Protesting as a Psychologist

[beginner2011]

Again, few disagree with any of that, though I'd assert that the KKK and neo-nazis of the world are mostly freaks ala 1990s Jerry Springer. Meaning, there aren't a lot of them. Note, this event occurred in a northern city in a blue state, in a very blue city. The four police officers involved were diverse in background and thus far, there is nothing that suggests KKK/neo-Nazi leanings in the picture. i.e., the situation is more complicated than that (long standing SES disparities, distrust of law enforcement, distrust by law enforcement, increased numbers of encounters, etc.).

If we could stop or decrease lynchings, genocide and property theft . . . . or deaths from a pandemic by doing a simple thing, e.g., going home, why would you not do that? Do an organized protest later? Waiting a couple of months and engaging in organized protests in DC and wherever would likely not be accompanied by looting and rioting.


A bit of history:

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/article21178995.html

You've got communities, minority communities, right now that are being destroyed in part by white people participating in protesting, rioting, and looting. That's super uncool.

Selective attention/memory.

Unite the Right rally - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Don't forget that the President of the United States (and the current leader of Republican Party) then went on national television shortly after those events and said, you had "people that were very fine people, on both sides."

When we're talking about people who share common cause with the KKK and neo-nazis, don't try to tell me "there aren't a lot of them."

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Justanothergrad]

Again, few disagree with any of that, though I'd assert that the KKK and neo-nazis of the world are mostly freaks ala 1990s Jerry Springer. Meaning, there aren't a lot of them. Note, this event occurred in a northern city in a blue state, in a very blue city. The four police officers involved were diverse in background and thus far, there is nothing that suggests KKK/neo-Nazi leanings in the picture. i.e., the situation is more complicated than that (long standing SES disparities, distrust of law enforcement, distrust by law enforcement, increased numbers of encounters, etc.).

If we could stop or decrease lynchings, genocide and property theft . . . . or deaths from a pandemic by doing a simple thing, e.g., going home, why would you not do that? Do an organized protest later? Waiting a couple of months and engaging in organized protests in DC and wherever would likely not be accompanied by looting and rioting.


A bit of history:

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/article21178995.html

You've got communities, minority communities, right now that are being destroyed in part by white people participating in protesting, rioting, and looting. That's super uncool.

There are a lot more of them (neo-Nazi and KKK) than you might expect. Like, a lot more. SPL tracks 27 in Minnesota and open rallies, people wearing KKK hoods, and nooses being tied up to send messages is not a thing relegated to the past or rare occurrence (I'm literally texting with a colleague right now about these issues happening... right now). It's not about a blue state/red state. That seems to assume that racism is a single party issue and it isn't. It also assumes that states can't be more complex that a color and ignores the entirity of the rural/urban divide in race relationships. I don't expect that the police have those ties and have not suggested that they do, but four people aren't the problem here either. This incident isn't the problem. Those things are symptoms of the problem.

Going home / stopping protesting hasn't worked to stop racism so far, what would be the rationale/evidence to suggest that it would it stop it this time? There is a strange narrative underlying this argument that change is a relatively easy process that people are open to, and a dangerous one that the reason the civil rights movement worked is because people deferred to authority. Literally quite the opposite.

I might even be so bold as to suggest that people are tired of waiting for racism to end. Because, you know, it kills people and destroys lives. I don't disagree that its super uncool that all sorts of communities are being damaged. I don't see waiting to protest 'a few months' as a solution either. It reminds me of the 'thoughts and prayers' argument whenever another mass shooting happens in the whole ''the time to act is later' vibe. Racism is tearing the country apart. Going home doesn't change that. It just means you (broadly defined to the public) don't see the ways it does it.

If we're doing history on lives lost, a bit of history:

 

[BuckeyeLove]

Are they forensic psychologists?

Edit: Oops, I see you specified that they are.

Any concerns about risks of being accused of not being impartial in their roles as expert witnesses in certain cases?

