Rationale and Methods for Diversity Efforts in Medicine

[AR]

I am sure controlling for this was a goal but I doubt it could be done well.

That almost sounds like confirmation bias, but then I remembered that you're above that.

Let's try this another way. We've seen some other unrelated studies in this thread that no one is really refuting that clearly show implicit bias:

-Blinded auditions for orchestras
-"Whitening" resumes is some way (i.e. change name, remove other clues in resume)

So is your position that implicit bias is just non-existent (i.e. these studies are flawed) or that it does exist, just not in medicine?

[Lordosis]

That almost sounds like confirmation bias, but then I remembered that you're above that.

Let's try this another way. We've seen some other unrelated studies in this thread that no one is really refuting that clearly show implicit bias:

-Blinded auditions for orchestras
-"Whitening" resumes is some way (i.e. change name, remove other clues in resume)

So is your position that implicit bias is just non-existent (i.e. these studies are flawed) or that it does exist, just not in medicine?

If implicit bias exists does it have to apply to everyone in every circumstance?

Choosing a white guy over a black guy based on a name is not implicit bias. It is racist.

Either way I think we are talking past each other. I will read up on biases and make sure I am not missing something big. But I am tired of this back and forth.

[AR]

Choosing a white guy over a black guy based on a name is not implicit bias. It is racist.

Those two things are not mutually exclusive. The reason why we call it implicit is because most of the time when you ask the people who are doing the choosing, they will assure us (just like you did), that they are not racist and they are evaluating each resume objectively. And it's not like they're lying. If we hooked them up to a lie detector or had some other hypothetical way of seeing into their soul, we would find that they truly believe they are acting in an unbiased manner. Yet when you look at their choices a pattern of bias emerges.

[ObgynMD]

For sure, implicit bias exists. Also no doubt that our brains are poor at deciphering it (if I may bring this back, tangentially, to a financial perspective and mention the work of behavioral economists such as Kahneman). But I always find it an interesting--and amusing--state of affairs when it is brought up in the same discussion of explicit bias.

Again, not saying that grades/scores are needed to be a good doctor. But how do we determine if someone "deserves" that spot in medical school. And if it isn't numbers, then what's next? Shall we ignore someone's qualitative achievements as well, marking that off as a byproduct of systemic racism?

Deep issues, no doubt.

Agreed that implicit bias exists. This online test from Harvard can give one an idea of ‘how bad’ their implicit bias is. It was certainly humbling when I took it.

https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/takeatouchtest.html

[AR]

Agreed that implicit bias exists. This online test from Harvard can give one an idea of ‘how bad’ their implicit bias is. It was certainly humbling when I took it.

https://implicit.harvard.edu/implici...touchtest.html

Just took one and apparently no bias on that one. Maybe I'm more like Lordosis than I think!

[bovie]

Among the most convincing studies on implicit bias are those resume studies where they send out identical resumes but just change names so some are sound white and others sound black. Spoiler alert: Despite identical resumes, they don't get the same results.

Alternative take: Smart parents, knowing this, would give their kids normal names, instead of taking the never-been-done-before route.

The world is what it is. It’s not fair, it’s not perfect, and never will be.

You have the opportunity to either help or hurt your child with something as simple as a name. The choice is yours, and so are the consequences.

[Turf Doc]

Maybe its just because of the ages of the people who i know who are having kids, but does anyone else think that kids have really really silly names nowadays? And in my social circle they're all white... so either these kids are going to have issues growing up or future medical school classes are going to be filled with a bunch of Braydins and Jaxtons

[AR]

Alternative take: Smart parents, knowing this, would give their kids normal names, instead of taking the never-been-done-before route.

The world is what it is. It’s not fair, it’s not perfect, and never will be.

You have the opportunity to either help or hurt your child with something as simple as a name. The choice is yours, and so are the consequences.

"normal names"?

Nope. No bias here whatsoever.

Mohammed is probably one of the most normal names in the world. This may be a shock to you, but it's definitely been done before.

[Hatton]

I have read this thread and in the spirit of Christmas decided not to shut it down. It is obvious that we all have some type of bias. EVERY single one of us. All doctors should strive to be as unbiased as possible. Trying to learn about and appreciate other races and cultures to me was a positive aspect of a medical practice. I am older than most of you. I remember when schools desegregated in Alabama because I was in elementary school when this occurred. I have seen and heard things that none of you ever will. I was also part of the big first wave of female medical students so I experienced first hand all the anti-woman comments in the OR. I say all this to give you an optimistic message. Things both for minorities and women have vastly improved in my life time. I remain hopeful that we can all overcome our individual biases and provide some really good healthcare.

[Tim]

Alternative take: Smart parents, knowing this, would give their kids normal names, instead of taking the never-been-done-before route.

The world is what it is. It’s not fair, it’s not perfect, and never will be.

You have the opportunity to either help or hurt your child with something as simple as a name. The choice is yours, and so are the consequences.

https://youtu.be/YJ3tFPTUhAE

Definitely bias exists. Inputs of quantitative and qualitative data and subjective information leads to a decision and the related results and consequences.
Bias leads to suboptimal decisions. Missed opportunities and poor results.

• Med school admissions: the med school doesn’t get the best possible candidates.
• Orchestra auditions: the orchestra chooses lower quality musicians.

The primary responsibility in the decision is to yourself and the organization. Making the optimal choice by eliminating as much bias as possible.
The difference is the focus. Eliminating your own bias is beneficial to you.
Eliminating someone else’s bias (for whatever rationalization) is actually superfluous. Gives you and your organization absolutely no benefit.

“A Boy Named Sue” plays on biases from a long time ago, 1969. A lot of social issues the too. Names create potential biases. If you make a subjective judgment based on a name, you relied on non-actionable information.
That doesn’t make you a bad person, it does make the consequences of less favorable results of your decision your responsibility as well.

[bovie]

Mohammed is probably one of the most normal names in the world. This may be a shock to you, but it's definitely been done before.

Point missed. I’m talking about normal for the person across the table, and for the environment that the table itself is located in, not normal for the person giving or holding the name.

You have no idea what would or would not be a shock to me. Again, and this certainly should not be a shock to you or anyone else, but people are free to give kids whatever names they want; however, that is a choice and it absolutely has consequences.

Life is a series of choices my friend, simple as that, and they all come with consequences—right from the very beginning.

[bovie]

“A Boy Named Sue” plays on biases from a long time ago, 1969.

“How do you do?!”

One of his best, for sure.

[bovie]

Mohammed is probably one of the most normal names in the world.

What about McLovin?

[AR]

Point missed. I’m talking about normal for the person across the table, .

You're actually not. Or you don't know what normal means. Or you're not familiar with the studies.

A name like Mohammed or Jamal or even Deshawn is normal by any reasonable definition. Let's look at your own description of a name that is not normal:

taking the never-been-done-before route

Every white person (racist or not) has heard of them more than once. However, based on these studies they don't "sound white" (although I'm sure there are some white Mohammeds). And the resume studies show that such people would get discriminated against.

The problem (according to the studies) is not that the names aren't "normal". It's that they don't "sound white".

So if you had said "white-sounding" instead of "normal", your post would have made sense. It's a depressing way to have to act , but it would be consistent with the data.

Instead you thought the two were equivalent, which is basically telling on yourself and demonstrates the very implicit bias we're talking about.

[AR]

What about McLovin?

I'm moving to McLovin to the top of the pile. I don't care if that's discriminatory or not.