ReviewNeuroscience2019
Grappling With Implicit Social Bias: A Perspective From Memory Research.
Review in Neuroscience, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Principle-based crisis prioritization: insights from the amygdala-hippocampus-prefrontal cortex network-mediated threat response.Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2026Article
- An Active Inference Agent for Modeling Human Translation Processes.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Review
- Improving Health Equity: The Role of the Oncology Advanced Practitioner in Managing Implicit Bias.Journal of the advanced practitioner in oncology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
There is now widespread consensus that social biases often influence actions independently of the actor's intention or awareness. The notion that we are sometimes blind to the origins of our thoughts, attitudes, and behaviors also features prominently in research into domain-general human memory systems, which has a long history of distinguishing between implicit and explicit repercussions of past experience. A shared challenge across these fields of study is thus to identify techniques for effectively managing the contents of our memory stores, particularly those aspects into which we have limited metacognitive insight. In the present review, we examine recent developments in the cognitive neuroscience of human memory that speak to this challenge as it applies to the social domain. One area of progress pertains to the role of individuation, the process of attending to and representing in memory unique characteristics of individuals, which can limit the influence of generalizations based on social categories. A second body of work concerns breakthroughs in understanding memory consolidation, which determines the fate of newly encoded memories. We discuss the promise of each of these developments for identifying ways to become better stewards of our social minds. More generally, we suggest that, as with other forms of learning and memory, intentional practice and rehearsal may be critical in learning to minimize unwanted biases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.