Category: Bias

It is natural

It is unintended

It can affect decisions

It can be mitigated

The surgeons dilemma, multiple mentions of man, boy his, all male orientated, and then a surgeon which historically has been a male dominated profession, all of which lead the mind away from the answer of the surgeon being the boy’s mother.

All the above point towards our brain making quick on the spot judgements automatically. Being able to mitigate these unconscious biases will enable us to have a more inclusive workforce / workplace, and therefore a more diverse team, with a better spread of views and characteristics.

Different types of Unconscious Biases in the workplace, taken from original article Unconscious Bias

Affinity Bias

Also known as similarity bias, is the tendency to connect with others who share similar interests, experiences and backgrounds. When hiring or interviewing someone who you know has similar interests you could be favouring them because you think they will automatically get on with the existing team, rather than add elements to enhance the existing team. Bringing in people who are different to what you already have can add new positive elements to the team, and therefore increase diversity in the workforce.

To avoid this you could make notes of the similarities you share with the candidate so you can differentiate between attributes that could cloud your own judgement and which attributes can be a ‘culture add’ rather than a ‘culture fit’.

Confirmation Bias

The inclination to draw conclusions based on personal desires, beliefs or prejudices rather than on unbiased merit. Initial eros when reading CV’s of individuals info like their name, where they are from, where they were educated. These opinions can follow on to the interview process meaning you ask questions in the interview that lead it in the direction already predetermined.

To avoid this you should ask standardised skill based questions which enable fair chances to each candidate.

Attribution Bias

Where you try to make sense of or judge based on prior observations or interactions you have had with them. People are quick to make assessments before knowing the full story, maybe determining a candidate unfit for a position because of an occurrence in the interview or on the CV.

To avoid this, rather than assume, ask the question. If they arrive late, dont assume its bad punctuality, it may have a genuine reason which they can explain. People in interviews may be nervous, so diving deeper in the interview can benefit.

Conformity Bias

Where the people responsible for employing candidates get together and review CV’s before the interviews, conformity bias can cause individuals to sway their opinion to match the opinion of the majority. The problem with this is the opinion of the majority is not always right, and then you could miss out on an excellent candidate because individual opinions become muddled.

To avoid this happening, the hiring team can write down and submit their own opinions on candidates immediately after the interviews, and then have the team as a whole come together and review what they all wrote down, for some impartial opinions.

The Halo Effect

The tendency to place someone on a pedestal after learning something impressive about them. This can come into effect at any stage of the recruitment process. We could see a candidate that has worked for an impressive company previously, or attended highly regarded educational facilities, but we should not judge candidates on the schools attended or previous employers names.

We at CCF currently seem to have this in anyone who works for our main competition SIG PLC. To avoid this when seeing one candidate with the stand out attribute, also consciously consider the others who have relevant attributes but not the one stand out one, and accept that their opportunities may not have been in line with the candidate with the glittery one.

The Horns Effect

The tendency to view someone negatively after learning something negative about them. Hiring teams can try to weed out candidates based on a trait that is averse to a team’s preferences. It could be something trivial like the company they currently work for you dislike. To avoid this, when you do get that gut feeling, examine why, and what is causing the feeling, it may be that it is unreasonable and you should reconsider it.

Contrast Effect

This is where you compare two or more things you have come into contact with, either simultaneously or one after another, causing you to exaggerate the performance of one in contrast to the other. An exceptional interview may make the next one seem terrible.

To avoid this we should structure interviews and applications where we can compare the answers inline with apples vs apples, rather than apples vs pears.

Gender Bias

This is the tendency to prefer one gender over another. Both men and women tend to prefer to employ men.

To avoid this you could set up blind screening, taking out names and gender identifiable info from the candidates submissions and then work on skills and merit. Make sure you set diversity hiring goals.

Ageism

This is the tendency to have negative feelings towards persons because of their age. This affects older employees for obvious reasons, employers seem to value young talent.

To avoid this we should train our teams on the value of experience and to dispel untruths about ageism. We have to follow the in place guidelines from the group to keep age diversity in our minds when hiring.

Name Bias

The tendency for hiring preference to be given to people with certain types of name, specifically anglo sounding names. People are assuming the name of the person means that person fits into a predetermined group, which can be completely wrong.

Ways to avoid this are to omit the personal information from the candidates application, therefore making decisions on merit and skills not names etc.

Beauty Bias

Where people who are given preference because of their perceived good looks or beauty. It may be because people who are in this category are generally perceived as socially happy and more successful.

To avoid this you could arrange initial interviews to be over the telephone, therefore no eyes on contact is required.

Gender is an inevitable thing that people cannot change about themselves making it impossible to escape the cruel injustices that we face on a daily basis. Gender bias and discrimination exist all over the world not only United states. In the novel, The Handmaid’s Tale by Margaret Atwood, she writes about a dystopian society called the Gilead in which women are deprived of their rights and live under male domination simply because they are women, and therefore are only meant for a position of get no opportunity or powerless. Somewhat, The Play The Piano lesson by August Wilson, is a play which focuses on the lives of the Charles family who are African American and their heirloom a family’s history under slavery. The main them in this movie is conflict about the piano between brother and sister. Boy Willie wants to sell the piano to be able to buy a land where his ancestors were slaves, but Bernice insists on keeping the piano in memory of their great grandmother and son whose faces carved on the piano. Therefore, gender bias and discrimination refer to the socially constructed preference for one gender over the other. As a social problem, gender bias can appear in various contexts such as, the educational system, the work environment and economy, families, and religious. However, I focused mostly on gender bias and discrimination injustice because research shows that gender bias and discrimination disproportionately affects women, mainly because of the patriarchal system embedded within the social structure of a given society. Likewise, the cultural and social obstacles have impacted and shaped the characters in The Handmaid’s Tale and the play The piano lesson through the social injustices of gender bias and discrimination.

Gender bias has consequences certain social roles in society, depending upon who fills the role. Such as, female dominant roles as nursing, childcare, or stay at home parenting are considered less masculine and are therefore viewed as less valuable in society. In the novel, The Handmaid’s Tale the society views women as less than man and society treated them powerless. In the society of Gilead men being equated with roles of power and women with domestic servitude. Therefore, the consequence of gender bias depicted within Gilead, where men are named according to military rankings and women are used solely as tools of reproduction. According to the novel, “Maybe none of this is about control. Maybe it isn’t really about who can own whom, who can do what to whom and get away with it, even as far as death. Maybe it isn’t about who can sit and who has to kneel or stand or lie down, legs spread open. Maybe it’s about who can do what to whom and be forgiven for it. Never tell me it amounts to the same thing” (Atwood 135). In the society of Gilead that men are hold the all power not the women because they think women are useless, they cannot able to hold any power. Likewise, “Where the missing Girl” of Explorations in Economic History explained the same issue the consequences of gender bias impacted in European societies that parents seem to have treated their sons and daughters differently throughout childhood. Research found that in 19th century, the livings standards of girls, relative to boys, seem to have deteriorated when they grew up, especially in economic conditions. In domestic chores also probably led to greater deprivation for older girls. Also, research shows that Spain in 19th century women faced sever discrimination in many amounts by legally subordinated to their fathers and husbands, women were expected to remain within the domestic province. There is gender bias has also involved other kinds of mistreatment towards girls. According to the research, “A glimpse of the existing son preference can be discerned from a popular proverb: ‘Wish I had a boy, even if he becomes a thief” (Beltran, Francisco, and Domingo 3). This such a male oriented society where male get preferential attention than female. Additionally, it appears that boys were breastfed longer than girls and that might have resulted in a greater likelihood of girls falling ill. The influence of family intervention favoring male infants have more important. Furthermore, gender bias can affect females in their daily life. The resource Women’s Inheritance, Household Allocation, and Gender Bias shows that how families are avoided giving their rightful land. This is because they bring the issue is that they saved this land for dowry payments when daughter get marry or an investment in education. But the main issue is when parents realize that their children’s education quality is low or poor then they take their sons out of school to train them in farming or nonfarming related skills, thereby increasing their future earnings potential. On the other hands, parents keep their daughters at home to doing house chores or train them for house parenting because parents believed that daughters are able to do house chores and sons for outside work. Also, in India the ancestral property, passed down through generations, could only be inherited by sons (Bose and Das). Additionally, resource also found that in Indian parents has to preferred with money for their daughter because dowry payments when daughter are close to marriageable age. Therefore, gender bias is a globally societal problem which can impacts against females. Another research “Gender bias and the female brain drain” shows that gender differences in the cause and consequences of female brain drain. They found that bias in a significant portion of the gap between male and female high frequency emigration rate. This is because, they observe outcomes of gender bias such as female get less opportunity in economic than man even if women are highly skilled or high educated than man because of they are women. Additionally, they show that the host countries have access to legal work status female immigrants than male immigrants because family visas that have allowed more women to migrate also forbid them from working, leaving them to seek informal work in less-skilled occupations. Whereas, eliminate these consequences family visas would allow them to find better job as their ability, as well as increase incentives for families to invest in educating their daughters (Bang and Mitra). Indeed, in somehow all societies women have impacted social injustice through confronted gender bias which is make them differences.

