Can Unconscious Biases Be Eliminated Through Conscious Awareness And Effort?

This article explores the possibility of eliminating unconscious biases through conscious effort and awareness. It presents an argument that while complete elimination of these biases might be unrealistic, understanding their origin and malleability can help mitigate their influence. It discusses various types of unconscious biases, their evolutionary basis, and the role of cognitive processes, particularly System 1 (intuitive) and System 2 (deliberate) thinking, in shaping our decisions and perceptions. The Free Energy Principle and Active Inference are also discussed, providing a framework for understanding how the brain processes information and seeks to minimise surprise. The article also highlights the importance of prefrontal cortex activation and individual differences in executive function, arguing that while conscious control over biases is possible to some degree, it is constrained by biological factors. The investigation concludes that while unconscious biases cannot be fully eliminated, their impact can be reduced through a combination of awareness, education, and conscious effort.

1. Unconscious Biases

Unconscious biases, also known as implicit biases, are subjective perceptions, attitudes or stereotypes that affect our understanding, actions, and decisions in an unconscious manner. These biases are often formed outside of our conscious awareness, and can fundamentally influence our behavior and decision-making processes. These perceptions are based on biological underpinnings, developmental adaptations and exposure to societal stereotypes and cultural norms, and can be considered as individual preferences in decision-making and internal inferences helping us make sense of the world and our lives.

However, unconscious biases can be in direct contradiction to objective reality and our consciously held understanding, beliefs and values. Due to their automatic and unconscious nature, unconscious biases can be challenging to acknowledge and manage. Unconscious biases are rooted in our evolutionary past and often reinforced by personal experiences, and can influence our perceptions, judgments, and decisions in ways we may not even realize.

There are also individual and group differences influencing our preferences in decision-making, difficulting their definition and identification. Biological, cultural, environmental and even situational factors all contribute to the variability between perceptions as to what constitutes an unconsicous bias, and their defining characteristics.

But can unconscious biases be completely eliminated through conscious awareness and effort, or are they inherently ingrained in human cognition and decision-making?

While complete elimination of these biases might be unrealistic, understanding their diverse nature and varying degrees of malleability can help us to mitigate their influence. The malleability of unconscious biases depends on several factors, including the strength of the association, the frequency of exposure to counter-stereotypical examples, and the individual's motivation to change. Some biases, like implicit associations, can be deeply ingrained and difficult to overcome completely. Others, like anchoring bias, can be more easily mitigated through conscious effort and exposure to diverse information.

Unconscious biases have significant consequences in human societies and interactions, including prejudice, discrimination and inequality. However, these biases can be mitigated through rational deliberation and awareness. Strategies to address unconscious bias include raising awareness of hidden and automatic prejudices, practicing transferable skills for managing those automatic tendencies, and promoting intercultural interactions, understanding and tolerance. Most biases can be mitigated through conscious effort to actively seek out and consider opposing viewpoints. While complete elimination might be unrealistic, conscious awareness, deliberate effort, and exposure to diverse perspectives can significantly reduce the impact of these biases on our perceptions, judgments, and decisions.

2. Definitions and examples of unconscious biases

There are several different types of unconscious biases, such as:

Implicit Association Bias reflects our automatic associations between concepts, often based on stereotypes. For example, it might reveal an unconscious association between "male" and "career" and "female" and "family." While these associations can be malleable through repeated exposure to counter-stereotypical examples, they are often deeply ingrained and difficult to overcome completely.

Confirmation Bias leads us to seek and interpret information in ways that confirm our existing beliefs, even if contradictory evidence exists. For instance, someone with a confirmation bias might only read news sources that align with their political views, reinforcing their existing beliefs and making them less open to alternative perspectives.

In-group Bias favors members of our own social group and can lead to prejudice and discrimination against those perceived as different. For example, an in-group bias might lead someone to favor job applicants from their alma mater over equally qualified candidates from other universities.

Anchoring Bias leads us to rely too heavily on the first piece of information we receive, even if it is inaccurate or incomplete. For instance, someone might judge a new acquaintance based solely on their first impression, even if subsequent interactions reveal a different personality.

