Study reveals DEI initiatives may be causing 'hostile attribution bias'

Some DEI training methods may cause psychological harm, according to new research from the NCRI and Rutgers University.

A study released on Monday reveals a significant rise in hostile and punitive attitudes among participants who were exposed to DEI pedagogy that covers topics such as race, religion, and caste.

The study co-author and NCRI Chief Science Officer Joel Finkelstein suggests that this hostile attribution bias may increase intergroup hostility and authoritarian behavior in the long run.

"Finkelstein stated in an interview with Planet Chronicle Digital that they took ideas from DEI lectures and interventions and training, and questioned how they would impact people. They discovered that when individuals are exposed to this ideology, they become hostile without any evidence of racism."

In 2023, a Pew Research Center study revealed that 52% of American workers participate in DEI training events or meetings at work, while Professor Iris Bohnet from the Harvard Kennedy School stated that $8 billion is spent annually on such programs.

Recent studies suggest that the effectiveness of DEI programs as a major area of investment remains a topic of debate, with NCRI's study indicating that they may even exacerbate tensions rather than alleviate them. The study measured "explicit bias, social distancing, demonization, and authoritarian tendencies" with both the DEI materials and control materials.

The NCRI shared anti-racist DEI materials from thought leaders like Ibram X. Kendi and "White Fragility" author Robin DiAngelo with participants, specifically focusing on materials that emphasized awareness of and opposition to "systemic oppression," as popularized by texts such as Kendi's "How to Be an Antiracist."

The study found that individuals who were exposed to anti-racist materials had heightened perceptions of racial bias and were more likely to support punitive measures against perceived offenders of "microaggressions," even without evidence.

"Finkelstein stated that when individuals are expected to encounter anti-racist content in ideology, they tend to become more likely to penalize any indications of misconduct. This includes protesting individuals, calling for their dismissal, demanding public apologies, and receiving calls for their relocation. These punitive measures can result in job loss for some individuals."

The study by NCRI found that DEI programming psychological harms extend beyond race and also affect religious identities. Anti-Islamophobia training in the study led participants to identify bias against Muslims in neutral scenarios.

The NCRI sourced its materials from the ISPU, which aims to offer unbiased research and instruction on American Muslims to facilitate informed discussions and decisions, as stated on its website.

The training provided by ISPU may cause individuals to believe they are being unfairly treated, even when there is no evidence of bias or unfairness. This phenomenon highlights a larger issue: narratives that emphasize victimization and systemic oppression can lead to unwarranted distrust and suspicions of institutions and alter how people perceive events.

The study by Finkelstein in NCRI reveals that the authoritarianism resulting from hostile attribution bias manifests differently in the 21st century.

Finkelstein claims that those who are likely to carry hostilities are individuals who are higher in left-wing authoritarianism. This phenomenon has become more prevalent in recent years, with people beginning to recognize the existence of left-wing authoritarianism alongside right-wing authoritarianism.

The study found that DEI materials actually amplified perceptions of prejudicial hostility, rather than reducing bias.

"Finkelstein stated that the bad ideas causing harm to people are prevalent and shockingly public, as research shows. He believes that this data should be focused on and more of it is needed. However, he emphasizes that this is not about speech but rather people's civil rights."

Planet Chronicle Digital's request for comment from Representatives DiAngelo was not immediately responded to.

Kendi criticized both Planet Chronicle and the study, labeling it as "pseudoscience."

"Kendi stated that it was not surprising that Planet Chronicle would broadcast unpeer-reviewed pseudoscience that misrepresented his work and was based on anchoring bias. He added that this study would likely end up in the historic landfill of pseudoscience alongside other attempts to give scientific legitimacy to racist propaganda, which anti-slavery and civil rights movements then, and DEI and antiracism movements now have been harmful."

Planet Chronicle' Bradford Betz contributed to this report.