Yep. Hell, I legit get nervous every day about things I posted on facebook in 2005 (nothing horrible, but I'm still paranoid). I think I may have told you all about how an attorney in a southern state I was in for fellowship tried to discredit me by finding my facebook profile pic (which still is visible to all even with the most tight locked security), and the pic had buckeye leaves on it, and he accused me of being "some stoner kid who ran back home" while my supervisor testified about my case. He immediately got yelled at by the judge when my supervisor informed them that they were buckeye leaves, but nonetheless, this stuff happening now just seems like something that could get brought up against them at some point in a much more real life-changing/discrediting way.

 

[Justanothergrad]

Honestly it’s to the point where they should just let minority communities make their own law enforcement. Minorities have such a deep distrust in law enforcement (some is legit some is not) I feel this is one of the only solutions. Otherwise this stuff is just gonna keep happening and tbh I don’t want my tax dollars to pay for continued riot/destruction. In the meantime we have to figure out how to better train law enforcement and address of black on black crime which takes a lot more lives than police in any race crime. Everyone has to do their part, its not a one sided issue.

I'm not sure separate but equal has a good ring to it. Also, within ethnicity crime is more common (W on W, etc) than between across the board, so of course more 'black on black' occurs.

Agree on the distrust of law enforcement. An interesting read from PNAS about militarization and its use within LEO, and how this plays in

Militarization fails to enhance police safety or reduce crime but may harm police reputation

National debates over heavy-handed police tactics, including so-called “militarized” policing, are often framed as a trade-off between civil liberties and public safety, but the costs and benefits of controversial police practices remain unclear due to data limitations. Using an array of...

www.pnas.org

 

[futureapppsy2]

Yep. Hell, I legit get nervous every day about things I posted on facebook in 2005 (nothing horrible, but I'm still paranoid). I think I may have told you all about how an attorney in a southern state I was in for fellowship tried to discredit me by finding my facebook profile pic (which still is visible to all even with the most tight locked security), and the pic had buckeye leaves on it, and he accused me of being "some stoner kid who ran back home" while my supervisor testified about my case. He immediately got yelled at by the judge when my supervisor informed them that they were buckeye leaves, but nonetheless, this stuff happening now just seems like something that could get brought up against them at some point in a much more real life-changing/discrediting way.

Is this a different standard than for attorneys? I know attorneys who have been admitted to the bar (often in multiple states) who have numerous arrests for protesting and have even made the national news for those arrests (turns out, it's rather bad optics for the police to forcibly drag out and ziptie people in wheelchairs, so it probably ends up making protests more effective in the end).

 

[Fan_of_Meehl]

no. But loitering in the streets when the latter is going on adds to the problem. Helps create the atmosphere that encourages the latter.

further, this could be done pretty much monthly. We have a pandemic active. Why not wait until an unarmed person is killed in December? You could protest then and not help spread corona.

Some of the vandals don’t look so angry. I think there is a sprinkle of political ideology in there.

I'd say the majority of the streams documenting the looting and vandalism involve people who are not expressing emotions of anger or grief. They're breaking and entering and stealing and many of them appear downright jubilant. Breaking windows and doors out of businesses and homes and ransacking property is an inherently violent, threatening and dangerous activity. I'm surprised more people haven't been shot or killed. When it inevitably happens, I predict that the shooter will be vilified in the media and the looters lionized. Buckle up.

 

[Justanothergrad]

what we are doing now isn’t working. it seems neither side is happy with the current state of things. it seems african americans are more displeased now than they were 50 years ago even though we have absolutely made progress. protesting the past is a silly notion. i don’t buy the above posters twitter link in regards to that. the current time is to be protested. the past is to be studied and learned from.

i think the question to be asked is what is the specific definition of the end game? no racism? if we are looking for no racism we have to address racism on all sides. it is present on both. i can assure you that. Currently the stats don’t really point toward blacks having it much worse than whites when it comes to cops