Availability Heuristic Bias can lead us to overestimate the importance of information that is readily available to us, even if it is not representative of the larger population. For example, someone might overestimate the risk of being a victim of crime based on frequent news reports, even if statistics show that crime rates are actually declining.

Other real-life examples of common biases include:

Affinity Bias: Favoring individuals who are similar to us. For example, a hiring manager preferring a job applicant who grew up in the same city.

Attribution Bias: Incorrectly evaluating the reasons behind others' experiences and accomplishments. For instance, assuming a candidate is more brilliant and successful because they attended a well-known university.

Ageism: Discrimination based on age. Ageism is a prevalent issue in the workplace, with older workers often being stereotyped as less capable or less adaptable. This bias can lead to unfair treatment and discrimination.

Beauty Bias: Discrimination based on physical attractiveness. Research has shown that attractive people are treated better and perceived as more trustworthy than those considered less attractive. This bias can affect hiring decisions and workplace interactions.

Conformity Bias: The tendency to conform to the opinions of others. This bias affects critical thinking and independent decision-making.

Gender Bias: Discrimination based on gender. For example, studies have found that in STEM fields, both men and women tend to rate men as more competent and hirable than women, even when their qualifications are identical.

Halo Effect: Overly positive evaluation of an individual based on a single trait.

Horns Effect: Overly negative evaluation of an individual based on a single trait.

Implicit bias in hiring decisions: Research has shown that even with identical resumes, applicants with African American-sounding names are less likely to be invited for an interview than those with European white-sounding names.

Racial bias in healthcare: Implicit bias can affect the quality of healthcare, with research showing that African American patients are less likely to receive adequate pain management and are more likely to die from heart disease than white patients.

Implicit bias in political opinions: People's implicit attitudes towards political candidates can influence their voting decisions, even if they don't consciously realize it.

Racial bias in political rhetoric: The way politicians talk about race and immigration can influence people's implicit attitudes towards these issues, with negative rhetoric contributing to more negative implicit attitudes.

Gender bias in political representation: Implicit bias can affect the representation of women in politics, with research showing that women are underrepresented in political offices and face biases in the electoral process.

Judicial bias: Research has found that judges are more likely to deny parole to African American defendants than white defendants, even when controlling for other factors.

Police bias: Implicit bias can affect police decisions, with research showing that police officers are more likely to shoot unarmed black men than unarmed white men.

Voter suppression: Implicit bias can contribute to voter suppression, with research showing that voter ID laws and other restrictions disproportionately affect minority voters.

This diagram lists various types of unconscious cognitive biases:

3. Evolutionary basis of unconscious biases

In the context of evolutionary biology and psychology, several concepts are relevant to understanding the manifestation of unconscious biases. The key evolutionary aspects to be taken into account is that all organisms share the same teleological goal of enhancing survival and reproduction, and that overall human cognition, including unconscious biases, has evolved to serve under these universal motivations.

From survival strategies to mating and collaboration preferences, human cognition is naturally geared towards optimizing the continuation of our species through reproduction. For example, the concept of "Green Beard effect" states that humans are likely to show preference towards people who look similar, at the cost of those who are perceived as dissimilar. In other words, if I have a green beard and you also happen to have a green beard, then I am likely to assume that it is beneficial to collaborate with you, instead of someone who does not have a green beard. This preference for similarity is unconsciously perceived and stems from outside of our consicous control. We do not perceive this preference consiously yet tend to collaborate with people similar to us nevertheless.

There are individual and group differences in threat detection and avoidance. Over our evolutionary past, humans have evolved a heightened sensitivity to detect potential threats, such as predators or hostile individuals. This can lead to unconscious biases towards perceiving certain groups or individuals as more threatening, even in the absence of actual danger. We may unconsciously perceive an individual or group to represent a threat without any previous experience interacting with them. As a result, we may withdraw, compete, or even resort to aggression (fight or flight), based on a mere unconscious negative intuition about their character and intentions. In contrast, we may also unconsciously perceive individuals and groups as safe and welcoming, even in the absence of previous evidence about their true nature and intentions. This positive evaluation results in empathic and cooperative behaviors towards them (tend and befriend). In both cases, we are engaging in "mind-reading", subjective evaluation of the mental states of others. Importantly, there are individual differences in the ability to evaluate other's mental states, and the preferences to cooperate or compete varies between individuals and groups.

