Document Type
Article
Publication Date
10-2025
Publisher
Springer Nature
Abstract
Since the 1990s, psychologists have developed multiple models of prejudicial attitudes. I argue that these models generally fall into one of two categories: individualistic or situationist. The former abstract away (or omit) environmental features from the system of interest and locate the phenomenon in the mind of the individual. However, new models of prejudicial attitudes have foregrounded just those features abstracted away in preceding models. These conceptualizations of attitudes foreground situations. The scientists that posit them claim that measures of implicit bias are better understood as measures of places as opposed to people, for example. These categories of models have very different implications for intervention strategies aimed at reducing the impact of implicit biases. In this paper, I draw on philosophical insights from the philosophy of science to advocate for an integration of these models. The desiderata I provide asks researchers to clarify how citizens and policymakers ought to proceed given the plurality of diverse models. Should interventions at the individual level or structural level be prioritized? This issue has important consequences for achieving egalitarian goals in contemporary society.
Recommended Citation
Lackey, N. (2025). We are Missing Multiple Model Integration in the Psychology of Implicit Bias. Topoi, 44(4), 889–898. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-025-10202-7
Comments
Open access to this article is funded by Santa Clara University Library.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.