Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: "This Map Shows What White Europeans Associate with Race"

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Last Online
    1 Hour Ago @ 08:09 PM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Saxon
    Ancestry
    British Isles, Germany
    Country
    Australia Australia
    Location
    USA
    Gender
    Age
    26
    Family
    Married
    Politics
    Anti-Judaist
    Religion
    Logos
    Posts
    704
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    48
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    76
    Thanked in
    40 Posts

    "This Map Shows What White Europeans Associate with Race"

    This map shows what white Europeans associate with race – and it makes for uncomfortable reading



    This new map shows how easily white Europeans associate black faces with negative ideas.

    Since 2002, hundreds of thousands of people around the world have logged onto a website run by Harvard University called Project Implicit and taken an “implicit association test” (IAT), a rapid-response task which measures how easily you can pair items from different categories.

    To create this new map, we used data from a version of the test which presents white or black faces and positive or negative words. The result shows how easily our minds automatically make the link between the categories – what psychologists call an “implicit racial attitude”.

    Each country on the map is coloured according to the average score of test takers from that country. Redder countries show higher average bias, bluer countries show lower average bias, as the scale on the top of the map shows.

    Like a similar map which had been made for US states, our map shows variation in the extent of racial bias – but all European countries are racially biased when comparing blacks versus whites.

    In every country in Europe, people are slower to associate blackness with positive words such as “good” or “nice” and faster to associate blackness with negative concepts such as “bad” or “evil”. But they are quicker to make the link between blackness and negative concepts in the Czech Republic or Lithuania than they are in Slovenia, the UK or Ireland.

    No country had an average score below zero, which would reflect positive associations with blackness. In fact, none had an average score that was even close to zero, which would reflect neither positive nor negative racial associations.



    Implicit bias

    Overall, we have scores for 288,076 white Europeans, collected between 2002 and 2015, with sample sizes for each country shown on the left-hand side.

    Because of the design of the test it is very difficult to deliberately control your score. Many people, including those who sincerely hold non-racist or even anti-racist beliefs, demonstrate positive implicit bias on the test. The exact meaning of implicit attitudes, and the IAT, are controversial, but we believe they reflect the automatic associations we hold in our minds, associations that develop over years of immersion in the social world.

    Although we, as individuals, may not hold racist beliefs, the ideas we associate with race may be constructed by a culture which describes people of different ethnicities in consistent ways, and ways which are consistently more or less positive. Looked at like this, the IAT – which at best is a weak measure of individual psychology – may be most useful if individuals’ scores are aggregated to provide a reflection on the collective social world we inhabit.

    The results shown in this map give detail to what we already expected – that across Europe racial attitudes are not neutral. Blackness has negative associations for white Europeans, and there are some interesting patterns in how the strength of these negative associations varies across the continent.

    North and west Europe, on average, have less strong anti-black associations, although they still have anti-black associations on average. As you move south and east the strength of negative associations tends to increase – but not everywhere. The Balkans look like an exception, compared to surrounding countries. Is this because of some quirk about how people in the Balkans heard about Project Implicit, or because their prejudices aren’t orientated around a white-black axis? For now, we can only speculate.

    Open questions

    When interpreting the map there are at least two important qualifications to bear in mind.

    The first is that the scores only reflect racial attitudes in one dimension: pairing white/black with goodness/badness. Our feelings about ethnicity have many more dimensions which aren’t captured by this measure.

    The second is that the data comes from Europeans who visit the the US Project Implicit website, which is in English. We can be certain that the sample reflects a subset of the European population which are more internet-savvy than is typical. They are probably also younger, and more cosmopolitan. These factors are likely to underweight the extent of implicit racism in each country, so that the true levels of implicit racism are probably higher than shown on this map.

    This new map is possible because Project Implicit release their data via the Open Science Framework. This site allows scientists to share the raw materials and data from their experiments, allowing anyone to check their working, or re-analyse the data, as we have done here. I believe that open tools and publishing methods like these are necessary to make science better and more reliable.
    Source
    Last edited by Juthunge; Saturday, May 6th, 2017 at 12:17 AM. Reason: Added quotation tags.