Table 43

ucr.fbi.gov

AA are around 1/5 the population of whites. they commit a little less than half as much total crime as whites. violent crime is disproportionately higher among AA. on PNAS it says blacks are 2.5x more likely to die by cop than whites. just by this rough estimate of nonpartisan sites it seems the cop issue is rather close to equal in regards to race ? if any rebuttals are provided please provide non partisan numerical sources

Risk of being killed by police use of force in the United States by age, race–ethnicity, and sex

Police violence is a leading cause of death for young men in the United States. Over the life course, about 1 in every 1,000 black men can expect to be killed by police. Risk of being killed by police peaks between the ages of 20 y and 35 y for men and women and for all racial and ethnic groups...

www.pnas.org

Sure, people aren't happy with the state of things. Still, separate but equal still has a bad ring to it. Any inference that one group should have a separate public service relegated to only that group is, at the very least, entirely tone deaf and completely unreasonable since it doesn't work. So let's agree that the argument supporting that sort of asinine plan is going no where, like, ever.

Sure, things arent the way they were 50 years ago. Relatedly, the nooses hanging around town where I am today are still hanging up to protest the protest because its legal for people to hang them on their property to make a point, and you know, using tools of racist lynchings to drive home a point is a good thing to have happening. Or the KKK and neo-nazi marches, you know, the groups who committed all those 'purely historical' atrocities. History "is to be learned from" and yet it isn't, which is sort of the crux of the issue here. I don't expect 'zero' of any attitude (racism, hate for the patriots, whatever), but I do expect a lot more push back against those attitudes and expect it consistently across the board.

The evidence of disproportionately negative police force and police outcomes aren't not nearly relatively the same - I'm not sure I would call a risk ratio of 2.5 "relatively equal". That seems to be substantially different and that PNAS article agrees ("Black women and men and American Indian and Alaska Native women and men are significantly more likely than white women and men to be killed by police. Latino men are also more likely to be killed by police than are white men. "). Also. you forgot to covary poverty rates and lower access to education (along with all the other systemtic predictors of JJ involvement in your analysis of cop issues. Those might be important because they represent some of the systemic barriers to other options.

 

[cara susanna]

In addition to the root causes mentioned above, the FBI has documented that there has been an effort by white supremecists to infiltrate law enforcement. This has been going on for years, apparently. Furthermore, given growing negative attitudes towards police (which are of course understandable), I think it's getting harder to find quality people who want to do that work. I've heard from numerous police officers that it's been difficult hiring. So, there's probably a selection bias going on now too.

 

[WisNeuro]

When bigotry and violence are encouraged by the potus, I'd say the failure of leadership starts somewhere else. That's one situation where things could have been preventable.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

That’s one place.

The United States of America....?

Many of the problems have been made worse by this administration, so if you want to talk about them, let's talk about them.

Maybe start with his comments today about "dominating" the protestors and using a MILITARY response.....

 

[TwistedTea]

In addition to the root causes mentioned above, the FBI has documented that there has been an effort by white supremecists to infiltrate law enforcement. This has been going on for years, apparently. Furthermore, given growing negative attitudes towards police (which are of course understandable), I think it's getting harder to find quality people who want to do that work. I've heard from numerous police officers that it's been difficult hiring. So, there's probably a selection bias going on now too.

yeah who would want that job for that pay. most intelligent people do other jobs. Sort of like teaching, most public school teachers aint great because the pay isnt that great honestly. I am sure there are many that do both jobs as a service, but low pay, not excellent work conditions, and the possibility of violence will tend to attract not great applicants for law enforcement. Personally I wouldnt be a cop for less than 200k a year which is unreasonable to sustain obviously.

 

[Justanothergrad]

The PNAS article was to be taken into context with the higher proportion of crimes committed by AA/population. I do agree that poverty is the problem and lack of education, weak home unit, and lack of good influences do not help the situation. Poor white neighborhoods also suffer from lack of good schools and all of the above things also. That does relate but the end goal of the discussion is Police brutality and the need to show that cops are that much harder on AA than they are whites. Of course they will have a higher chance of death to cop when a higher % of AA are involved in crime.