Other concepts, like in-group bias confers preference for collaboration with individuals belonging to the same social group, over out-group individuals. Humans have a tendency to favor and trust members of their own social group (in-group) over those outside their group (out-group). This in-group bias may have evolved as a survival strategy to promote cooperation and resource-sharing within the group. However, it can lead to unconscious discrimination and prejudice towards out-group members.

Likewise, the theory of Assortative Mating states that individuals tend to be biased towards choosing mating partners they perceive as similar to themselves, thus being more likely to produce offsprings with higher fitness. Assortative mating can arise from various factors, including unconscious biases. One potential factor that may contribute to these biases is differences in immune systems and human leukocyte antigen (HLA) profiles between individuals. Individuals have unique HLA profiles, which can influence their susceptibility to certain diseases and their ability to recognize and respond to pathogens. HLA molecules are a set of proteins found on the surface of cells that play a crucial role in the immune system. They are responsible for recognizing and presenting foreign antigens to T cells, which then initiate an immune response. In the context of assortative mating, we may unconsciously choose our mating partners based on the compatibility between immune systems.

Unconscious biases in assortative mating related to HLA profiles can arise from compatibility between immune systems and preferences arising from sensory perception such as olfactory, visual, or other biochemical cues:

- Olfactory cues: Individuals can unconsciously detect and prefer the scent of potential mates with dissimilar HLA profiles. This is thought to be an evolutionary mechanism to avoid inbreeding and promote genetic diversity, which can enhance the offspring's immune function.

- Immune system compatibility: We may unconsciously prefer mates with HLA profiles that are compatible with our own, as this can lead to a more effective immune response in their offspring. This could be particularly important in the context of infectious diseases, where genetic diversity can provide a survival advantage.

- Fertility and reproductive success: Certain HLA profiles may be associated with increased fertility or reproductive success, either directly or through their influence on the immune system. We may unconsciously prefer mates with HLA profiles that are linked to these desirable traits.

- Perceived attractiveness: HLA profiles may influence the perceived physical attractiveness of potential mates, either through their effects on body odor or other physiological characteristics. We may unconsciously prefer mates with HLA profiles that they find more attractive.

In addition to immune profiles, other factors, such as cultural, social, and environmental influences, also play a significant role in shaping mating preferences and behaviors. There are several evolutionary mechanisms leading to unconscious biases:

- In-group vs Out-group favoritism: The tendency to divide the world into in-groups (those similar to oneself) and out-groups (those different from oneself) is a fundamental aspect of human psychology. This division can lead to unconscious biases, as certain individuals may preferentially treat in-group members more favorably.

- Kin Altruism (Hamilton's Rule): This phenomenon, also known as kin selection, occurs when individuals prioritize the well-being of their relatives over others, as this increases the chances of their genes being passed on. Kin altruism can lead to in-group favoritism, where individuals preferentially treat their kin or similar individuals more favorably.

- Competition-Cooperation: This concept refers to two opposite survival strategies and preferences between competing for resources and cooperating with others to achieve common goals. In the context of unconscious biases, competition-cooperation dynamics can influence how individuals perceive and interact with others, potentially leading to biases against out-group individuals.

- Individual Differences in basic needs: Individuals have differences in their basic needs that must be fulfilled for survival and well-being. These needs can influence how individuals perceive and interact with others, potentially leading to biases based on perceived threats and preferences to fulfill their needs.

- Survival and Reproduction: The fundamental drives of survival and reproduction can influence how individuals perceive and interact with others. For example, individuals may be more likely to seek mates and form alliances with those who can help them achieve these goals, leading to in-group favoritism and assortative mating.

- Assortative Mating: This phenomenon occurs when individuals choose mates with similar characteristics, such as physiological features or socioeconomic status. Assortative mating can perpetuate social and genetic segregation, contributing to the development of unconscious biases.