Gender discrimination is still existing around us. Gender discrimination are generally discussed as pertaining to women. There’s an unfair imbalance between males and females. Males have much more superiority than females. Males are prone to be higher than females. There’s an inequality between genders because males have a better opportunity in everyday life. It affects society negatively because it causes an imbalance for females, making them seem like they don’t have the ability to do what males can do. However, the gender prejudice viewed as in the play The Piano Lesson by August Wilson shows in his movie that how a single mother a character named Bernice faced gender prejudice because the society tell her she cannot be independent unless she has a man by her side. She is thirty-five-year-old women who still in mourning for husband, Crawley. At this point she refuse to re marry because still she constantly thinks about her husband. Therefore, she is running for her family and she nicely take care and support her daughter, but the society said she is not because as a woman cannot able to independent by herself. According to Bernice “You trying to tell me a woman can’t nothing without a man. But you alright, huh? You can just walk out of here without me- without a woman- and still be a man. That’s alright. Aren’t nobody going to ask you, “Avery, who you got to love you?” That’s alright for you” (Wilson CH. 25). At this point the character female faced gender discrimination that society make her dependent by men. Therefore, gender discrimination can affect a person physically and mentally. Resource shows that “perceived gender discrimination is related to women’s poor mental health outcomes” (Kim and Hansol 1). They also said Gender discrimination is one of the social stressors of being a woman that negatively impacts mental health. Such as higher lifetime prevalence of anxiety and mood disorders. Resource tested a moderated mediational model involving married Korean working women’s perceived gender discrimination, self-esteem, believed just world, and depression. This study shows two hypotheses. First, married working women who perceive higher levels of identified discrimination reported lower self-esteem was significant only when the level of believed just world -self was high. Second, self-esteem meditated the relationship between perceived gender discrimination and depression at high levels of believed just world. The Women’s Studies International Forum states that, “In particular, the finding regarding the indirect effects of self-esteem provides support to racism-related stress model in that stress related to perceived discrimination has negative effects on mental health outcomes through low self-esteem” (Kim and Hansol 5). Although research has found that the harmful effects of felt discrimination on psychological well-being and low self-esteem as a negative consequence of identified discrimination. However, in the face discrimination, it would be tough to maintain high self-esteem. This is because of sociometer, which emphasizes the social nature of self-esteem or an internal gage of others’ evaluation of the individual. For example, gender discrimination could damage female’s self-esteem when conceptualized as social devaluation and disapproval messages against females. Society thinks males are capable to do things in everyday life than females which is negatively affects females lives. Atwood spoke in her novel that in the society of Gilead women are forbidden from their self-restricted such as women can not hold job, bank account, own property even their identities also, reading and writing. The society cracked down on women’s rights because they think women can not do outside work and they believed that women are only able to do house chores and produce children. However, they treated them unequal way or make them useless by break their rights. In the society all people should treated by equally, but the Gilead is treated by differently. The narrative state that, “It’s strange now, to think about having job. It’s a funny word. It’s a job for a man” (Atwood 173). She also states that, when her bank account frozen “But I’ve got two thousand dollars in the bank, I said, as if my own account was the only one that mattered. Women can’t hold property anymore, she said. It’s a new law” (Atwood 178). In this situation the narrative remembers losing her job and how her debit card suddenly stopped working. All of a sudden, women were second class citizens. However, when the take over control the Gilead society all women eliminate from their opportunity. At that time does not matter if these women are highly educated or not in this society. Same issue come up with a research that “Gender bias and the availability of business loans”. Journal of Business Venturing experiment shows that how women are confronted gender bias when two experiment were carried out significant differences in response to female and male applicants were observed in both experiments. In experiment one both sexes were equally likely to obtain a loan, but education was considered a more important factor for the female applicant than for the male. In experiment two the female applicant was less likely to obtain a loan than the male applicant. The author of this journal said, “The results support the widely held perception that women can experience gender discrimination when seeking start-up capital” (Fay and Lesley). Indeed, the social construction of differential gender roles in western culture such it is more likely that discrimination in unconscious. Therefore, In both position women are confronted in gender discrimination that impacted them in their career because in the novel the society crackdown their rights by eliminate them from the job position and froze their own bank account likewise the experiments women are obtain a loan even if they are more educated than male. In both societies view as women are less than men which is make differences between males and females. Furthermore, in the novel authors shows that women are not only less than men, but they also categorized all women based on their societal standard.

Lastly, in the novel and the play shows that how women are confronted gender bias and discrimination which can impacts both society’s women. At this point how society sees women by their gender and define them who are they and how they are treated in both societies even they don’t have any choice or any rights. Based on the discussions that the social injustice and obstacle have impacted through gender bias and prejudice where women are object to lower class in all around the world. Which is associated with low self-esteem and negatively impacted women career. These social obstacles are a global crisis and people cannot control their gender and this is an unchangeable.

Work Cited

1. Atwood, Margaret. The Handmaid’s Tale. N.p.: Anchor, a Division of Penguin Random House LLC, 2017. Print
2. Bang, James T, and Aniruddha Mitra. “Gender Bias and the Female Brain Drain.” Applied Economics Letters, vol. 18, no. 9, 2011, pp. 829–833.
3. Beltran Tapia, Francisco J, and Domingo Gallego-Martínez. “Where Are the Missing Girls? Gender Discrimination in 19th-Century Spain.” Explorations in Economic History, vol. 66, 2017, pp. 117–126.
4. Bose, Nayana, and Das, Shreya see. “Women’s Inheritance Rights, Household Allocation, and Gender Bias.” The American Economic Review, vol. 107, no. 5, 2017, pp. 150–153.
5. Fay, Michael, and Lesley Williams. ‘Gender bias and the availability of business loans.’ Journal of Business Venturing8.4 (1993): 363-376.
6. Khera, Rohan, et al. ‘Gender bias in childcare and child health: global patterns.’ Archives of disease in childhood 99.4 (2014): 369-374.
7. Kim, Eunha, and Hansol Park. “Perceived Gender Discrimination, Belief in a Just World, Self- Esteem, and Depression in Korean Working Women: A Moderated Mediation Model.” Women’s Studies International Forum, vol. 69, 2018, pp. 143–150.
8. Wilson, August. The Piano Lesson. Plume, 1990.

Life is a rollercoaster, oftentimes no one knows what is next for them. Numerous characters in To kill a Mockingbird feel the same. Even though it may not be as big of a problem for some, we need to become aware of our implicit biases and stereotypes. In Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird and in Harvard’s Project Implicit, everyone demonstrates implicit biases as well as stereotyping but it is important to acknowledge and face them to create stronger and better relationships.