  2. #2
    Anachronism "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Huginn ok Muninn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Ancestry
    Germany, Norway, England
    Subrace
    Nordeby
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Texas Texas
    Gender
    Zodiac Sign
    Leo
    Family
    Single adult
    Politics
    Farther right than you.
    Posts
    3,077
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    664
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    786
    Thanked in
    379 Posts
    Why is there a problem with reacting negatively to black faces? I'll tell you why. It interferes with the agenda which almost all of these people pursue, knowingly or unknowingly, which is to destroy the fabric of European cultures and erase the identities of Europeans themselves. They see "racism" as an evil, when it is really only tribalism, an inherent built-in self-protection mechanism in every human culture. But they only want to destroy EUROPEAN societies, so they only seek to demonize it among Europeans. If there were no black Africans living in Europe, there would be no purpose in this "test." This is simply a measure to see which social engineering methods are doing the best job of killing white people.
    Most people think as they are trained to think, and most people make a majority.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Last Online
    1 Hour Ago @ 08:09 PM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Saxon
    Ancestry
    British Isles, Germany
    Country
    Australia Australia
    Location
    USA
    Gender
    Age
    26
    Family
    Married
    Politics
    Anti-Judaist
    Religion
    Logos
    Posts
    704
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    48
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    76
    Thanked in
    40 Posts
    It's too bad the study appears to just be on blackness. Asians dislike blacks too. It could've been a more useful study.

    The article linked a map of the results of the same study done in the United States.



    Pretty interesting results for some of the mid-atlantic states.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Last Online
    1 Week Ago @ 06:19 PM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Ancestry
    75% NW Euro (English/Dutch/German), 25% Sicilian
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    New York New York
    Gender
    Politics
    Nationalist
    Religion
    Eternal Tradition
    Posts
    62
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    4
    Thanked in
    2 Posts
    Not really any surprise. More relevant to ask is why people (even blacks) make these generalizations in the first place. The answer: they're mostly accurate or otherwise valuable as a tool of survival.
    "Considering your specific duty as a kshatriya, you should know that there is no better engagement for you than fighting on religious principles[...] either you will be killed on the battlefield and attain the heavenly planets, or you will conquer and enjoy the earthly kingdom. Therefore get up and fight with determination. Do thou fight for the sake of fighting, without considering happiness or distress, loss or gain, victory or defeat--and, by so doing, you shall never incur sin."

  5. #5
    a.k.a. Alpensun Ringenwald's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Online
    2 Hours Ago @ 07:42 PM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Swiss
    Ancestry
    Switzerland
    Country
    Switzerland Switzerland
    Location
    The edge of the Germanic world
    Gender
    Age
    37
    Posts
    165
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    36
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    27
    Thanked in
    16 Posts
    I think the colors are misleading. If no country or state received a score below zero for positive associations with black faces, all countries or states should be colored with some shade of red. It's a basic rule of cartography. Otherwise you have the impression that Norway or the State of Washington for example has a positive attitude whereas it's not the case. It would maybe make the map visually less appealing, but more representative of the truth.

  6. #6
    Proffessional Hickerbilly
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    SpearBrave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    American of German decent
    Ancestry
    Bavaria/Switzerland
    Country
    Other Other
    State
    Kentucky Kentucky
    Location
    Central
    Gender
    Age
    53
    Zodiac Sign
    Libra
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Kunstschmiede
    Politics
    Self-Reliance
    Religion
    Asatru
    Posts
    4,573
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,794
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,317
    Thanked in
    611 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Sawyer View Post
    It's too bad the study appears to just be on blackness. Asians dislike blacks too. It could've been a more useful study.

    The article linked a map of the results of the same study done in the United States.



    Pretty interesting results for some of the mid-atlantic states.
    This map if overlaid to ethnic maps show that higher the negro population is the more people dislike negroes. Funny as you mentioned the mid-Atlantic states are in red as well as several Midwest states and these were not part of the Confederacy and it proves what HoM is saying about tribalism.