- Green Beard Effect: This concept, proposed by Richard Dawkins, refers to the idea that an individual's genes can influence their behavior in ways that increase the chances of their genes being passed on. In the context of unconscious biases, the Green Beard Effect could contribute to the development of biases that favor one's own group.

- Survival and Self-Preservation: Humans have evolved to make quick judgments to stay safe from threats, which can lead to biases based on similarity, expedience, experience, distance, and safety.

- Fear of the Uncanny (uncanny valley): The fear of those similar to us but not quite the same may have led to biases like xenophobia and racism. This in an innate mechanism of survival and reproduction found across species, confering protection against within-species invaders and promoting reproductive success.

- Error Management Theory: Judgments about opportunities and threats, in cases of uncertainty, would consistently err toward minimizing potential costs to reproductive fitness, leading to biases.

- Evolved Prejudice: Prejudice is often associated with discrimination, which is an integral part of group living and is essential to reproductive success in an evolutionary context.

- Emotion and Prejudice: Universal emotions, such as fear, anger, disgust, sadness, happiness, surprise, are socially functional adaptations that can motivate unique behavioral responses.

- Cognitive Stereotyping: Biases originated in response to fears and were helpful for safety and useful for evolution and survival. Cognitive stereotyping helps perceive surroundings quickly and efficiently, and unconsciously affects judgment with missing information filled in from unconscious cognition.

- Neural Processing: Our brains are capable of processing a vast amount of information every second, and we often use mental shortcuts and make decisions impulsively, which can lead to unconscious biases.

- Sexual imprinting: A form of learned mate preference for a trait that an individual has observed in its population during the early stages of life. This learned preference may lead to early formation of unconscious biases in mate selection.

Unconscious Bias can be seen as a biological function, a competency manifested in all humans, which is an evolutionary tool promoting survival and reproduction. These concepts are relevant to understanding unconscious biases because they can influence how individuals perceive and interact with others, often unconsciously and involuntarily. For example, kin altruism and assortative mating can lead to in-group favoritism, while competition-cooperation dynamics and individual differences in basic needs can influence how individuals perceive and interact with out-groups. The Green Beard Effect and Hamilton's Rule can also contribute to the development of biases that favor one's own group. These mechanisms suggest that unconscious biases are deeply ingrained in human psychology and are influenced by a combination of evolutionary, environmental, developmental and cognitive factors.

4. The biomechanics of unconcious biases: Kahneman's systems of cognition

As conceptualized by Nobel Laureate Daniel Kahneman, the two systems of cognition, System 1 (unconscious) and System 2 (conscious), represent two distinct modes of thinking that influence human reasoning and decision-making processes. System 1 and System 2 cognition offer a framework for understanding how humans think and make decisions, emphasizing the interplay between automatic, intuitive responses (System 1) and deliberate, analytical reasoning (System 2) in various cognitive tasks and behaviors. The two systems work together to make sense of the world, and unconscious biases can arise from the System 1 processing.

System 1 operates automatically and quickly, with little or no effort and no sense of voluntary control. It is intuitive, emotional, and based on heuristics and past experiences. It generates impressions, intuitions, and feelings. It is responsible for quick, automatic responses and immediate reactions. System 1 handles tasks like recognizing objects, orienting attention, and making fast judgments, such as recognizing faces, reading emotions, driving on a familiar route, and reacting to danger.

System 2 is the deliberate, slow-thinking mode that requires conscious effort, attention, and mental exertion. System 2 allocates attention to the effortful mental activities that demand it. The operations of System 2 are often associated with the subjective experience of agency, choice, and concentration. It engages in complex computations, logical reasoning, and problem-solving, and it is activated when tasks are novel, require focused attention, or involve analytical thinking. System 2 is responsible for making deliberate choices, planning, and critical decision-making, such as solving complex math problems, learning a new skill, analyzing data, and making important decisions.