Jem has an implicit bias towards gender in To Kill a Mockingbird. In chapter four, Jem keeps criticizing Scout for her “girl-like behavior.” When Scout is in the tire and rolls into Boo Radley’s yard, she is afraid to go get it, so Jem has to instead. When he got back, he stated, “I swear, Scout, sometimes you act so much like a girl it’s mortifyin.”( Lee 50) This made Scout feel like acting like a girl is a bad thing, which is an implicit bias because Jem is not fully matured and doesn’t know how that may affect Scout and because scout does not follow gender roles. She gets hurt when others around her attempt to influence her. People look at women to have more feminine behavior because that is the social “norm.” When she was the opposite of what was considered normal, people thought they needed her to change because that is all they know and believe was right. This is crucial because if Jem was aware and knowledgeable of this bias he could have had a better relationship with Scout and see her where she is at, a tomboy, instead of stereotyping.

I took a test recently, evaluating potential bias in regards to the disabled, abled and gender-career common areas of potential bias. It was surprising to me that in all areas tested, my results appeared not biased. My peers have similar results because we don’t favor one more than the other. This connects to Jem and Scout because when I was their age I was more biased towards these subjects. As I matured, I became more knowledgeable and less biased because of the information I learned and with that, it changed my perspective to be unbiased. Furthermore, I connect with Jem because he is unknowing and the way he grows up, like most people, only knowing what his family believed and sense this was different. This was new territory for them just like when I was younger and still am, I was learning new things that were biases that would change for the better as I matured and got older and became able to see things from other people’s perspectives. This caused me to become more empathetic and able to put myself in other people’s shoes, which would allow me to not be one-sided towards any topics. This is important and still relevant in today’s society because if we can see things from another person’s perspective then we will be less one-sided to complex issues. This also allows me to have deeper connections and relationships with other people that I may not have similar viewpoints with.

Aunt Alexandra had an attitude and stereotypes Scout for being a tomboy and Aunt Alexandra’s vision of scout involves “playing with small stoves, tea sets, and wearing the Add-A-Pearl necklace she gave me when I was born furthermore I should be a ray of sunshine in my father’s lonely life.”(Lee 74) Aunt Alexandra clearly thinks this is how a girl should be and what she should do, thus implicitly stereotyping her and making scout follow gender norms. This is of great importance because if Aunt Alexandra could be more understanding and intentional with her relationship with Scout she could strengthen that relationship. This is important no matter who the relationship is with because in order to create those stronger relationships we need to face and address our implicit bias. If were able to accomplish this we will have better relationships with other people and we can learn to be more understanding to others which would allow for less issues and conflicts and a society that can deal with these issues all while having those strong and healthy relations

In conclusion, we all have biases whether we know it or not. Therefore, besides becoming aware, learning to understand and overcome our biases in order to have better, stronger as well as deeper relationships with other people. In order to do this we need to meet people where they are at, such as Jem accepting Scout where she is and for who she is and being understanding of our stereotypes rather than trying to make others understand our own view of things. If we start doing this our relations with others would prove creating a stronger connection and a less bias society.

Identifying Bias

Andrew Banasiewicz had written in his 2019 published book, Evidence-based Decision-making, it is well known that the human brain has essentially the same basic structure as other mammalian brains; yet, somehow, it gives rise to capabilities that enable humans to do so much more. In addition, although manifestations of those capabilities span the spectrum ranging from tragic to triumphant, the intellectual prowess that emanates from the roughly three pounds of squidgy matter that is the human brain seem limitless (Banasiewicz, 2019).

Human brain is the brilliant organ yet; brilliance is not supremacy. At times when brain is assigned to make quick decisions for certain situations, it utilizes sense making heuristics, or alternate routes, creating what is normally alluded to as instinct. Such instincts can often ends feel exceptionally normal, and extremely ‘right’, however can at last end up being unjustifiable or biased (Banasiewicz, 2019).

Being biased is somewhat disproportionate: a biased individual favours one side or issue over another. While biased can just mean having an inclination for one thing over another, it additionally is synonymous with ‘prejudiced,’ and that prejudiced can be taken to the extreme. We all might want to feel that we can settle on target and levelheaded choices constantly. Yet, the truth of the matter is, that in specific situations, nearly anybody can wind up being biased in their reasoning and decision making.

Research in this area has shown that the decision making is very much effected by our human values such as emotion. A genuine case of a bias is when feelings are included. However, this bias that is seen in decision making has been tried to be corrected. Experts and analysts have tried to correct it by using modeling but they have faced the very same problem while trying to correct it because if the input for the modeling is biased then it surely effects the output and all the results based on it. But, their efforts paid off as they found out the causes of the biasness they were facing in their process. They found out that the human mind tended to manipulate the decisions to match their liking which is called cognitive bias. Once in a while are great choices made when we are furious and it’s difficult to be reasonable whenever the circumstance includes a friend or family member and this is called a motivational bias. Involvement of a family member or a friend while making decisions can consciously or even sub-consciously effects a humans’ decision.

Cognitive Bias

Cognitive bias as discussed earlier is an efficient inconsistency between the ‘right’ answer in a judgmental errand, given by a formal regulating rule, and the decision maker’s or expert’s genuine response to such an undertaking (Montibeller & Winterfeldt, 2015). Cognitive biases are often a consequence of human mind’s endeavor to simplify information processing. It usually shows itself in generally able people coming to truthfully unwarranted or logically irrational conclusions as a result of elements, for example, peer impact, the attractive quality of alternatives under consideration, individual motivations, emotions, fancy affiliations and limits on mind’s ability to process information (Banasiewicz, 2019).

Cognitive bias can be brought about by various things, but it is these mental short-cuts or easy routes, known as heuristics, that frequently plays a major contributing role. While they can frequently be surprisingly accurate, they can also lead to errors in thinking. For example: a person is walking down a dark alley and notices a dark shadow following him all the way, a cognitive bias may make the person to assume that the shadow following him is a mugger and he needs to get away from the alley as fast as possible. But the shadow might just be of a flag moving due to the wind rather than a mugger following him (Cherry, 2019).

Cognitive bias is a deliberate mistake in imagining that influences the choices and decisions that individuals make. A portion of these biases are identified with memory. The manner in which a person recollects an occasion might be biased for various reasons and that thus can lead to biased thinking and decision making. Other cognitive biases may be identified with issues with attention. Since attention is a limited asset, individuals must be particular about what they focus on in their general surroundings. Because of this, unpretentious biases can sneak in and impact the manner in which a person sees and considers the world (Cherry, 2019). Cognitive Biases:

• Anchoring –tendency to overweight the first information received.
• Confirmation Bias–placing more emphasis on information that supports currently held views.
• Framing–tendency to respond based on how information is presented.
• Hindsight Bias–tendency to see things as more predictable than they really are.
• Status Quo Bias–inclination to prefer the current state of affairs.
• Sunk-cost Bias–tendency to continue with a course of action in an attempt to recoup losses, despite rationale to do otherwise.

Das and Teng have classified cognitive bias in the Journal of Management Studies published in 1999 into four categories which are 1. Prior hypothesis and focusing on limited targets 2. Exposure to limited alternatives 3. Insensitivity to outcome probabilities 4. Illusion of manageability.

Different authors have given different explanations regarding the types of cognitive biases. However, the information below comprises of the common definitions proposed by them.

a. Confirmation Bias

Researches have demonstrated that decision makers are probably going to bring their formerly framed beliefs or theories into basic decision making circumstances (Das & Teng, 1999). For example: a firm has to hire a company from a list of companies which manufacture bathroom tiles. Among the list of the companies, there is such a company (Say ‘X’) which used to manufacture tiles that were very poor in quality but at present, X has set their standards high and are manufacturing the tiles with best quality. But, the decision maker beliefs that X does not provide qualitative good and selects some other company which is not as good as X.

At the same time, managers or the decision makers have been found to focus on selected targets, rather than on broad objectives. Their attention centers around those key objectives that intrigue to their interests, and accordingly they tend to ignore information about other beneficial objectives. Summing up, bringing earlier theories and hypothesis to decision making and attention regarding chosen targets together results in a biased view of the environment and the current issue. (Das & Teng, 1999).