    I would like to see map broken down by individual counties for the US.
    Life is like a fire hydrant- sometimes you help people put out their fires, but most of the time you just get peed on by every dog in the neighborhood.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Last Online
    1 Hour Ago @ 08:09 PM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Saxon
    Ancestry
    British Isles, Germany
    Country
    Australia Australia
    Location
    USA
    Gender
    Age
    26
    Family
    Married
    Politics
    Anti-Judaist
    Religion
    Logos
    Posts
    704
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    48
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    76
    Thanked in
    40 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by SpearBrave View Post
    This map if overlaid to ethnic maps show that higher the negro population is the more people dislike negroes. Funny as you mentioned the mid-Atlantic states are in red as well as several Midwest states and these were not part of the Confederacy and it proves what HoM is saying about tribalism.

    I would like to see map broken down by individual counties for the US.
    The worst part is that it's just a test for negative association with blacks. I know plenty of people (usually from the Southwest) who dislike blacks but are okay with Hispanics. Even a lot of Hispanics don't like blacks.

    Also, the article doesn't appear to explain what the actual magnitude of the 0.075 difference between Texas and New Mexico is, for example.

  8. #8
    Senior Member Coillearnach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Online
    40 Minutes Ago @ 09:28 PM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Ancestry
    Anglo-Celtic
    Country
    Confederate States Confederate States
    Gender
    Age
    31
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Vagrant
    Politics
    Nativism/Nationalism
    Religion
    Summum bonum
    Posts
    321
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    252
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    230
    Thanked in
    112 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Alpensun View Post
    I think the colors are misleading. If no country or state received a score below zero for positive associations with black faces, all countries or states should be colored with some shade of red. It's a basic rule of cartography. Otherwise you have the impression that Norway or the State of Washington for example has a positive attitude whereas it's not the case. It would maybe make the map visually less appealing, but more representative of the truth.
    The article explicitly points out that no one was near zero though so it doesn't seem like dishonesty was a motivation. Why represent data that isn't there? It's the same reason we use breaks in graphing.

  9. #9
    a.k.a. Alpensun Ringenwald's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Online
    2 Hours Ago @ 07:42 PM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Swiss
    Ancestry
    Switzerland
    Country
    Switzerland Switzerland
    Location
    The edge of the Germanic world
    Gender
    Age
    37
    Posts
    165
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    36
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    27
    Thanked in
    16 Posts
    Not dishonesty but two-color gradients should be used to represent antagonistic results, like positive and negative figures, cold and hot, and so on. To separate the two-color palette at the mean like on these maps is a little bit arbitrary. For example, on the US map, the difference between the lowest score of New Mexico (0.341) and the highest score of Mississippi (0.456) is 0.115. Does such difference justify to colorize them with completely different colors as they have both similar positive "bias"? If so, the author, a cognitive scientist, should have been clearer on what those numbers and colors mean. Maybe 0.341 is a high score after all, like 0.456.

    Didn't want to quibble. I thought it was useful to point out that, as maps shape our view of the world usually quickly, it's important to think about the meaning of the colors used, sometimes inadvertently. For those interested, there is a field of research called "semiology of graphics" that deals with the cognitive reasons of choosing this or that representation on maps.

Similar Threads

  1. Will "White Babies" Save the White Race?
    By Ahnenerbe in forum Strategic Intelligence
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: Wednesday, July 31st, 2019, 06:02 PM
  2. The Darkest "White" Europeans
    By Ted in forum Europoid
    Replies: 55
    Last Post: Tuesday, March 14th, 2017, 04:17 AM
  3. Replies: 2
    Last Post: Monday, April 16th, 2012, 02:06 AM
  4. Replies: 21
    Last Post: Friday, April 22nd, 2011, 10:54 AM
  5. Replies: 13
    Last Post: Monday, December 20th, 2004, 01:51 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •