Indeed, awareness of the conflict is a prerequisite to overcoming prejudice. According to Allport, successful resolution of inner conflict – true prejudice reduction – requires taking stock of one’s biases and doing the hard work to achieve an integrated personality in which there is consistency between values and actions. — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 2100 (
#complicates, via linked claim)
Categorization
- XREF: connects to: Realistic conflict triggers and becomes indistinguishable from preexisting prejudice; Suppressing prejudice begins preconsciously via an automatic conflict detection system in the brain. — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 2111; Unconscious conflict detection recruits deliberate regulation before any awareness of bias — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years…, 2111 (+7 more)
Broader Connections
- Suppressing prejudice begins preconsciously via an automatic conflict detection system in the brain.
#corroborates(0.99) — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 2111 - Prejudice control begins preconsciously via the anterior cingulate cortex
#expands(0.96) - True prejudice reduction requires awareness of the values-action conflict
#complicates(0.81) — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 2100 - Recognizing behavior-ideal gaps triggers compunction that motivates prejudice change.
#complicates(0.73)