So, some of the techniques that can be used to overcome this bias is to set up meetings among the decision makers to keep the information they get up to date. A research team can be brought to existence to support them with the latest information they might need in the decision making process. Key decision makers should be given trainings to broaden their mind so that they don’t just stick with the factors that are in their interests.

b. Anchoring bias

Decision makers lean themselves to a single set of information that can accomplish an objective while simultaneously ignoring other options and use instinct to enhance rational analysis. Subsequently, instead of attempting to indicate every pertinent worth and objectives and produce various elective approaches, decision makers focus on the anchoring information that results in them making inadequate choices. For example: a person goes to buy a car and sets his mind to buy one by just looking at the car’s exterior and completely ignoring internal features. Here, the person going to buy the car overlooks the interior because he is anchored to the external looks of the machine.

Debiasing this type of bias can be prevented by getting advices from different specialists who uses varying anchors to make a decision as this can include wide range of information in better detail. Another much simpler process of debiasing would be to explain the neglected information to the decision maker. Lastly, trainings can be conducted to make them aware about this type of bias that can limit their ability to make the best decision.

c. Insensitivity to Outcome Probabilities

Research has demonstrated that decision makers do not trust, do not comprehend and usually don’t utilize estimates of result probabilities. Decision makers will in general be impacted more by the value of potential results than by the size of the probabilities. Managers are bound to utilize a couple of key qualities to portray a circumstance, instead of registering or utilizing standard statistics dependent on probabilities. Another reason decision maker’s do not utilize estimates of probabilities is that they consider problems to be one unique. Along these lines, probability assessments and statistics from similar occasions in the past become irrelevant. Likewise, decision makers are additionally described by their lack of care toward the legitimacy of estimates (Das & Teng, 1999).

This can be avoided by explaining to the decision makers, why is it important to consider statistics and probabilities rather than just focusing on outcomes.

d. Over confidence bias

Over confidence bias is a type of cognitive bias that expresses itself in two different ways. First, decision makers may improperly see a triumph probability higher than the objective probability would warrant, and afterward have a vision of control. For this situation, in spite of the fact that they are worried about result probabilities, they will in general structure excessively hopeful evaluations. In a contrasting way, decision makers will in general overestimate the degree to which a result under their control, accepting that risk can be decreased by utilizing their expert aptitudes. Second, decision makers have the deception that results of decision are convenient. They falsely expect that should issues emerge they would probably fix them. Decision makers tend to accept that consequences can be contained, rectified or turned around, given some additional endeavors. Decision makers believe in ‘post-decisional control’, which permits them ‘to impact whatever goes on after the moment of choice’. The fantasy of sensibility of terrible results facilitates decision makers’ anxiety over such results (Das & Teng, 1999).

We can overcome this type of bias by conducting different trainings on the importance of the details that they are omitting in the verge of making these overly confident decisions. Also, it can be omitted by having a clear idea on the best and worst case scenarios about certain decisions before diving into the suitable decision that lies somewhere in the middle.

Thus, cognitive bias is based on the thought processing error frequently arising from glitches with reminiscence, attention, attribution and other mental slipups.

Motivational Bias

Motivational biases are those in which decisions are affected by the desirability or undesirability of occasions, results, consequences, outcomes or choices (Montibeller & Winterfeldt, 2015)

Types of motivational bias

Affect influenced

This type of bias occurs when there is a passionate inclination in support or against a particular result or choices that taints the judgement. For example: If there is a project manager who has to decide the winner of a bidding for the contract of a construction project and he has a friend who has also lodged a bid for the contract, the manager’s judgement here will be affected by this connection he has with his friend. This may happen consciously or even unconsciously.

This type of bias can usually be corrected by keeping the affected party out of the decision making process so that the outcome is fair and fruitful.

Desirability of a positive event or consequence

This type of motivational bias is caused by overthinking about events or likely outcomes which brings about the obsession about the likeliness of the desired outcome coming true. In case of cost estimation, such bias can affect an engineering project as the obsession of the decision making authority to finish the project in the desired cost can lead to the compromise in the quality.

This can be made right by accepting a realistic view of a projects and its probabilities. It can also be avoided by decomposition or by getting the views of different authorities who have diverse ideas on the decision making.

Undesirability of a negative event or consequence

Undesirability of a negative event or consequence implies that the pessimism brought about by over thinking the worst case scenarios can restrain the decision making abilities of a person. This causes major confusions eventually leading to a regretful outcome.

This bias can be corrected by the same debiasing methods discussed in the preceding topic.

Besides these major biases in decision making there are some minor biases that a decision maker may face. But they are easy to correct or manage. Few are described below:

Base rate fallacy

Base rate fallacy occurs when people tend to assume certain outcome may occur without being concerned about the knowledge regarding the outcome. People start to focus on irrelevant information although it is not sure if the desired outcome will come into existence. In a project, this bias can be managed by dividing the different section of a project to different teams of experts. This will help bridge the knowledge gap in a decision making process. For example, in a construction project, there are various sections of it like brick works, concrete works, rebar works, etc. So, basically in this project we hire different experts to deal with the base rates of each of the works. This gives the decision makers a knowledge regarding the range of bidding which in-turn simplifies and strengthens the decision making process.

Insensitivity to sample size

This condition occurs when people don’t take into consideration the range of choices they have to decide on. They tend to generalize the range and this effects the decision they make. As indicated by the laws of probability, outrageous midpoints or extents are less likely in enormous ranges than in little ranges. Individuals will general overlook the range and consider limits similarly likely in all ranges.

This bias can simply be addressed by using statistical tools to define the likelihood of boundary line results in different range of data. Also we can use the provided information to explain why the use of statistical tool is different for different range of data as the effectiveness of the tools also differs in respect to the data ranges.

Bibliography

1. Banasiewicz, A. D. (2019). Evidence-Based Decision-Making. New York: Taylor & Francis Group.
2. Cherry, K. (2019, July 29). Very Well Mind. Retrieved August 05, 2019, from How Cognitive Biases Influence How You Think and Act: https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-a-cognitive-bias-2794963
3. Das, T. K., & Teng, B.-S. (1999). Journal of Management Studies. Cognitive Bias and Strategic Decision Process: An Integratedd Prespective, 762-763.
4. Hersing, W. S. (2017). Journal of Space Engineering. Managing cognitive bias in safety decision making: Application of emotional intelligence competencies, 124-128.
5. Montibeller, G., & Winterfeldt, D. v. (2015). Cognitive and Motivational Biases in Decision and Risk Analysis, 35, 1231. doi:0.1111/risa.12360

Issue

The topic of gender bias has been constantly discussed by the public in society. For decades, people have been paying close attention to the news concerning gender bias. That is, people in the society have begun to realize the problem of gender bias, especially the gender bias in the workplace. Gender bias is a hot issue in the workplace, especially in industries like IT where the vast majority of staff are men. This has led to the society’s misconceptions about the industry and most of the people believe that IT is male exclusive and not suitable for women. It has been a deep-rooted idea, especially for contemporary college students. Based on the education they have received for more than a decade; they have formed a fixed mindset and have a certain framework for the industry they want to pursue in the future. Have to consider that such fixed thinking also has a certain gender discrimination, some women think that they cannot be well engaged in work like IT, engineering, etc. Therefore, in order to make the students who are at the point of life choice aware of the problem of gender bias, so that they can choose the future path following their own interests, the organization will let the students in the school understand and thus eliminate the gender bias thinking through posters and websites with certain transmission significance.

Audience

In the workplace, the gender bias thinking has been formed, which influence their choice of career scope. Therefore, in order to let fewer and fewer people continue to have gender-biased ideas, we will start with college students and let them know there is no longer a gender bias in the upcoming career choices.

Communications goal

Through the design of the website and the spread of posters, the target audience is informed of gender bias and thus equal. And let the target audience have a certain clear view of their future work choices.

