GlobalShift

The various schools of eastern philosophy have much teach the Western world. Certainly eastern wisdom had some influence on the insights which have given William James (1842-1910) such long-lasting prominence. The greatly under-appreciated mental health physician Georg Groddeck (1866-1934) was familiar enough with eastern methods of thought, that he drew comparisons to Lao Tse. Yet it was with the work of Carl Jung (1875-1961) that psychology most fully incorporated the deep wisdoms of the eastern sages.

 

Since that time it seems that the lessons wrought by these associations have largely been lost by psychology. Had it not been, the work of University of Washington psychologist Dr. Tony Greenwald would not be received with such astonishment. Dr. Greenwald has developed an Implicit Association Test (IAT) to reveal what he calls level 2 thinking. Malcolm Gladwell, who apparently featured Dr. Greenwald’s work in his book Blink, refers to it as “thinking without thinking”.

 

According to Greenwald’s research, our first level of thinking is deliberative and contemplative. Level 1 thinking is employed in learning new motor tasks such as learning a new sport or how to drive. It’s what we use for unfamiliar language tasks such as trying to concisely summarize some psychology research, proofreading, or reading aloud (people who proofread will often read aloud to improve their effectiveness… I do neither of the two). It’s what we use for unfamiliar language tasks such as trying to concisely summarize some psychology research, proofreading, or reading aloud (people who proofread will often read aloud to improve their effectiveness… I do neither of the two). Level 1 thinking is also used in non-routine social interactions like figuring out tips, really trying to remember someone’s name, or having a thoughtful discussion.

 

Level 2 is a process of “thinking” which typically escapes our attention. It’s automatic and impulsive. Many, including Greenwald, refer to it as an “unconscious” process, but I believe this word is used inappropriately in the academic world so I want to avoid calling it that.

 

Level 2 thinking is responsible for familiar motor tasks like walking, tying your shoes, and even driving. Consider how often you drive while listening to the radio and don’t know how many stoplights or streets you passed. It’s used in familiar social interactions such as walking the halls of a school or telling a clerk to “have a nice day”. It operates at the level of finely tuned athletic skills.

 

The IAT is a measure of associative knowledge – links that cause one concept to activate another. Two concepts that are easily associated (”mother” with “babies” for example) will elicit similar responses even to exemplars of both (associate “diaper” with “female”). It reveals a pension for stereotyping in our thinking that seems unavoidable. We have racial, religious, sexual, gender, and many other inescapable prejudices and “gut” reactions which happen outside the radar of consciousness. Once these biases are established, the influence they yield can be powerful enough to dictate many of the “decisions” we think we make.

 

Tests were also conducted to measure our ability to rid ourselves of these prejudices. Since it operates outside of our awareness it seems beyond our control to consciously change it. Stereotyped associations are all around us and are ingested early and often; be it through family, culture, or the structure of our language. As Roger Shepard says in Mindsights “any knowledge or understanding of the illusion we may gain at the intellectual level remains virtually powerless to diminish the magnitude of the illusion.” Once the neurons have decided how they’re going to fire (thus initiating the kinds of decisions and reactions we commit), it seems our only recourse is to be aware of our bias and try to override our sub-conscious with the fully conscious.

Obviously this impacts how businesses employ, juries deliberate, and so on. Knowing this we can also be aware of how marketing or politics might exploit these built-in biases. While these concerns are important, I find the prospects of this research has much significance in linguistic fields. It can help us discover how language can distort our views of the world and how language itself affects our thinking.

You can test yourself here: https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/demo/selectatest.html

Tribe w/ unique language has unique worldview: http://globalshift.org/2009/11/language-sheds-light-on-human-nature/

Overview of Language studies: http://globalshift.org/2009/11/language-sheds-light-on-human-nature/