Both systems work in tandem, with System 1 continuously generating suggestions for System 2. System 2 often endorses or modifies the outputs of System 1, turning impressions into beliefs or intuitions into actions. System 2 is typically in a low-effort mode, but it is mobilized when System 1 encounters difficulties or when conscious attention is required. System 2 monitors behavior, corrects errors, and engages in detailed processing when needed. One of the tasks of System 2 is to overcome the impulses of System 1. In other words, System 2 is in charge of self-control.

Contrary to popular belief, the brain is not physically divided into two parts corresponding to System 1 and System 2. Both systems can be biased and prone to errors, highlighting the importance of understanding their limitations. While the model of System 1 and System 2 is a simplification of cognitive processes, it remains a valuable tool for insights into decision-making and human behavior.

Regarding the malleability of unconscious biases, Daniel Kahnemann explains in Thinking Fast and Slow:

The question that is most often asked about cognitive illusions is whether they can be overcome. The message of these examples is not encouraging. Because System 1 operates automatically and cannot be turned off at will, errors of intuitive thought are often difficult to prevent. Biases cannot always be avoided, because System 2 may have no clue to the error. Even when cues to likely errors are available, errors can be prevented only by the enhanced monitoring and effortful activity of System 2.

5. Free Energy Principle and Active Inference

Personality, cognition, and perceptions are rooted in and result from biological processes. The body/brain processes incoming stimuli with the goal of optimising homeostasis. The ultimate goal of homeostasis is to optimise survival and reproduction, thus brain/body makes inferences based on combination of memory of previous experiences/decisions and prediction of optimised outcome to reach this goal. This process is called active inference, based on Free Energy Principle (FEP), and is largely unconscious. Active inference and the Free Energy Principle provide a valuable framework for understanding how unconscious biases develop and how they can be mitigated.

The Free Energy Principle proposes that the brain's primary goal is to minimize surprise and maintain a state of equilibrium. It does this by constantly comparing its predictions with incoming sensory information and adjusting its internal model of the world accordingly. This process can be understood as minimizing the "free energy" in the system, which represents the difference between what the brain expects and what it actually experiences. By minimizing free energy, the brain can maintain a state of stability and efficiency.

Active Inference: Imagine your brain as constantly trying to make sense of the world around you. This process, active inference, involves using your existing knowledge and expectations to predict what you will experience next. When your predictions are accurate, your brain is in a state of equilibrium, or homeostasis. However, when unexpected events occur, your brain must update its predictions and adjust its understanding of the world. This continuous process of prediction and error correction allows you to learn and adapt to new situations.

Active inference and the Free Energy Principle work together to explain how the brain processes information and makes decisions. Active inference describes the process of making predictions and updating them based on new information, while the Free Energy Principle provides a theoretical framework for understanding the brain's goal of minimizing surprise and maintaining equilibrium.

Imagine you have always been told that women are bad at math. This belief becomes ingrained in your brain as an unconscious bias. When you encounter a woman who is good at math, your brain may try to rationalize this by thinking that she is an exception to the rule. This is an example of how active inference and the Free Energy Principle can perpetuate unconscious biases.

6. How do FEP and Active Inference relate to System 1 and System 2

The FEP and Active Inference theories provide a theoretical foundation for understanding how System 1 and System 2 cognitive processes interact to minimize free energy, reduce surprise, and optimize adaptive behavior in response to environmental stimuli and internal goals.

System 1 (Intuitive, Automatic):

System 1 cognition aligns with the principles of the FEP by emphasizing rapid, automatic processing based on minimizing surprise. System 1's intuitive judgments and quick decisions can be seen as attempts to reduce the discrepancy between expected and actual sensory inputs.

In the context of Active Inference, System 1 processes can be viewed as the initial, automatic responses that aim to minimize free energy by quickly generating predictions and actions based on prior experiences and heuristics.

System 2 (Deliberate, Analytical):

System 2 cognition corresponds to the FEP through its deliberate, effortful nature that involves more detailed processing to minimize surprise. System 2's analytical reasoning and problem-solving align with the FEP's focus on adaptive behavior through minimizing free energy.

Active Inference theory suggests that System 2 processes engage in active inference by constructing generative models, making complex predictions, and taking actions to reduce free energy. This deliberate mode of thinking involves more conscious effort and cognitive resources.

