Aarhus University Seal / Aarhus Universitets segl

Keynote Speakers

Jim Everett (Kent)

Title of Key note: 

Speciesism and the moral basis of human-animal discrimination

Abstract: Philosophers have argued there is a normative relationship between our attitudes towards animals (“speciesism”) and other types of prejudicial discrimination. In this talk I will discuss speciesism as a social psychological construct, considering similarities and differences between the psychological processes and motivations underlying speciesism and traditional types of discrimination. 

Alex Madva (Cal Poly Pomona)

Title of Key note: 

Confronting Bias and Discrimination

Abstract: High-profile anecdotes of mass shaming on social media foster the perception that social confrontation and “silencing” have gone too far. Yet empirical research on more local, person-to-person interactions paints a different picture: when it comes to bias and discrimination, we are still not confronting each other enough. Passive bystandingprevails.This presentation therefore draws on a growing but still underappreciated body of empirical literature to make concrete ethical and pragmatic proposals for when and how to confront bias and discrimination.

Steve Neuberg (Arizona)

Title of Key note: 

The Evolutionary Logics of Stereotyping, Stereotypes, Prejudices, and Discrimination

Abstract: Prominent theoretical approaches to understanding stereotyping, the content of stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination struggle to capture the great variability in the forms they take, the factors that shape these forms, and how these forms relate to one another.  I present an alternative perspective, one predicated on the assumption that our evolved psychology is “designed” to predict, detect, and manage the threats and opportunities others potentially afford us.  This affordance-management approach not only captures what we have long known but, more important, generates a large number of novel (and now empirically supported) predictions about previously undetected nuances about stereotyping, stereotypes, prejudices, and discrimination that lie outside the theoretical architectures of prominent approaches.

Deborah Hellman (Virginia)

Title of Key note:

 

What machine learning and algorithmic decision-making can teach us about discrimination

Abstract: Recent controversies about the use of machine learning and algorithmic tools to make consequential decisions about hiring, lending, school admissions, etc. reveal important ambiguities in prominent legal and philosophical accounts of what discrimination is and what makes it wrong.  Take the prominent ideas of disparate treatment and disparate impact to start.  Some theories of discrimination find it troubling to allocate goods or opportunities on the basis of a protected trait (race or sex, for example)?  But what counts as doing this?  Is any use of the protected trait within the algorithmic process an instance of disparate treatment, or only some uses?  In addition, he fact that a policy has a disparate negative impact on a protected group is often viewed a morally troubling.  Is a disparate impact present when more people of a protected group are mischaracterized by the algorithm?  Or should we focus on whether more people of the protected group are denied the good?  These are just two of the ways that the world of algorithmic decision-making problematizes our understanding of important concepts of discrimination law and theory. 

Sophia Moreau (Toronto)-CANCELLED

Title of Key note:

Can there be wrongful discrimination without subordination? 

 

Abstract: If discrimination wrongs people by failing to treat them as each other’s equals, then at least in one sense of “subordination," there can be no wrongful discrimination without subordination.  But can there be cases in which a policy fails to treat some people as the equals of others in a particular context, and yet this group of people is not generally subordinated to others in their society —or at least, not subordinated on the basis of the trait that the policy uses to distinguish them from others? What should we say about these cases, from a moral standpoint?  Are they instances of wrongful discrimination?  Is rectification of such forms of discrimination as morally urgent as those forms that do contribute to social subordination?

Jim Sidanius (Harvard)

June 29 Jim Sidanius passed away unexpectedly. Please click here to read the obituary and remberance from the International Society of Political Psychology  

Below you find a link to a talk Jim Sidanius gave at LSE The London School of Economics  and Political Science, Department of Psychological and Behavioural Science:

Link to the event page at LSE: https://www.lse.ac.uk/Events/2021/03/202103311600/psychology

Direct link to video: The Psychology of Intergroup Inequality | LSE Online Event - YouTube