D

M: So, what did you find through the simulation?
    W: We found that when we introduced only a three percent difference in the way that men and women were treated in this simulation, it resulted in a leadership tier of our corporation that was 87% men. So we found that it doesn’t actually take very much bias to create the kind of disparities that we see in the real world.
    M: Is there anything we can do to prevent it from happening?
    W: I found pretty straightforward ways that organizations can interrupt bias. Like standardizing criteria for hiring and promotions. In the field of medicine, where bias can have deadly consequences, doctors can use a simple checklist for care to ensure everyone is treated the same.
    M: So if a bias is unconscious, how can we as individuals recognize it and address it?
    W: One really important step is to develop awareness, awareness of what’s happening in our minds. Another thing that we can do is learn history. There’s something called the Marley Hypothesis, which was named after Bob Marley, who said, "If you don’t know your history, you don’t know where you’re coming from. " And the research shows that as people’s knowledge of the past increases, their ability to see present discrimination also increases.
    M: OK. Now, as we’re doing this interview in Minneapolis, the place where you live and where you wrote your book. And while you were writing the book, the notorious event about the black suspect killed by a white policeman during arrest happened practically in your backyard.  How do you see this event?
    W: When that happened, I was just finishing this manuscript. One that I can share with you is a program that was developed in South Los Angeles about 10 years ago.
    M: What was this program about?
    W: In this program, police were told that instead of having their goal be arrests, their goal was to create relationships with the community that they served. And in fact, what they were told is that what they should do is treating the community as though they were members of their own family. Over time, what happened was community members reported that police were starting to treat them with more dignity, with more respect. Something else that happened was that arrests went down.
    M: It sounds wonderful.
    W: Yes. Additionally, violent crime went down. And that’s a really important link because there’s a close connection between police legitimacy, how police actually treat people and their willingness to engage in law-abiding behavior.
    M: Is there a silver bullet here?
    W: Well. There’s no silver bullet. I mean, this is a problem that’s huge. It’s complicated. It’s going to take a lot of different approaches and it’s going to take really all of our collective efforts to solve. But the good news is, I mean, it’s a human invention. This is a human problem. And I think that if we are really dedicated to it and we use evidence-based approaches, we can really make an impact and make a dent in the problem.
    M: Ok, thank you, Jessica, for sharing with us your opinion on gender bias.
    W: I enjoy the talk too. Good bye.
    6. What was the finding of the woman’s simulation?
    7. According to the woman, what measures can be taken to interrupt bias?
    8. According to the woman, how can people increase their ability to recognize bias?
    9. What was the result of the police program in Los Angeles ten years ago?
    10. What is the woman’s attitude towards solving the problem of bias?