System 1 and System 2 can be seen as operating within the framework of the FEP and Active Inference. System 1's rapid, intuitive responses may initiate the process by generating predictions and actions to minimize free energy, while System 2's analytical thinking may refine these responses based on more detailed computations and conscious decision-making.

The FEP and Active Inference highlight the importance of adaptive behavior in minimizing surprise and maintaining a steady state. System 1 and System 2, within this framework, work together to optimize cognitive processes and decision-making by balancing automatic, intuitive responses with deliberate, analytical reasoning.

7. The path of least resistance and prefrontal activation of executive control

Conscious control over decisions is possible by activating the System 2 and the prefrontal cortex (PFC), which has executive control over our decision-making. Conversely, without activation of executive functions and prefrontal control we can not avoid unconscious decision-making. By activating the PFC to consciously weigh the pros and cons of the decision, we can reach at least some level of conscious control over our unconscious biases. The problem is that due to the mechanisms of active inference and FEP, the brain typically does not want to change any previous habits, thus it attempts to persuade os towards our innate ways of perceiving the world, leading to perpetuation of unconscious biases.

Brain will always want to choose the path of least resistance.

This means decision-making is always biased towards developmentally learned patterns of behavior (e.g. associative learning), coupled with innate preferences of decision-making stemming from biologial structure. Previous experiences create patterns of behavior, which are reinforced over time. Whatever we learn, brain registers it into memory, thus becoming a habit. In other words, brain itself is biased towards reinforcing the habits in decision-making based on the previous experiences. However, habits/memories of previous experiences can be changed by consciously changing learned patterns of behavior. For that, one must consistently behave differently in order to replace previous habit with a new one.

For example, if one has learned a habit of smoking, this habit can be replaced by creating a new a habit of not smoking. When we feel the urge to smoke, we can consciously exercise prefrontal control and abstain from smoking. Then, the next time the urge to smoke arises, the brain will look into what happened previously, and because the last time we chose not smoke, it will assume that the habit is not to smoke. Brain will always look for what happened previously, and weigh that memory against predicted outcome. Repeat the decision to not smoke for a few times, and a new habit/memory will form. This new habit will become reinforced over time, as new neural connections related to not smoking are preferred over the older ones related to smoking. The connection towards the pathways involved in the new habit becomes the new path of least resistance.

8. The role of individual differences in prefrontal control

Individual differences in the activation patterns of executive function and prefrontal control are crucial. Due to variations in genetics, environment, personality, and social influences, some individuals have greater control over the activation of their prefrontal cortex compared to others. Consequently, some people may be better equipped to control and modify their learned habits, thereby mitigating the impact of unconscious biases. These individual differences generally arise from the complex interplay between genetic and environmental factors. However, in my opinion, the genetic and evolutionary forces that shape human cognition provide the underlying structure, with environmental and developmental factors acting as secondary influences that shape and refine the expression of these underlying patterns. Ultimately, the basal patterns of cognition, behavior, and personality have their roots in an evolutionary framework. Therefore, an individual's biological makeup and the evolutionary forces that have shaped it exert a stronger influence over their ability to activate prefrontal control in their decision-making processes.

However, the challenge with the prefrontal cortex is that it does not directly receive stimuli from other parts of the brain. As a result, the PFC must autonomously excite itself in order to activate executive function and exert conscious control over the decision-making process. And as mentioned previously, there are significant individual differences in the ability to activate and excite the PFC. Consequently, some individuals may experience difficulties in their efforts to consciously activate the PFC and may consequently be unable to fully perceive and mitigate their unconscious biases. This inherent limitation of the PFC, coupled with the variability in individual capacity for PFC activation, presents a significant obstacle in the pursuit of conscious control over one's decision-making. The PFC's reliance on self-generated stimulation, combined with the disparities in this self-activation ability, can hinder some individuals' efforts to overcome the influence of their unconscious biases.

