4.3 Article

Cognitive processes behind the shooter bias: Dissecting response bias, motor preparation and information accumulation

Journal

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2021.104230

Keywords

Implicit stereotyping; Shooter task; Shooter bias; Racial bias; Diffusion model

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Research indicates the presence of racial biases in police officer dilemma tasks, leading to faster and less error-prone reactions towards Black targets. The data analysis reveals that the threat of a social group can be explicitly learned and mapped onto a-priori response bias within the model. Additionally, there is evidence of racial bias caused by stereotype-consistent motoric preparations and execution readiness, rather than prejudicial threat biases.
A rich body of research points to racial biases in so-called police officer dilemma tasks: participants are generally faster and less error-prone to shoot (vs. not shoot) Black (vs. White) targets. In three experimental (and two supplemental) studies (total N = 914), we aimed at examining the cognitive processes underlying these findings under fully standardized conditions. To be able to dissect a-priori decision bias, biased information processing and motor preparation, we rendered video sequences of virtual avatars that differed in nothing but the tone of their skin. Modeling the data via drift diffusion models revealed that the threat of a social group can be explicitly learned and mapped accordingly on an a-priori response bias within the model (Study 1). Studies 2 and 3 replicated the racial shooter bias as apparent in faster reaction times in stereotype-consistent trials. This, however, appears to result from stereotype-consistent motoric preparations and execution readiness, but not from pre-judicial threat biases. The results have implications especially for automatic stereotypes in the public.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available