Facts Do Matter: A Reply to Bagenstos

27 Pages Posted: 8 Jan 2009

See all articles by Gregory Mitchell

Gregory Mitchell

University of Virginia School of Law

Philip E. Tetlock

University of California, Berkeley - Organizational Behavior & Industrial Relations Group; University of Pennsylvania - Management Department

Date Written: January 7, 2009

Abstract

This essay replies to critics of our earlier article reviewing efforts to apply psychological research on implicit bias to antidiscrimination law. We document that we do not hold the normative position ascribed to us by our leading critic, Professor Bagenstos, and that he misconstrued our scientific arguments and has accepted at face value empirically unsubstantiated claims about the power of millisecond-reaction-time measures to predict behavior in workplaces. Scholars, judges, regulators, and legislators who seek to combat the root causes of inequality effectively should attend carefully to the disputes surrounding the empirical assessment and theoretical modeling of implicit bias and consider the limits of existing data before using implicit bias research for theoretical, litigation or policy purposes.

Keywords: implicit bias, discrimination, antidiscrimination law

Suggested Citation

Mitchell, Gregory and Tetlock, Philip E., Facts Do Matter: A Reply to Bagenstos (January 7, 2009). Hofstra Law Review, Forthcoming, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1324367

Gregory Mitchell (Contact Author)

University of Virginia School of Law ( email )

580 Massie Road
Charlottesville, VA 22903
United States
434-243-4088 (Phone)

Philip E. Tetlock

University of California, Berkeley - Organizational Behavior & Industrial Relations Group ( email )

Berkeley, CA 94720
United States

University of Pennsylvania - Management Department ( email )

The Wharton School
Philadelphia, PA 19104-6370
United States

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
143
Abstract Views
1,288
rank
245,877
PlumX Metrics