Content

A separate page covers three parts, briefly explain what gender bias is, how to face gender bias and some aspects of gender bias in China. Nowadays many people in society don’t understand gender prejudice. There exists potential gender bias for some people, even they don’t realize it. So at the beginning of the page, we set up a framework of “What is gender bias” so that the audience can understand it roughly and can have a general positioning in the mind about whether or not they have gender bias. After understanding what gender bias is, how to face gender bias is followed in the next frame, it allows the audience to understand how to solve this problem. In the second half of the page, we added a short story about gender bias in China and some measures that China has begun to address on gender bias. Because many gender prejudices occur in developing countries, like China, because of the traditional and feudal thought, many people think that women should stay at home and not go out to work and contact the outside world. This is a representative example, can let the audience know how a more feudal country gradually resists gender bias. The audience can accept the rejection of gender bias through these materials and stories.

The initial content of website sets a profile of gender bias, allowing the audience to understand gender bias and also give a rough introduction to the content of the entire page. Because the main purpose of this website is to help the audience when they are faced with gender bias, how to deal with gender bias is included in the next frame. It’s a face-to-face approach from organizations specialized in gender bias, there are many this kind of organizations around the world, and their methods are also very detailed. Next to the framework of “How to Face Gender Prejudice”, a picture showing “gender equality” is set up to match the content of the text. In the end, it is the news as an example that society began to resist gender bias with attached photos of “female-only cars” taken in the Chinese subway. Let the audience know about the detailed cases of resisting gender bias around them. A poster with picture below demonstrates how to face gender bias, it conveys the idea of calling for gender equality, which matches the text content.

Form

In order to make the audience feel more convenient and comfortable to read, the webpage sets the font ‘Times new roman’ and keeps the font size 16 for text, and 18 for the title owing to website need avoid using full capitals for body copy,

The overall color of the page is light blue and light pink, representing men and women, it also echoes the poster. Color is an easy way to establish connections among graphic elements and across multiple pages. We follow the main color related to the theme with the choice of color and give the audience a visual impact while positioning the entire theme color. At the beginning of the page, a headline and a subtitle are set. Create a central element with anchors point to grab attention. With the aim to make the audience feel interested in reading, we set a headline in the first frame, to grasp their eyeball at the first sight and stimulate them to continue reading.

Web design needs establish a visual hierarchy, i.e. via less important elements should take up less space or occupy a less prominent position. So the headlines are short, and the content is streamlined and easier to read. In the fast-paced life, many people are reluctant to read a lot of text, and the picture plays a role. Iconic representation reduces performance load, conserves display and control area, and makes signs and controls more understandable across cultures. (Lidwel 2010). Generally, icons should be labeled and share a common visual motif (style and color) for optimal performance. The color of the pictures on the webpage and the color of the theme are in a light color, and have a certain representativeness, conveying the theme to the audience.

Reference Lists

1. Lidwell, W., Holden, K., & Butler, J. (2010). Universal principles of design, revised and updated : 125 ways to enhance usability, influence perception, increase appeal, make better design decisions, and teach through design. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral-proquest-com.ezproxy.library.uq.edu.au
2. Jack wallen. (2015, May 7th). 10 examples of gender bias you may encounter in the workplace. Retrieved from
3. https://www.techrepublic.com/blog/10-things/10-examples-of-gender-bias-you-may-encounter-in-the-workplace/
4. Connson Locke. (2019, Jul 5th). Why Gender Bias Still Occurs And What We Can Do About It. Retrieved from
5. https://www.forbes.com/sites/londonschoolofeconomics/2019/07/05/why-gender-bias-still-occurs-and-what-we-can-do-about-it/#79dac5be5228
6. Pragya Agarwal. (2019, Aug 29th). Is Gender Bias Really Impacting The Hiring Of Women In STEM. Retrieved from
7. https://www.forbes.com/sites/pragyaagarwaleurope/2019/08/29/is-gender-bias-really-impacting-the-hiring-of-women-in-stem/#134bcc483bf0
8. Buket Gundogan. (2016). How to make an academic poster. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2016.09.001

How can bias effect and prevent being rational in politics? Avoiding prejudice in the approval of a certain group or opinion could be difficult in politics due to its social structure and influence. We as people tend to form our opinions based on logical facts. As well as encircling ourselves with individuals that share these same opinions. This being done by the different bias constituents played by our rational mindset. Each bias has an impact on the perspective of politics. This separate bias that involves has a certain influence of groups.

Confirmational Bias is the main reason non-rational decisions are made. This bias creates an interpretation with evidence to emphasize their own beliefs. It can go on to test how strongly opinionated people are towards the candidates. ‘The confirmation bias found in our reporting and be willing to investigate both sides of the story, rather than simply relying on the story that fits our narrative or opinion best’ (The Link Between Politics And Confirmation Bias 2017). Explains the instincts of the human mindset of needing to be accurate.

Negativity Bias is a typical bias role played throughout decision making in politics. The more intense the subject, the more negativity the feedback is. Here it is the nature of human instinct that psychologically processed. ‘Negativity bias is to be used as a predictive factor for political attitude’ (The Role Of Negative Bias In Political Judgement 2014). Then results in different levels of analysis and factoring the pros and cons of the material.

The Bandwagon effect is a bias that is the most impactful in politics. It has the impact of increasing rates quickly and easily influence others. Concerning the assumptions, it is quickly embraced and used to be achievable and fit in with the group of confirmational bias group. ‘Part of the reason people conform is that they look to other people in their social group for information about what is right or acceptable’ (The Bandwagon Effect As A Cognitive Bias 2019). The Bandwagon effect creates pressure for individuals. As quickly as they jump on they can jump off which forms a dangerous diversion for politicians.

Conformational bias, negativity bias, and the bandwagon each play a role in politics all affect your place in politics. They all help to form our opinions and place where we stand in the political realm. To suit our perception and beliefs of how something should be. The influence these biases have in the political world is very impactful. Conformational bias strongly affects the logical reasoning behind politics. Negative bias can create a downfall for politicians. Bandwagon can give supporters that are unsure and opinionated.

Bias’ can prevent rational thinking by blocking essential views. It can create selective opinions and change the perspective of the politician. Bias lack objective and logical thinking, and can easily be exercised out of context. Depending on the material and conditions reasonable speculation can become adaptive to one’s mental state. This can eventually block an original state of mind and create a new one. Eventually succeeding in opposition to rational thinking in politics.

Bias is connected to politics by the politicians to make issues more appealing as well as the candidate. This causes individuals to hold power over the candidate. Bias play an important part in deciding the candidate’s placement. Including each individuals’ beliefs and opinions towards the problem.

The Big Bang Theory is an American sitcom by three exclusive creators Steven Molaro, Bill Prady, and Chuck Loree. It is called a sitcom because they shot it in live spectators setting; the series has a total of two hundred and seventy-nine episodes all in twelve seasons.. The last episode of the series was released in May this year. It has five key actors and actresses and other supporting characters. The primary focus in the series will be on one key actor Raj Koothrapali. Race and gender discrimination is still very rampant despite the many efforts to suppress it. Some media artefacts such as The Big Bang Theory indirectly portrays these kinds of biases and discrimination throughout the series, and it is highly uncouth.

Well, it is sad but true the TV series popularised some of society’s prejudgment, and anyone keen enough would note. One of the significant discriminations is racism, and the punch line comes in when it is brought to limelight by the series. This discrimination is portrayed in almost every episode in the seasons. Racism is a belief that a particular race is superior to others (Balibar & Etienne 163-72). In the whole series, there is only one character of colour that is Raj compared to the over more than five actors and actresses who are white. Raj made only 80% of what his other white male colleagues made per episode. This occurrence brings out the highest level of racism in the film.

Another occurrence is that right through the series, Raj has been receiving bad gags about his race. He has an Indian accent they depict him as a character who is shy to approach and speak to the female gender. He also has bossy parents that have an arranged marriage for him which he is trying to escape. There is a lot of destructive traditions that are brought out from his race. All these occurrences bring out the racist nature of the tv series about Raj’s race. In one of the episodes, Raj hooks up with one of the female characters and tells her that as friends they did not have sex in a predictable sense to which she responds by asking him if he pulled out one of his weird Indian crap on her. The woman doesn’t have to include the weird Indian phrase in the statement she made. This was put in writing just to bring out the humour and an outburst from the listeners.

