Categorizing by Race - try the quick example test

[andyf]

http://scienceblogs.com/cognitivedaily/2006/05/categorizing_by_race_as_automa.php

There's a brief 14 person example listed. See what you think.

* Advisory: probably best if only intelligent/mature people reply to this thread so as to avoid random crap.

[Cabe]

I dunno, with the list I went in to it with the desire to strip the colour out so I didnt actually read any of the names. Perhaps I am just unusually focussed this evening.

[Zenith]

Very interesting results on the graphs.
In a general way, I can understand the reason behind why our brains behave in that way. There's nothing inherently racist about the test.

I did the quick and dirty test and found it no easier on either. Like Cabe, I just blank out the words themselves and concentrate on the colour of the words. I'd probably score well on the colour identification, but lousy on identifying the names.

[RocketKnight]

I've taken these tests before. I'm with Cabe on this one, my brain is very good at ignoring the word I'm looking at and just focusing on the colour. The last time I took this test, the word lists were a mix of non-emotive words (e.g. chair) and emotive words (e.g. love). The test was to see if reading ink colours from emotive words would slow you down. The results proved the hypothesis, but I was the anomoly; I did both kinds of list in the same record time. Researchers told me I'm dead inside. :p: Really though, I just think my brain is good at making sure I don't process any of the words.

[TimmyNoShoes]

I dunno, with the list I went in to it with the desire to strip the colour out so I didnt actually read any of the names. Perhaps I am just unusually focussed this evening.

Or usually unfocused, depends how you look at it.

[UberMonkey]

tbh, i dont think their example test is all that effective. reading the name at a glance and instantly processing who it is and what colour they are takes longer than just registering the colour of the text...

although it might be more effective on people who care about famous people more. although i know (pretty much) all of the people whose names are used in the example, i dont instantly see their face or who they are, it would take me a second to remember exactly who a few of them are.

the other test floating about,
green red orange blue black yellow

is quite effective though :p i've made mistakes on that one

[Er00]

That test with the names is a lot easier to say the colours than the one Ubermonkey posted with the coloured colours (god that sounded confusing :/ ).

[KingDaveRa]

Easy.

Look at the colour. It's not text - it's just coloured blobs.

It all depends on how you perceive things I think.

[UberMonkey]

i still say the colour one is tricky.... even just my example above, when i tried to (quickly) say the colours of the text aloud, i ended up saying yellow for the last, instead of orange.

green red orange blue black yellow

[TimmyNoShoes]

Yeah the colours one did seem to have a major effect on me.
The names one did not, i think its because i dont put much emphasis on race nor celebrities.

[UberMonkey]

personally i think the experiment is very true, that we do categorise people by race... but the example kinda sucks since people dont read the names, and not everyone knows who the people are.

i'm not sure how they could improve the experiment, but they would need to make sure the people actually read the names.