|
New York, NY; October 17, 2024—The National Association of Scholars (NAS) has just released a new report examining the science and claims underlying implicit bias theory and its associated Implicit Association Test (IAT). This fourth report of Shifting Sands: Unsound Science and Unsafe Regulation, Zombie Psychology, Implicit Bias Theory, and the Implicit Association Test focuses on strong assertions made and policies enacted by followers of implicit bias theory. The report finds compelling evidence that the IAT does not appear to measure implicit bias accurately or reliably, nor does its measurements correlate with real-world behaviors.
NAS’s report on implicit bias theory and the IAT continues the work of the previous three Shifting Sands reports. PM2.5 Regulation investigated irreproducible research in the field of environmental epidemiology, which informs the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s policies and regulations. Flimsy Food Findings, likewise, found persuasive circumstantial evidence that the scientific literature (in general) and statistical practices (in particular) affecting the nutritional epidemiology of red and processed meats and negative health outcomes, as well as soy protein and cardiovascular disease risk reduction, are untrustworthy. Confounded Errors found compelling circumstantial evidence that lockdowns and masking mandates imposed during the pandemic had no proven benefit to public health outcomes.
“As we’ve found throughout these previous reports, exciting research with significant association claims dominates modern research publications,” explained NAS Director of Research David Randall. “These reoccurring incentives contribute to the growth of irreproducible research and encourage outright scientific fraud.”
Shifting Sands argues that federally funded science and agencies would benefit from more rigorous and transparent statistical processes in laying the foundation for public policy interventions. As NAS has discovered, when these interventions are founded on faulty science, it undermines public trust in both sound and unsound science and public policy. Such outcomes are avoidable.
Randall continued: “Replication makes for sound science. Without it, our government relies on potentially faulty research to create and enforce policy interventions that have real consequences on the liberty and prosperity of millions of Americans. I and my colleagues, Warren Kindzierski and Stanley Young, offer recommendations to policymakers to right the wrongs imposed by laws and regulations based on implicit bias theory—and, more broadly, to protect American liberty.” These Include:
- Rescind all laws, regulations, and programs based on implicit bias theory.
- Establish a federal commission to determine what grounds should be used to cite social science research (i.e., the field of research used to justify implicit bias theory and other like theories).
- Establish federal and state legislative committees to oversee social scientific support for proposed laws and regulations.
- Support education for lawyers and judges on the irreproducibility crisis, social science research, and best legal and judicial practices for assessing social science research and the testimony of expert witnesses.
“America’s policymakers must ensure that the science underlying public policy and court decisions rely upon the best available science. Failing to do so will further erode public confidence in our nation’s leading policy experts,” concluded Randall.
NAS is a network of scholars and citizens united by a commitment to academic freedom, disinterested scholarship, and excellence in American higher education. Membership in NAS is open to all who share a commitment to these broad principles. NAS publishes a journal and has state and regional affiliates. Visit NAS at www.nas.org.
###
If you would like more information about this issue, please contact David Randall at [email protected].
Interested in learning more about the implications of implicit bias theory and other similar topics? Check out Minding the Campus's new book, Social Justice versus Social Science: White Fragility, Implicit Bias, and Diversity Training, a critique of today’s social justice dogma—and a challenge to readers to think critically, question prevailing ideologies, and engage in real dialogue. Click here to learn more.
|