Also, racism is put to limelight when Raj becomes a standard personality for all Indian men. One Indian actor narrates an experience whereby he met a white person who told him he reminds him of someone. Later, the person remembered the name of the character he reminded him of and said it is Raj from The Big Bang Theory. The statement agitated him because it is like Raj has become a stereotype of how the whites imagine all Indian men. The agitation was because the series brought out Raj as a humourless, unpleasant and retrograde character. He said Raj represents nothing from his community because they are now advanced and not as rearward as in the previous centuries portrayed by Raj in The Big Bang Theory.

Apart from racism, the series also portrays gender biasness. The woman is brought out as an inferior gender because of the occupations she possesses. The men are seen to be intellectuals and are physicists while the woman’s job is a mere waitress. It also highlights that she would like to be an actress. All the occupations given to the female gender have no reputable recognition in the society. A woman can be anything she wants either a Professor, a lawyer, doctor but the tv series just saw it wise for her to be a waitress and an aspiring actress. The writer of the series must have overlooked that niche during scripting or may even be a male chauvinist, and it did not matter what kind of occupation the woman had as long as she has a job.

The series also puts these nerdy guys in a position to seem less intimidating while they downgrade the ladies. Since they are viewed to be knowledgeable, it rules out their bullying nature when they are gender-biased. They get away with a lot of downright behaviours such as not minding if they obtain consent or not from the women, stalking, upskirting and other sexists acts just because they are portrayed to be kind, geeks and non-harmful due to their intellectual ability (Bednarek & Monika 199-229). In one of the episodes, they point out that all women care about is lip gloss and salads. They even go ahead to ask if the women are menstruating which is a sensitive topic for the female gender. This is the highest form of male chauvinism in this series. It brings out the superiority of the male gender and the inferiority of the women as they are viewed to concentrate on non-issues according to men.

We also see the men asking the women throughout the series to do “female jobs” that is cooking, cleaning and washing. Sadly, this brings an outburst from the live viewers showing how the woman is looked at by society. Apart from the writing, it is also absurd that the female earns almost ten times less than their male colleagues in the series and this is in real life. The big bang theory has undermined and discriminated the female gender not only in their scripts but also in real life. In season twelve episode twenty, the woman freaks out when she learns her husband may quit his job and thus it will lead to a change in lifestyle. It shows the high level of financial dependence by the women on their husbands which is not usually the case. Most women today are financially independent, and there are even some who are the breadwinners in their families taking care of their husbands and everyone else.

Despite the series being on air for entertainment, it is a plague in the society because it brings out some of the vices in the world such as race and gender discrimination. The Big Bang Theory will still live on generation after generation because it is still available for viewing and thus the vices risk being passed down to the youngsters. Racism and gender biasness is evil and should done away within the whole world. Sadly, the entertainment industry tends to continue producing and releasing content that downgrades women and makes other gender appear inferior. Due to increased awareness of the negativity of this biasness, there are a number of organizations and forums that have been established to bring about gender equality and scrap off racism. It is also crucial for parents, teachers and all those who associate with the young generation to instil the goodness of gender equality and cast out racism mentality. When they grow up, it will be hard for them to view their differences negatively and this will lead to a better society, and thus a better and peaceful world at large will be created.

Works Cited

1. Balibar, Etienne. ‘Racism and nationalism.’ Nations and nationalism: A reader (1991): 163-72.
2. Bednarek, Monika. ‘Constructing ‘nerdiness’: Characterisation in The Big Bang Theory.’ (2012): 199-229.

Problem identified

Sports are among the general activities, which garner an international following uniting people from different ages, races, tribes, and localities. Equally, critical stereotyping, prejudice, and bias plague the sports ultimately overwriting the probability of achieving social cohesion and national unity (Spaaij, Farquharson, & Marjoribanks, 2015). Mainly, games are highly challenged by the high levels of gender bias and racial prejudice as well as stereotyping of the disabled constituting a major psychosocial quandary. Currently, people from different races form one team evident in sports like football and volleyball. Athletics involve all types of individuals with an obvious Paralympic athletics conducted exclusively for the disabled. However, disassembling the social vulnerability facing the disabled with reduced resources, accessibility issues, and acceptability in the sports arena is troubling (Lox, Ginis, & Petruzzello, 2014).

The perception of the populace for the different sportspeople is mostly prejudiced with an incessant overbearing attitude in the treatment of the athletes. For example, black athletes have increased over the American population in professional sports with a biased portrayal in the media (Tyler Eastman, 2001; Lox, Ginis, & Petruzell, 2014). The media presents the blacks as naturally gifted while the white counterparts intensively practice and apply their intelligence to achieve professional success. Ultimately, the production procedures, sportsperson profiling, program arrangement, and studio broadcasting has a tinge of bias despite the reduced overt racism in the modern world (Mwaniki, 2017).

Misleading generalizations on the inadequate number of female couches in most sports tend to highlight most of the aggressive sports events as more masculine while allowing favoritism to the males in sports (Spaaij et al., 2015). Partiality and game media preconception present male participants more often while overlooking female sportspersons, teams, and games. The marginalization of either gender in sports is directly tied to the normative social prejudice in the social life mainly preeminent due to the media prejudice (Lox et al., 2014). Men are viewed as professionals, while female participants are primarily considered as engaging in sports for fun save a few talented females. Cooky, Messner, and Musto concluded in their research that televised women’s sports coverage is notably low, and the general media implies that sports are for men (2015).

The disabled cannot compete favorably with the healthy contestants. Despite few receiving national recognition at states level, many disabled sportspersons are disregarded, and sports seem to be for a select group (Cooky, Messner, & Musto, 2015). The obese and overweight receive an equal share of discrimination and exclusion from participating in sports due to their un-athletic appearance. Lox, Martin, and Putruzzello note that sport activity reduces with age being more pronounced in women than men (2014). Marginalized minorities and low-income class social groups are generally inactive. Girls are naturally expected to perform more miserably than men in games like soccer, thereby attracting lesser following on feminine sports by both the global community and social media (Grappendorf & Burton, 2017).

The proposed plan of action

The proposed method of operation can focus on heightening the awareness of cultural literacy in sports to avoid traditional bias propagated by the media. Gender bias promulgated by the media can be handled by addressing the understanding and perception of games from a neutral scope rather than a partial one. Stereotyping incites self-fulfilling predictions for the discriminated groups evoking response tactics (Mwaniki, 2017). The opinion that blacks are naturally talented in comparison to the whites invites discrimination in training and enrolment. White sportspersons can train to gain professional dexterity while blacks have to be skilled for them to be conscripted (Brown & Stone, 2016). Creating awareness of the existing stereotypes in sports would help in balancing the treatment to any individual irrespective of race, tribe, or ethnicity.

Increasing both black and women game announcers especially in significant games would reduce traditional stereotyping while increasing gender parity and racial sensitivity (Cunningham, 2019). Media coverage must address the issue by adopting a more neutral position with no favoritism to any group in the sports for equal chances. Games should not be domineered by one gender, race, or even age of athletes. Social sensitization, therefore, would increase respect for each group, increasing racial diversity acceptance as well as gender parity. Awareness programs would focus primarily on the media, which has been central in propagating stereotypes (Spaaij et al., 2015). The social perception that sports are masculine is mainly founded in the social media’s skewedness to coverage of the male sports while overlooking female sports.

Media attention should equally target sportswomen with no backdrop-preconceived attitudes.

Additionally, sports bodies should endorse more racial sensitivity. For example, black quarterbacks are deemed as more incompetent as compared to their white counterparts when a team loses in a game (Cunningham, 2019). Reporters and game analyzers focus more on bad decisions made by the blacks, thereby resulting in losses. The populace conforms to the perceived social prejudices, thus resulting in an unjustified perception of a given class of individuals. Sensitization on the perceived stereotypes would reduce the negative attitude and bias (Mwaniki, 2017).