9. So, can unconscious biases be eliminated through conscious awareness and effort?

Following these discussed mechanisms, one can practice activation of PFC to replace previous patterns of behavior/habits of the brain. But this is only possible so far, given biological constraints regarding brain activity. It is extremely hard to increase activation of the PFC significantly without having biological brain structure that permits such changes. There can be some improvements in conscious control and activation of the executive functions, but completely changing brain's innate patterns of behavior is unlikely, due to the constraints of biological structure.

The learned pattens of behavior that can be changed consciously arise from our development and environment. These patterns are rooted in biological structure tho lesser extent, hence they are under stronger control of the executive function and the PFC. As such, by strengthening the executive functions we may also strengthen our decision-making. There may be multiple pathways to strengthen executive function and conscious decision-making. The activation patterns of the PFC can likely be somewhat improved by combination psychological practice, nutrition, physiological exercise, and changes in social environment/behavior. These are some examples of how these factors could potentially improve conscious decision-making and reduce biases:

- Psychological practices like mindfulness meditation can strengthen prefrontal cortex regions involved in self-control and weaken implicit biases. Regular practice may enhance PFC functioning over time by creating new patterns of neural activity, and the reinforcement of those patterns.

- A nutritious diet with adequate nutrients like omega-3 fatty acids, iron, vitamin B/D etc. which support brain health and neurotransmitter function may optimize PFC activity and cognition.

- Physical exercise increases blood flow and neurotrophic factors in the brain. Aerobic exercise in particular may stimulate growth of PFC regions and enhance executive functions involved in conscious reasoning.

- Social exposure to diverse groups of people can help challenge existing implicit biases by providing disconfirming experiences. Broadened perspectives may weaken automatically activated stereotypes, allowing for emergence of new ways of thinking.

- A supportive social environment that encourages open-minded, rationale thinking versus reactiveness/impulsivity strengthens neural pathways for controlled decision-making over automatic biases.

- Learning soft skills like active listening, perspective taking etc. in interactive social contexts exercises neural networks underlying empathy, reducing biases stemming from lack of understanding other viewpoints.

- Work/academic environments that value reason, merit, transparency over biases give positive feedback loops reinforcing impartial thinking habits versus reliance on preconceptions.

So, lifestyle factors may optimize PFC health and function, weakening biases by enhancing neural pathways for conscious, flexible thought over rigid automatic associations. One can change learned habits in all those areas, but only learned habits can be changed, not biological structure. Depressingly, one can not completely change their genetic makeup, even with conscious effort. Biology and evolution still establish limitations over what can be altered and to what degree.

10. How can we become aware of our own unconscious biases?

Here are some key ways we can become more aware of our own unconscious biases:

- Engage in self-reflection: Regularly take time to reflect on your own thought processes, decisions, and interactions. Ask yourself questions like - What assumptions or snap judgments am I making? What experiences or stereotypes might be shaping my perceptions?

- Seek feedback: Ask friends, colleagues, or family members to provide honest feedback on areas where you may exhibit biases. Being open to outside perspectives can reveal blind spots.

- Expose yourself to diverse perspectives: Seek out information, media, and interactions with people from different backgrounds and experiences. Expanding your exposure can challenge and counteract ingrained biases.

- Practice mindfulness: Cultivate mindfulness to increase self-awareness and notice when automatic judgments or biases arise. This can create space to consciously override those impulses.

- Slow down decision-making: When faced with high-stakes decisions, take time to deliberately consider all perspectives rather than relying on fast, intuitive judgments prone to bias.

- Audit your environment: Examine the diversity of your social circles, media consumption, and professional networks. Look for areas where you might be insulated from different viewpoints.

- Participate in implicit bias tests: Take online implicit bias tests like those from Project Implicit. These can uncover biases you weren't aware of by measuring your automatic associations. Learning about your hidden biases enables you to mitigate their effects and improve decision-making.

The key is a combination of introspection, feedback, education, and conscious effort to override automatic biases. Ongoing practice and a genuine commitment to self-improvement are essential for reducing the influence of unconscious biases.

