And more generally, social psychology is profoundly disinterested in disentangling actual racial discrimination from rational, statistical discrimination, even though they are both (a priori) the most likely explanations for the majority of these effects.
Yet to be tested hypothesis: implicit associations just reflect accurate stereotypes. Unlikely stimuli (e.g. black doctor) should be viewed with more skepticism resulting in longer processing time.https://twitter.com/juliagalef/status/1000805502534598656 …
-
-
-
The Bayesians should know better. They're always going on about the prior. Well, there's a case of the priors being wildly different, so we expect different processing of stimuli. From signal processing perspective, incongruent stimuli more likely to reflect reading error.
-
Hence, the rational choice is to increase reading time until that option is sufficiently ruled out. This results in equal response accuracy, but longer processing times for stimuli with low prior associations.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.