Evaluation of the individuals should promote racial balance that is directly proportional to the demography of the social groups: equal conscription chances, assessment, and player involvement based on competency (Cooky et al., 2015). Additionally, the sensitization programs should promote the marginalized and low social classes to encourage equal participation of all individuals. Skill should be the basis of evaluation, which would allow the obese and overweight to participate in sports if qualified without attracting social stereotyping. A global body of managing and coordinating different games would effectively reduce stereotyping. Diverse people from all ages, races, tribes, and both genders participate in the games lowering chances of bias. Therefore, national sports if possible should realign with global sporting activities for more sensitization against prejudice and stereotyping (Brown & Stone, 2016).

Justification of the plan of action

Biases in sports are individual preferences resulting in liking or disliking of the target individuals or team. Contrastingly, stereotyping is a collective perception of given members of a group, which attributes specific unjustified characteristics attached to them. Primarily, the stereotyping and bias evident in sports concerning players, sports managers, and the entire society arises from misinformation (Grappendorf & Burton, 2017). The most prolific strategy to mitigate stereotyping would be sensitization and awareness programs. First, despite the decrement of overt racial segregation and mistreatment, comments in the media overemphasizing one party over the other propagates racism or gender inequality. Eastman and Billings assert that observations in televised basketball tournaments revealed overemphasis on the White women participants while the blacks for both genders were considered athletic (2001).

Eastman and Billings’ research analyzing sixty-six different games agree with Spaaij, Farquharson, and Marjoribanks who present social inequality as a significant psychosocial menace in sports (2015). The sensitization programs are essential in routing out the misinformed fragmented ideas on the sports to reduce the racial imbalance. Games should employ professionalism, just like every other field with the professional treatment of every participant rather than opinionated treatments (Grappendorf & Burton, 2017). The media as a central sensitization channel should re-orient the viewing lenses on the sportspersons terminating the propagation of biased ideas and opinions about any given class of people (Zhang, 2017).

Reporters, game announcers, and game analyzers in sports should focus on the competency and skill of the players individually rather than focusing on gender or race of the players (Shifflett, Murphy, Ghiasvand, Carlton, & Cuevas, 2016). The referees, trainers, and sportspersons should participate equally based on their proficiency and not their race, tribe, or gender. Moreover, the sensitization programs focus on increasing open-mindedness, which allows for the perception of each group as equal to any other group participating.

For example, reporters treating every team player with consideration to his or her role in the team would reduce bigotry. The sensitization programs should then seek to inform the populace alongside every other personnel involved of the equality of every team member as well as their different roles (Mwaniki, 2017). The performance of any team member is based on their functional role in the team rather than their race or background hence the need for media sensitization (Spaaij et al., 2015). The game announcers should equally celebrate skills in women and men to reduce gender inequality respecting gender differences. It would be unfair to compare women’s performance against men just as it would be to compare the performance of the disabled against the normal sportspersons. Sensitizing every person would largely contribute to establishing professional ethics in sports.

Racial integration should be encouraged through sensitization and awareness through every possible channel. Racial integration can be enhanced through coalescing the local sports activities with international activities. International sports and athletics involve all people at every level inclusive of referees, couches, game announcers, and players (Cunningham, 2019). Such interactions reduce racial or gender-based bias. Equally, international sporting activities in themselves serve as a tool of unifying all people while focusing on their talents and abilities rather than their backgrounds. People would appreciate individual performance based on one’s perfection rather than origin and race.

Ethical issues

While fighting stereotyping, favoritism is hard to avoid. Often, the individuals trying to rediscover sports free of bias may side with the less advantaged group, thereby advancing favoritism (Zhang, 2017). Considerably, ethical issues of more bias arise, as there will be divisions between the ones being discriminated against and those who are not. Additionally, tackling issues of gender equality may raise ethical questions about over empowerment of one gender at the expense of the other (Lox et al., 2014). Lastly, equality in the treatment of professionals in sports would attach incredible value to the experienced based on one’s competency leading to unfair competition. The talented and more skills would win effortlessly over the less skilled ones evoking hard ethical questions to grapple with.

Methods of progress review and evaluation

The frequency of occurrence of the psychosocial issues can track the progress of the sensitization programs both through the media and at the team level. Additionally, sensitization for equality based on competency at the team level can be reviewed by analyzing the criterion for employment of the players. At the national level, the treatment of the different races and genders in sports would determine the extent of success. The social media and televised comments would monitor a numeric estimate of the effectiveness of the sensitization programs (Van Sterkenburg, Knoppers, & De Leeuw, 2010). Additionally, the co-existence and mutual dependability between team members irrespective of a person’s background would determine the success of reducing bias and stereotyping.

Moreover, regular awareness programs can be tracked where using the leading sports’ television and radio channels can help to get feedback from the target audience. Constant evaluations on the sportsperson can reveal their opinions on the progress of the sensitization while the marginalized groups can be reached through empowerment programs. The practical functioning of the programs in reaching out the marginalized would give an adequate review of the progress in reducing stereotyping and bias.

References

1. Brown, C. S., & Stone, E. A. (2016). Gender stereotypes and discrimination: how sexism impacts development. In Advances in child development and behavior (Vol. 50, pp. 105–133). Elsevier.
2. Cooky, C., Messner, M. A., & Musto, M. (2015). “It’s dude time!” A quarter century of excluding women’s sports in televised news and highlight shows. Communication & Sport, 3(3), 261–287.
3. Cunningham, G. B. (2019). Diversity and Inclusion in Sport Organizations: A Multilevel Perspective. Routledge.
4. Grappendorf, H., & Burton, L. J. (2017). The impact of bias in sport leadership. Women in Sport Leadership: Research and Practice for Change, 47–62.
5. Lox, C. L., Ginis, K. A. M., & Petruzzello, S. J. (2014). The psychology of exercise: Integrating theory and practice: Holcomb Hathaway.
6. Mwaniki, M. F. (2017). The Black Migrant Athlete: Media, Race, and the Diaspora in Sports. U of Nebraska Press.
7. Shifflett, B., Murphy, D., Ghiasvand, F., Carlton, M., & Cuevas, M. (2016). Gender bias in sports-media analytics. Journal of Sports Media, 11(2), 111–128.
8. Spaaij, R., Farquharson, K., & Marjoribanks, T. (2015). Sport and social inequalities. Sociology Compass, 9(5), 400–411.
9. Tyler Eastman, S. (2001). Biased voices of sports: Racial and gender stereotyping in college basketball announcing. Howard Journal of Communications, 12(4), 183–201.
10. Van Sterkenburg, J., Knoppers, A., & De Leeuw, S. (2010). Race, ethnicity, and content analysis of the sports media: A critical reflection. Media, Culture & Society, 32(5), 819–839.
11. Zhang, L. (2017). A fair game? Racial bias and repeated interaction between NBA coaches and players. Administrative Science Quarterly, 62(4), 603–625.

I have chosen to research ‘ Does professional wrestling is gender-biased?’ If yes, then up to what extent wrestling is gender biased and how it affects their professional career and life. Wrestling has always had controversy surrounding it for male and female wrestlers as many people believe women get less appreciation than what they deserve and the business is still male dominant. I would like to explore how much potential each female wrestler brings to the ring and how much appreciation they get whether it’s men or women what is the social structure of the wrestling around the world?

Knowing that professional wrestling is just a violent act performed by the wrestlers to engage the audience by entertaining them, undeniably, in decades wrestling has changed so does its structure, more women have been launched in the recent years than ever in the past. I would like to dig deeper to discover what and when did the transition occur? Whether the Social structure improved. Whether Wrestling is gender biased, or it’s just an illusion? Wrestling was introduced in 1896 then why it took so long for the women to become a wrestler or why are the women wrestling speeded up in the later years? Do women get the same respect as men in that business?