11. Implicit Association Test

Project Implicit is a significant initiative founded in 1998 by Dr. Tony Greenwald, Dr. Mahzarin Banaji, and Dr. Brian Nosek, aimed at exploring implicit social cognition. This non-profit organization, affiliated with Harvard University, focuses on understanding and addressing biases and disparities through research and education. The mission of Project Implicit is to educate the public about hidden biases and provide a platform for collecting data on the internet, serving as a "virtual laboratory" for research on implicit biases.

One of the core tools developed by Project Implicit is the Implicit Association Test (IAT), which measures the strength of associations between concepts and evaluations or stereotypes to reveal hidden or subconscious biases in individuals. The IAT, first published in 1998, has been continuously updated and enhanced to provide insights into implicit attitudes and preferences. IAT enables individuals to understand their implicit biases related to various topics such as age, race, religion, gender, and more.

12. Conclusion

In this essay I have set out to examine whether unconscious biases can be fully overcome through conscious awareness and effort. In reviewing the relevant theories and evidence, a clear picture emerges - while conscious control over biases is possible to a degree, their complete elimination is unrealistic given human cognitive architecture and evolutionary foundations.

Unconscious biases originate from rapidly formed intuitions in System 1 processing to facilitate quick decision-making essential for survival. Innate cognitive mechanisms like error management, emotion and stereotyping shape our automatic associations and preferential treatment of in-groups over out-groups. At the neurological level, minimizing prediction errors through rapid intuitive inferences constitutes the primary function of the brain as defined by theories of free energy principle and active inference.

While deliberate System 2 processing enables re-evaluation of intuitions, its voluntary control relies on prefrontal cortex activation which differs significantly between individuals based on genetic and environmental factors. Even with motivated prefrontal engagement, ingrained neural pathways reinforced over a lifetime resist substantial change. As patterns of perception and behavior emerge from evolutionary pressures to optimize fitness, we inherit biological constraints on how much cognition and habits can diverge from our innate programming.

While awareness of biases and lifestyle optimization may enhance prefrontal functioning and thought flexibility to some degree, habits are difficult to modify without consistent behavioral replacement and reinforcement over extensive periods. Complete elimination of evolved cognitive competencies and ingrained neural circuitry is unrealistic given that we cannot alter our underlying biological architecture shaped by evolutionary and developmental history.

The most we can hope for is mitigating unconscious biases' influence through recognizing limitations of intuition, actively considering alternative perspectives, and cultivating an open and impartial approach. Though not fully conquerable, biases' impacts on important domains can be meaningfully attenuated through changes in environment, education, institutions, and collective mindfulness of hidden prejudices. Ultimately, human cognition demonstrates both conscious control and biological constraints - we possess some capacity for impartiality, but not total transcendence of evolved patterns of thought.

The case presented here suggests that while unconscious biases can be mitigated, their roots in evolution and biology preclude absolute elimination through will or reason alone. A balanced view acknowledges both our potential for rational change and inherent cognitive inclinations that elude complete conscious oversight or transformation.

---

For information and inquiries contact the author

Sources and further reading

Lehtonen, J. (2020) Green Beard Effect, The. In Encyclopedia of Evolutionary Psychological Science (Shackelford, T.K. and Weekes-Shackelford, V.A. eds), Springer International Publishing. https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007/978-3-319-16999-6_1366-1

An Active Inference Model of Collective Intelligence. Rafael Kaufmann , Pranav Gupta , and Jacob Taylor https://arxiv.org/pdf/2104.01066

Ramstead MJ, Kirchhoff MD, Friston KJ. A tale of two densities: active inference is enactive inference. _Adaptive Behavior_. 2020;28(4):225-239. doi:[10.1177/1059712319862774](https://doi.org/10.1177/1059712319862774)

Thinking, Fast and Slow, Daniel Kahneman, ISBN-10 0374533555 https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0374533555/ref=as_li_qf_asin_il_tl?ie=UTF8&creative=9325&creativeASIN=0374533555&linkId=605530201eac71366146ee714501b97e

Alice C. Poirier Amanda D. Melin: Smell throughout the life course. Wiley Online Library, 05 May 2024. [https://doi.org/10.1002/evan.22030](https://doi.org/10.1002/evan.22030)

Implicit Association Test (IAT) [Project Implicit](https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/aboutus.html)

---