IMPLICIT BIAS AND NORMATIVE SCIENCE
Deficit approaches to left-handedness and neurodivergence in scientific papers
Focus on critical reading skills
Objectives:
· to recognise implicit bias in academic texts
· to reflect on normative science and its impact
· to discuss how OS values and participatory research could promote discussions on epistemological bias and influence existing narratives.
Before you start:
Are you or do you know anyone who is left-handed? What attitudes to left-handedness were there in the past?
Are you familiar with the neurodiversity paradigm?
What is a neurotype?
Did you know that the word “sinister” comes from Latin “left”? This is likely caused by the dominance of right-handedness in human population and bias against the left-handed minority in the past.
Activity 1 Critical reading - identifying implicit bias
Look below at fragments of this article published in The North American Review in 1903, which discusses left-handedness. What can you say about the beliefs the author held about the following groups of people:
men /women / white people / people of races other than white / children / left-handed individuals / individuals suffering from mental health problems / individuals with criminal record?
open the activity in a new window
TIP: click on the question marks on both sides of the text to see hints or click on the button above to see the activity in full screen.
Click on the button below to see statements about the text. Are they true or false? Click on each statement to reveal the answer.
decide if the statements are true
Participatory research
Do you think anyone left-handed, non-white or female has been involved in the production of Lambroso’s paper or the design of the researcher’s studies?
Do you think this paper would be well-received today?
If you have a moment, research the history of a condition that was referred to by doctors and scientists as “female hysteria”. Raulin, a French physician who studied “the condition” claimed that while it is not impossible for a man to contract hysteria, it is mainly women who suffer from it because of their “lazy and irritable nature”.
What are the dangers of conducting research into communities, cultures, or groups of people that we do not identify with?
Can you think of claims that have been made about different groups of people based on conclusions from studies that did not involve members of the researched communities in the design of the studies? Can you think of reasons why science might pathologe minorities? Think about group psychology - ingroup/outgroup effect (Billig & Tajfel, 1973), and social identity theory (Tajfel 1979) or categorising the world into “them” and “us”.
Participatory research (PR) encompasses research designs, methods, and frameworks that use systematic inquiry in direct collaboration with those affected by an issue being studied for the purpose of action or change (Vaughn and Jacquez, 2020).
How can focusing on participatory research contribute to social justice within the Open Scholarship framework?
Activity 2 Deficit approaches and pathologising minorities
In the 70s, Bakan and colleagues have published a number of highly influential articles that pathologised left handedness. Their claims, which were later revoked (e.g., Bishop, 1990), included that left handedness results from birth trauma and a minor brain damage. Below are some of their papers that discussed the ideas. Discuss how implicit bias may influence methods that are applied by scientists and how this could skew results.
- Bakan P (1971) Handedness and Birth Order. Nature 229(195). https://doi.org/10.1038/229195a0
- Bakan P (1975) Are left-handers brain damaged? New Scientist 67(1): 200–202.
- Bakan P, Dibb G, Reed P (1973) Handedness and birth stress. Neuropsychologia 11(3): 363–366.
What effect, do you think, this had on the public perceptions of left handedness in the 70s and 80s? And what impact did it have on the population? And the progress of research in the area?
Can you think of other areas where implicit bias perpetuated in language (has) had a detrimental impact on public perceptions? What groups of people might have been affected?
Activity 3 Neurodiversity paradigm: definition and introduction
Click on the link below, which will open the following publication: Azevedo, F., Middleton, S., Mai Phan, J., Kapp, S. K., Gourdon-Kanhukamwe, A., Iley, B., Elsherif, M. M., & Shaw, J. J. (2022). Navigating academia as neurodivergent researchers: promoting neurodiversity within open scholarship. Observer. Find a definition of neurodiversity and neurodivergence, then look at the tweet below and the following questions.
Can you explain what neurodiversity is in your own words?
What is the difference between neurodiversity and neurodivergence?
What does it mean that an individual is neurodivergent?
Look at the wheel from the group’s Twitter thread and either discuss it in pairs or take time to familiarise yourself with it on your own. Are you included in the wheel?
Are non-neurotypical brains presented as deficient in the article and the tweet? In other words, does the framing pathologise neurodivergence?
Skim through the article and find a definition of neurodiversity
#Neurodiversity includes neurotypical & neurodivergent people. A person is neurodivergent when their neurology diverges from the neurological majority. Examples of neurodivergence: dyslexia, dyspraxia, OCD/C, personality disorders/conditions, autism, ADHD/C, Tourette’s and tics. pic.twitter.com/swgenhJ4i1
— FORRT @FORRT@mastodon.social (@FORRTproject) July 14, 2022
Activity 4 Neurodiversity paradigm: spotting biased language
Now choose one of the two articles below and skim the abstract and intro. Discuss or reflect on the questions below.
Article 1:* Zwaigenbaum, L., & Penner, M. (2018). Autism spectrum disorder: advances in diagnosis and evaluation. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 361. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26959693
Article 2:* Faras, H., Al Ateeqi, N., & Tidmarsh, L. (2010). Autism spectrum disorders. Annals of Saudi medicine, 30(4), 295–300. https://doi.org/10.4103/0256-4947.65261
_How is neurodivergence viewed by the authors? How do the authors see individuals with neurotypes other than neurotypical?
Are neurotypical and neurodivergent populations perceived equally by the authors or is one of the groups given as a model and the other compared to it by looking at their deficits?
Can you see any examples of pathologising language? Underline fragments that suggest that neurodivergent brains are deficient rather than different.
Activity 5 Ableist Language in scientific publications
Look at some examples of language taken from these and other articles published in the last 20 years in influential journals and discuss the language use. Can you identify the implicit bias? What does it suggest about the perception of different neurotypes held by the authors?
Instructions: drag and drop the fields to match the language found in papers (orange pin) and the corresponding comment (blue pin). Once you find a pair, put the fields side by side. Once you complete the task, check by clicking the icon in the bottom right corner. For full screen view, click on the square in the top right corner.
- What is the assumed norm that autistic individuals are often measured against? Is this explicitly stated?
- Norms are developed based on observations gathered through research. Where is most research conducted? Which populations is it mainly conducted on? Which groups may be underrepresented or purposefully excluded from studies? How does this affect norms?
- Normative science is pervasive in many fields. Pay attention to assumed standards and implicit bias in articles you read. How can we become more aware of our own biases?
- Is it possible for early researchers avoid unquestioned acceptance of paradigms, terminology and methods?
Post your reflection below.
Posts are moderated so they may not appear immediately._
_Reading:
(to be be done before or after the lesson)
Bottema-Beutel, K., Kapp, S. K., Lester, J. N., Sasson, N. J., & Hand, B. N. (2021). Avoiding Ableist Language: Suggestions for Autism Researchers. Autism in adulthood : challenges and management, 3(1), 18–29. https://doi.org/10.1089/aut.2020.0014
Flavio Azevedo, Sara Middleton, Jenny Mai Phan, Steven Kapp, Amélie Gourdon-Kanhukamwe, Bethan Iley, Mahmoud Elsherif, & John J. Shaw. Navigating Academia as Neurodivergent Researchers: Promoting Neurodiversity Within Open Scholarship. APS Observer October 2022
Elsherif, M. M., Middleton, S. L., Phan, J. M., Azevedo, F., Iley, B. J., Grose-Hodge, M., … Dokovova, M. (2022, June 20). Bridging Neurodiversity and Open Scholarship: How Shared Values Can Guide Best Practices for Research Integrity, Social Justice, and Principled Education._