Is the discussion below understandable if so explain, if not explain?

Discussion Question: Next week is devoted to peer-review and presentations, so this week we will combine intelligence testing, bias and ethics. In a world increasingly valuing diverse skills and talents, do traditional intelligence tests still hold the same relevance as they perhaps once did? Considering the criticism of these tests for their cultural biases, narrow focus, and inability to encompass emotional and creative intelligences (not to mention that we are not even sure what intelligence is), should we be reevaluating their role in education, employment, and even the perception of individual worth? What are the implications of judging others based on a biased construct? What alternatives could be explored to truly capture the multifaceted nature of human potential, or should we discontinue assessment until we can develop culturally fair tests?

In 1998, Greenwald, McGhee and Schwartz (1998) proposed an influential personality and social assessment claiming to measure individual differences in implicit bias called the Implicit Association Test (IAT). According to several multimethod studies, there was found little or no evidence of discriminant validity, showing the validity as a measure of attitude fluctuates across concepts (Schimmack, 2021). The majority of valid variance comes from the distinction between opposite attitudes in participants, but the response time plays less than 10% of the modification in calculations.

Perhaps traditional testing does not hold the same relevance as years past since we have continued to understand more about cognition, emotion, intelligence, and psychology in general. Science should be on a constant flexibility basis with the development and growth of measurement scales with particular gravity on implicit bias. The last assessment of construct validity for the IAT is over 10 years ago with many reasons to revisit. Measures are based on changing factors, new data, insights and should be a continuing process (Schimmack, 2021).

IAT scores reflect the interference effect from preexisting associations on the classification task. Demonstrating validity requires more than grouping differences by the strength of association which is how IAT measures individuals. If circumstances, interpretations and attitudes change over time, the IAT does not measure individual differences very well. Can an assessment of implicit attitudes be measured with explicit measures, as projected by Greenwald et al., (1998). According to the article Intelligence and How to Get It, the best way to fix the problem of socioeconomic and race bias in intelligence is to reduce wealth disparity (Nisbett, 2009).

I chose to take the Hispanic/European IAT and scored with no preference or bias toward or against Hispanic or European people. I'm Hispanic, I speak fluent Spanish, I have many Hispanic family members and friends. I definitely feel more comfortable around BIPOC than people of European descent because I don't know that culture. This measure in my opinion is incorrect. I also took the Gay/Straight IAT and the score is below. Also, not a great measure in my opinion. I'm straight in a 30+ year heterosexual relationship so obviously I have more knowledge and experience, but I'm not sold on "strong automatic preference for straight people compared to gay people" or vice versa.

References

Greenwald, A.G., McGhee, D.E., Schwarts, J.L.K (1998). Measuring Individual Differences in Implicit Cognition: The Implicit Association Test.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(6), 1464-1480.

Schimmack, U. (2021). The Implicit Association Test: A Method in Search of a Construct.Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(2), 396-414.https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691619863798

Nisbett, R. (2009). Intelligence and How to Get It, Bring the Family Address.Association for Psychological Science, Observer (2009), July/August

• image_38874980921697034286039.png(198.4 KB)