We should do everything we can to snuff out KKK white power groups, but there are also anti white groups when propose whites are inherently evil out there also who must be snuffed out.

to the post below yes. You can only get so many quality applicants in law enforcement when the pay is low and risk for injury and backlash is high. I sure would never do that job for the current pay.

I'm not sure you're following the PNAS article or the broad literature on LEO involvement with minorities. Higher chance of death is not explained by the frequency of baseline event. The data is extremely clear about this, responses to minorities are overwhelmingly different and more severe than responses to non-minorities. That's... really not an open discussion. It's not one article, it's literally entire fields of research that are clear about this.

Sure, let's get rid of all racist so much as possible. But the whole 'all or nothing / we can't fix one til we fix all' logic doesn't fly as effective or reasonable. How about the big fish first - I don't see anti-white groups marching streets and hanging nooses on a regular basis. I don't see why addressing the most systemtic, historic, and pronounced issue would decrease the need to address others. It may even help. I suspect they may correlate.

 

[Justanothergrad]

Do you have data to support this? The stuff i posted does not. Of course lifetime risk of death by cop will be higher if you have more run ins with the law per capita than other ethnicities. I am not saying it does not exist but the above data does not pan out that way. Especially with the absolute amount of reported murders in the country being HIGHER for AA than white even though they are 1/5 the population.

Uh.

Sure. Go to google scholar and type in "minority bias police" and read any of the thousands upon thousands of articles on the topic to get informed. The data is really clear and it extends to decisions to shoot, arrest/charge, rates of death, etc. Not really sure what else to say about this - racism and the effects of racism are systemtic. This really isn't up for debate - minorities experience negative police outcomes differently. Relatedly. they also experience negative educational outcomes differently. Also, justice system involved outcomes. Of course there are moderators/mediators, but... yeh.... this isn't up for debate or discussion.

 

[TwistedTea]

Uh.

Sure. Go to google scholar and type in "minority bias police" and read any of the thousands upon thousands of articles on the topic to get informed. The data is really clear and it extends to decisions to shoot, arrest/charge, rates of death, etc. Not really sure what else to say about this - racism and the effects of racism are systemtic. This really isn't up for debate - minorities experience negative police outcomes differently. Relatedly. they also experience negative educational outcomes differently. Also, justice system involved outcomes. Of course there are moderators/mediators, but... yeh.... this isn't up for debate or discussion.

Let’s be honest here. There are not thousands. Most are mixed result or having variance between race and what type of interaction occurred. One of the newest and biggest even stated that they believe there is more force on AA than whites but the conclusion was not for sure. Read it yourself. The one in question was by Roland fryer.

This paper is relatively new and states there needs to be more data. I am not trying to argue there are not differences but after spending 30 minutes searching and reading the results are dismal. We need more studies.

The topic IS up for debate and discussion. Whether you like it or not. Now please provide indisputable evidence or admit there are many gaps in the literature with some studies not being significant and others leaning either way. As a psychologist you should be more akin to cruising through studies.

 

[beginner2011]

The topic IS up for debate and discussion.

This is wrong. For a recent review of this topic on these forums: What is the role of psychologists in reducing injustice and increasing social justice?

If nothing else, I find participating in these discussions on this forum a useful reminder of just how ****ing clueless most Americans are about the extent of the problem. Even professionals in helping fields such as our own, who really ought to know better.

 

[TwistedTea]

This is wrong. For a recent review of this topic on these forums: What is the role of psychologists in reducing injustice and increasing social justice?

If nothing else, I find participating in these discussions on this forum a useful reminder of just how ****ing clueless most Americans are about the extent of the problem. Even professionals in helping fields such as our own, who really ought to know better.

We are not clueless. Studies are conflicting. Simply saying it is not up for debate does not make it so. Even the few studies that show difference say the data is WEAK and we need more.

 

[Fan_of_Meehl]

This is wrong. For a recent review of this topic on these forums: What is the role of psychologists in reducing injustice and increasing social justice?

