Sesgo Implícito, Externalismo y Segunda Persona
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5007/1808-1711.2025.e96263Palabras clave:
Sesgo Implícito, Cognición Social, Representación, EstereotiposResumen
En este texto, sostengo que el estudio psicológico del sesgo implícito puede beneficiarse de los enfoques de segunda persona. Específicamente, muestro que las aproximaciones experimentales dominantes basadas en el Test de Asociación Implícita (IAT por su sigla en inglés) presuponen un internalismo según el cual la posesión de un sesgo implícito se identifica con la posesión de una asociación conceptual. Al equiparar la posesión del sesgo implícito con la posesión de una asociación conceptual, la visión tradicional reduce el sesgo a una activación en memoria particular e ignora los aspectos socioculturales involucrados en este fenómeno. Para evitar esto, sugiero adoptar una perspectiva externalista, considerando el enfoque de segunda persona, permite incluir en la identificación del sesgo aspectos socioculturales y normativos. Exploro finalmente algunas consecuencias de la propuesta externalista para la medición y la intervención sobre el sesgo implícito.
Citas
Amodio, D. M.; Devine, P. G. 2006. Stereotyping and evaluation in implicit race bias: Evidence for independent constructs and unique effects on behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 91(4): 652–661. https://doi.org/10/d5k6tj
Frankish, K. 2016. Playing Double: Implicit Bias, Dual Levels, and Self-Control. In: M. Brownstein; J. Saul (Eds.), Implicit bias and philosophy: Vol. 1: Metaphysics and epistemology, p.23-46. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Fricker, M. 2007. Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gallistel, C. R.; Matzel, L. D. 2013. The Neuroscience of Learning: Beyond the Hebbian Synapse. Annual Review of Psychology 64(7.1-7.32): 169–200. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143807
Greenwald, A. G.; Banaji, M. R. 1995. Implicit social cognition: Attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Psychological Review 102(1): 4–27. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.102.1.4
Greenwald, A. G.; McGhee, D. E.; Schwartz, J. L. K. 1998. Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 74(6): 1464–1480. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.6.1464
Hebb, D. O. 1949. The Organization of Behavior: A Neuropsychological Theory. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Kalis, A.; Ghijsen, H. 2022. Understanding implicit bias: A case for regulative dispositionalism. Philosophical Psychology 35(8): 1212–1233. https://doi.org/10.1080/09515089.2022.2046261
Levy, N. 2015. Neither Fish nor Fowl: Implicit Attitudes as Patchy Endorsements. Noûs 49(4): 800–823. https://doi.org/10.1111/nous.12074
Machery, E. 2016. De-Freuding Implicit Attitudes. In M. Brownstein; J. M. Saul (Eds.), Implicit bias and philosophy: Vol. 1: Metaphysics and Epistemology, p.104–129. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Machery, E. 2022. Anomalies in implicit attitudes research. WIREs Cognitive Science 13(1): 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1569
Mandelbaum, E. 2016. Attitude, Inference, Association: On the Propositional Structure of Implicit Bias. Noûs 50(3): 629–658. https://doi.org/10/gf4fx4
Marini, M.; Sriram, N.; Schnabel, K.; Maliszewski, N.; Devos, T.; Ekehammar, B.; Wiers, R.; HuaJian, C.; Somogyi, M.; Shiomura, K.; Schnall, S.; Neto, F.; Bar-Anan, Y.; Vianello, M.; Ayala, A.; Dorantes, G.; Park, J.; Kesebir, S.; Pereira, A.; Tulbure, B.; Ortner, T.; Stepanikova, I.; Greenwald, A. G.; Nosek, B. A. 2013. Overweight People Have Low Levels of Implicit Weight Bias, but Overweight Nations Have High Levels of Implicit Weight Bias. PLOS ONE 8 (12): 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0083543.
Mitchell, G.; Tetlock, P. E. 2017. Popularity as a Poor Proxy for Utility: The Case of Implicit Prejudice. In S. O. Lilienfeld; I. D. Waldman (Eds.), Psychological science under scrutiny, p.164-195. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell.
Nanay, B. 2021. Implicit Bias as Mental Imagery. Journal of the American Philosophical Association 7(3): 329–347. https://doi.org/10.1017/apa.2020.29
Payne, B. K.; Vuletich, H. A.; Lundberg, K. B. 2017. The Bias of Crowds: How Implicit Bias Bridges Personal and Systemic Prejudice. Psychological Inquiry 28(4): 233–248. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2017.1335568
Pérez, D. I.; Gomila, A. (2017). Lo que la segunda persona no es. In: D. I. Pérez; D. Lawler (Eds.), La segunda persona y las emociones, p.275-293. Buenos Aires: SADAF.
Phelan, S. M.; Puhl, R. M.; Burke, S. E.; Hardeman, R.; Dovidio, J. F.; Nelson, D. B.; Przedworski, J.; Burgess, D. J.; Perry, S.; Yeazel, M. W.; van Ryn, M. 2015. The mixed impact of medical school on medical students’ implicit and explicit weight bias. Medical Education 49(10): 983–992. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12770
Quine, W. V. O. 1969. Epistemology naturalized. In: Ontological Relativity and Other Essays, p.69-90. New York: Columbia University Press.
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
Rae, J. R.; Newheiser, A.-K.; Olson, K. R. 2015. Exposure to Racial Out-Groups and Implicit Race Bias in the United States. Social Psychological and Personality Science 6(5): 535–543. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550614567357
Rudman, L. A.; Greenwald, A. G.; McGhee, D. E. 2001. Implicit Self-Concept and Evaluative Implicit Gender Stereotypes: Self and Ingroup Share Desirable Traits. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 27(9): 1164–1178. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167201279009
Toribio, J. 2018. Implicit Bias: From social structure to representational format. THEORIA. An International Journal for Theory, History and Foundations of Science 33(1): 41–60. https://doi.org/10.1387/theoria.17751
Wiberg, M. 2006. Gender differences in the Swedish driving-license test. Journal of Safety Research 37(3): 285–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2006.02.005
Wilms, M.; Schilbach, L.; Pfeiffer, U.; Bente, G.; Fink, G. R.; Vogeley, K. 2010. It’s in your eyes—using gaze-contingent stimuli to create truly interactive paradigms for social cognitive and affective neuroscience. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience 5(1): 98–107.
Descargas
Publicado
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2025 Juan R. Loaiza
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 4.0.
Principia http://www.periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principia/index is licenced under a Creative Commons - Atribuição-Uso Não-Comercial-Não a obras derivadas 3.0 Unported.
Base available in www.periodicos.ufsc.br.
