Implicit Ingroup Favoritism,Outgroup Favoritism,and Their Behavioral Manifestations

Three broad themes that emerge from the social psychological research on unconscious or implicit prejudice and stereotypes are highlighted in this article. First, individuals who belong to socially advantaged groups typically exhibit more implicit preference for their ingroups and bias against outgroups than do members of socially disadvantaged groups. This research suggests that intergroup preferences and prejudices are influenced by two different psychological forces—people's tendency to prefer groups associated with themselves as a confirmation of their high self-exteem versus their tendency to prefer groups valued by the mainstream culture as a confirmation of the sociopolitical order in society. Second, these inplicit prejudices and stereotypes often influence people's judgements, decisions, and behaviors in subtle but pernicious ways. However, the path from implicit bias to discriminatory action is not inevitable. People's awareness of potential bias, their motivation and opportunity to control it, and sometimes their consciously held beliefs can determine whether biases in the mind will manifest in action. Finally, a new line of research suggests that implicit biases exhibited by individuals who belong to socially disadvantaged groups towards their own group may have unintended behavioral consequences that are harmful to their ingroup and themselves.     

黑肤色--这就是罪?

自人类存在至今,人和人之间就存在互相仇恨与轻视,这种仇恨不仅存在于个体之间,有时甚至可以演变为整个地区或民族间的仇恨.虽然所有国家极力反对种族歧视,但是它的确还存在.在移民国家,对有色人种特别是对黑人的种族歧视通常表现在社会生活的方方面面.种族歧视不是一个政治观念,也不是价值的裁判,而是一种根据人们的不同种族、不同肤色而产生的不公平待遇.     

Discrimination and deprivation: The effects of social comparisons

This article deals with relative deprivation with regard to wages, particularly the effects of gender and occupational sex-type on justice evaluations and on the perception of individual and fraternal deprivation. Underlying this analysis of the factors that allow perceived discrimination to be translated into feelings of deprivation is the basic assumption that workers in different occupational and gender categories report different levels of relative deprivation primarily because of their diverse comparison criteria for evaluating their rewards. The empirical findings point to systematic gender and occupation-type differences in choice of comparison others and in justice considerations.This is a revised version of a paper presented at the 1988 meetings of the Social Justice and Societal problems convention, Leiden, The Netherlands.     

Statistical tests of discrimination in punishment

A method, adopted from the labor econometrics literature, is proposed for detecting discrimination in punishment. The method requires the separate estimation of time served and punishment probability equations for, say, whites and blacks. The coefficients from the white equation are used to predict the punishment blacks would receive if treated like whites. A test of no discrimination against blacks is a test that the black punishment predicted by the black equation is equal to the punishment predicted by the equation using the white coefficients but the black endowments or characteristics. A further test is proposed that evaluates the economic efficiency of disparities in punishment. The test is restricted to measuring the recidivism effect of equality of treatment in punishment. The discrimination test and the efficiency test are illustrated using the U.S. Board of Parole data for 1972. Statistically significant racial disparities in punishment are uncovered and are found to be economically inefficient.     

Evidence and Actions on Mortgage Market Disparities: Research,Fair Lending Enforcement,and Consumer Protection

ABSTRACT

In this article, we present an overview of the research on discrimination in mortgage underwriting and pricing, the experiences of minority borrowers both prior to and during the financial crisis, and federal efforts to mitigate foreclosures during the crisis. We next discuss the history of legal cases alleging disparate treatment of minority borrowers, and recent cases alleging disparate impact in the wake of the Supreme Court’s Inclusive Communities decision. Using these discussions as a background, we examine and discuss mortgage regulations issued by the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau following the financial crisis, describe recent developments in the FinTech industry and explore the implications for fair lending policy and minority borrowers more generally. Finally, we draw conclusions and make recommendations for improving the mortgage market outcomes of minority borrowers and increasing minority borrowers’ access to credit.     

制度性歧视的内涵与辨异

制度性歧视是由于国家正式规则的认可或者公权力主体的推行,使一定社会群体持续遭受普遍的、规范化的不合理对待。制度性歧视包含三个构成要素:公权力主体实施的歧视、以制度形态存在的歧视以及不合理的区别对待。与普通的歧视行为相比,制度性歧视具有合法性与正当性、强制性、群体性和稳定性等特点。制度性歧视在性质上属于公法歧视,并且依据存在形态与行为性歧视相区别。它不仅包括多数群体对少数群体的歧视,还包括少数群体对多数群体的歧视。     

Fairness and Justice for All? The House of Lords in White v. White [2000] 2 F.L.R. 981

In the recent U.K. decision of White v.White, the House of Lords clarified thelaw to be applied in applications under s. 25of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973. Itconfirmed that the overriding goal of the courtin such cases was to achieve fairness, but,crucially, it articulated a view of fairnesswhich took equality and non-discrimination asstarting points. On this view, the courtchallenged historically gendered assumptions offairness, contribution to the family welfare,and the value of different kinds of work. Whilethe decision has far-reaching potential toachieve a form of substantive equality forwomen in cases of divorce, there is a dangerthat it may be confined to those cases, andissues of family finances will continue toappear unrelated to broader state policies.     

对以欺诈手段订立劳动合同的法律思考

以欺诈手段订立的劳动合同，合同内容违反法律、行政法规的强制性规定或违背公序良俗时，劳动合同无效，欺诈方应承担侵权责任。除此之外，应赋予受欺诈方撤销或变更劳动合同、追究过错方违约责任的选择权。求职者为防止用人单位的就业歧视而进行的欺骗不属于欺诈行为。     

从权力到权利:算法治理的路径

人工智能时代,算法日益介入社会生活中。我国对算法的治理刚刚起步,现有的算法治理模式并不能适应算法技术的发展。基于对我国算法治理现状和治理困境的分析,提出从权力到权利的算法治理路径,并借助“权利束”这一概念,从整体上对算法权利进行构思,以实现算法控制者和算法相对人的利益平衡。     

COW PROTECTION AND MINORITY RIGHTS IN INDIA: REASSESSING RELIGIOUS FREEDOM

Recent efforts to prevent cow-slaughter in India have prompted U.S. concern about violations of religious freedom. But although the politics of cow protection poses a significant threat to disadvantaged groups in India, efforts to ameliorate that threat through an international policy of religious freedom also carry serious risks. This paper reviews reports issued by the U.S. Department of State's Office of International Religious Freedom and by the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom. It argues that by unnecessarily portraying the politics of cow protection in terms of a stark conflict between Hindus and Muslims, they threaten to undermine the goal of reducing anti-minority discrimination and violence in India.