From my childhood memory, I remember playing trump cards of wrestlers and watching wrestling with my brother on the weekend as he was the one who loved watching it and pretended to be like them. I always noticed wrestlers used to bring hot, sexually appealed women with them wearing a bra and panties. Maybe it can be a lack of my knowledge I hardly know about any women wrestler or the women wrestling was not that famous 20 years ago as it is now. Why women were only considered as a sexual object? I believe their ability was much more than just coming and showing off their body. Why men athletes got competed in the Olympic of freestyle wrestling earlier than women athletes? This topic is important as I speculate if Hulk Hogan has received a lot of recognition, then why not any specific women too, if someone looks up in the internet and search about ‘famous wrestlers’ subsequently only a list of male wrestlers shows up. I desire to see the woman’s wrestlers name on the internet too without typing ‘women wrestlers’. Wrestling between man and woman is not seen often even though wrestling is for everyone, but not between everyone. Intergender wrestling has always been a subject of critic because of which WWE no longer holds intergender wrestling matches. Women are physically strong and they should get equal opportunity and recognition as male.

Through my reading list, I’ll gather the required/important piece of information to provide evidence of the gender discrimination in the wrestling world and the history of women wrestling. In addition, it will aid me by relying on validation and accurate useful sources to ensure that my research paper is based on facts and data. The aim of my research is not to criticize any gender or race it is to find the facts about gender inequality rumours of the wrestling business and to get a better understanding of the evolution of women wrestling world.

Introduction

World War One was the first instance of conflict that synthesised most all of the greatest world powers. This wasn’t centralised to one region as previously, hence the “world” war. However, debate has continued ever since 1914 as to whether it was inevitable. Unfortunately, primary and secondary sources from the time are often plagued with bias and patriotism due to national perspectives’ influence. To reach a conclusion, we have to synthesise all of the consistent and/or supported evidence. At the most basic level, history is made of sources and historians. However, both of these factors may contain bias or misrepresentation and selectiveness. As humans, we are naturally inclined to make those we align with look better. To determine whether World War One was inevitable, we must ask; How can we gauge the extent to which history is told from a national perspective and what indicators are present?

Historical Context

Most modern historians believe there is no one sole cause for World War One, but rather a timeline of events causing a level of tension mostly in Europe. In the late 19th century we saw the creation of the Triple Entente (France, Russia, Britain) and the Triple Alliance (Germany, Austria-Hungary, Italy) (Schmitt, 1924). This caused a level of “rivalry,” both feeling intimidated by the other. Around this time, military weapons were rapidly advancing, causing an arms-race – a competition of sorts (Brose, 1924). Additionally, we saw the growth of developing regions into world powers – notably Germany and Austria-Hungary (Gunther 2016; BBC Bitesize, 2019). Finally, thanks to globalisation Britain had now furthered its economic advancement and believed this would make Germany more vulnerable. Due to Britain’s further increasing power, Germany considered war a viable option to close this gap as proven by documents released at the time (Stevenson, 2014).

Source Overview

One of the most notable thesis’s on World War One was Fritz Fischer’s “Germany’s Aims in the First World War.” In the first chapter, he immediately cites his own country’s government (Germany) as the sole cause for the war. After being “attacked by his colleagues,” he published a sequel – War of Illusions. He only stood to further his claims, stating that Germany had planned the war for decades previously in a lunge to become a world power. The assertions he made have been criticised as being outlandish and controversial. However, his so-called “downfall” came in his contrarian inclination, often leading to disproven and/or impossible conclusions. This is most evident in the fact that he claimed Germany’s constant involvement in both World War I and World War II was carefully planned – from Franz Ferdinand’s assassination to Hitler, he believed they were all connected. In British Historian William Gatzke’s more recent analysis, Germany and the United States, he criticizes the evidence – or lack thereof – to prove Fischer’s claims (Gatzke, 1980).

Prior to this, Sidney Bradshaw Fay (an American historian) had published The Origins of the World War. He stated, “American public opinion began to denounce Germany as being guilty of causing World War 1.” To paraphrase, he blamed most participants an even amount rather criticizing terms of the Treaty of Versailles. As with most revisionist historians, he often victimised Germany in favour of calling the Allies aggressors (Lipstat, 1994). Given Fay’s nation of origin, his assertions may be less biased due to an outsider perspective. However, it must be noted that his book may have been created under the influence of the German government. They paid “special attention” to his writings, providing hundreds of copies to hand out at embassies and consulates (Herwig, 1997). This implies an amount of bribery involved. Additionally, few German citizens would have read Fischer’s thesis as novels criticising Germany were not permitted to be published (Herwig, 1997).

Source Analysis/Evaluation

We can gauge how much national perspective affected these two books’ assertions by comparing them to known facts – facts of which have evidence and are agreed upon by modern historians. We can also observe whether the books align with perspectives of the nations at which the authors come from. By this evaluation, Fischer’s book contains little national bias. His assertions are entirely controversial contrasted the German Conservative perspective. His book was not permitted to be published in German at the time due to the criticism thrown against solely Germany (Herwig, 1997). It must be noted that he had full access to German archives of World War One, indicating the evidence he had access to had proved Germany’s fault. Additionally, most of his conclusions are supported by evidence in the novel, with the most notable exception being the aforementioned claims of Germany’s calculated attacks. Modern historians with access to newer evidence (such as Gerhard Ritter) have criticised this due to a lack of sources linking the events that Fischer did. Despite Fay’s outsider perspective, his own assertions do contain national bias, though not his own. To reiterate, immediately after publishing the book the German government spread it to numerous German embassies therefore indicating there may have been some communication at this point. Whether this proves Fay was bribed, or had favours done for him as modern theories state is unknown as there is a lack of evidence to prove so. Given this uncertainty, we cannot gauge this source as entirely lacking national bias. Additionally, Fay’s theories contain very little criticism of Germany, despite the existence of evidence proving their guilt in terms of calculated attacks (Fischer, 1964). His ignorance of these facts is a major factor in why his assertions contained significant national bias. It begs the question of whether his representation is holistic. The assertions made are often one-sided and victimizing of Germany. However, Fischer’s book also contains an amount of selectiveness and it must be noted that neither book is completely lacking in bias or selectiveness, especially considering the solely-Germany aimed attacks of Fischer. The extent to which is what differs.

Conclusion

The comparison between Fischer and Fay’s assertions allow us to evaluate the influence of national perspectives on historians and secondary sources. Upon evaluating the events of the time and comparing the novel’s conclusions to that of popular opinion, we can gauge whether a source is reliable and to what extent national bias is present. We must also look at how one-sided an author’s arguments are. To conclude, different sources contain different extents of national perspective. It is possible to gauge this through the evaluation of known evidence both now and at the time, as well as holistically viewing what bias may be implied in the language and assertions made. Due to the nature of history, we may never know whether World War One was truly inevitable but assessing the national bias evident in sources is an integral step to making a conclusion.

References

1. Schmitt, B.E. (1924). Triple Alliance and Triple Entente. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/1836520?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
2. Brose, E. (2014). Arms Race prior to 1914, Armament Policy. Retrieved from https://encyclopedia.1914-1918-online.net/article/arms_race_prior_to_1914_armament_policy
3. Gunther, K. (2016). Pre-war Military Planning (Austria-Hungary). Retrieved from https://encyclopedia.1914-1918-online.net/article/pre-war_military_planning_austria-hungary
4. BBC Bitesize (2019). Germany Before World War One 1890-1914. Retrieved from https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/guides/z36wycw/revision/2
5. Stevenson, D. (2014). Europe before 1914. Retrieved from https://www.bl.uk/world-war-one/articles/europe-before-1914
6. Fischer, F. (1961). Germany’s aims in the First World War. New York: W.W. Norton.
7. Gatzke, H.W. (1980). Germany and the United States, a “special Relationship?” Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
8. Lipstat, D. (1994). Denying the Holocaust. London: Plume Books.
9. Herwig, H. (1997). Patriotic Self-Censorship in Germany. Houghton Miffig.