If nothing else, I find participating in these discussions on this forum a useful reminder of just how ****ing clueless most Americans are about the extent of the problem. Even professionals in helping fields such as our own, who really ought to know better.

How can you have a domain of scientific inquiry that is not open to debate/discussion?

 

[beginner2011]

How can you have a domain of scientific inquiry that is not open to debate/discussion?

Christ.

Are you suggesting that physics is not a domain of scientific inquiry because physicists aren't interested in debating whether or not the earth is flat?

As we discussed in the other thread, the question is not if inequality is occurring, the debate is regarding the mechanisms and how to intervene effectively.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

His argument sounds like what I hear from Climate Change Deniers...."Not ALL scientists agree...".

The research is pretty darn overwhelming, but whatever.

 

[Fan_of_Meehl]

Christ.

Are you suggesting that physics is not a domain of scientific inquiry because physicists aren't interested in debating whether or not the earth is flat?

As we discussed in the other thread, the question is not if inequality is occurring, the debate is regarding the mechanisms and how to intervene effectively.

Satan.

No. I am not suggesting that physics is not a domain of scientific inquiry because physicists aren't interested in debating whether or not the earth is flat. But I am asserting that any meaningful CONTEMPORARY area of inquiry within the scientific domain of physics is one in which various physicists are engaging in vigorous, meaningful, and extensive debates/discussions about what experiments should be done and what the results of said experiments actually mean in terms of corroborating or refuting various scientifically meaningful theoretical propositions.

If you react this strongly (emotionally) to the very idea that it's okay to have a debate within this area, how objective can you be in terms of conducting, interpreting, or reviewing research in this area?

 

[DokterMom]

In addition to the root causes mentioned above, the FBI has documented that there has been an effort by white supremecists to infiltrate law enforcement. This has been going on for years, apparently. Furthermore, given growing negative attitudes towards police (which are of course understandable), I think it's getting harder to find quality people who want to do that work. I've heard from numerous police officers that it's been difficult hiring. So, there's probably a selection bias going on now too.

I hadn't heard this before. Did some quick research and it appears to be well-documented and true. Very sad, and likely to be a factor in the types of violent police responses we're seeing.

Thanks for bringing this to our attention --

 

[Fan_of_Meehl]

Christ.

Are you suggesting that physics is not a domain of scientific inquiry because physicists aren't interested in debating whether or not the earth is flat?

As we discussed in the other thread, the question is not if inequality is occurring, the debate is regarding the mechanisms and how to intervene effectively.

And, if there are any 'Things I Have Learned (So Far)' from my Lord and Savior (Jacob Cohen), it's that 'The Earth is Round (p < .05)'

http://www.personal.kent.edu/~dfresco/CRM_Readings/Cohen_1990.pdf

http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~dift3913/cours/papers/cohen1994_The_earth_is_round.pdf

 

[AbnormalPsych]

And, if there are any 'Things I Have Learned (So Far)' from my Lord and Savior (Jacob Cohen), it's that 'The Earth is Round (p < .05)'

http://www.personal.kent.edu/~dfresco/CRM_Readings/Cohen_1990.pdf

http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~dift3913/cours/papers/cohen1994_The_earth_is_round.pdf

It also hurts to fall onto from high up:

Parachute use to prevent death and major trauma related to gravitational challenge: systematic review of randomised controlled trials

Objectives To determine whether parachutes are effective in preventing major trauma related to gravitational challenge.Design Systematic review of randomised controlled trials.Data sources: Medline, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases; ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[beginner2011]

“wrong” is a smidge broad. The topic is up for debate, necessarily, as to effectively intervene we need to understand mechanisms. And, I think the mechanisms are far more complex than current active “I don’t like black people” racism from cops.

So, let’s assume something in the range of the following is true

- in the many, many thousands of encounters police have with people per year, a very small number result in a fatality.
- of that small number, most are adjudicated justified (a non insig number of which others may disagree with).
- of that small number where there’s agreement/disagreement on justification, you have some where in the vicinity of 2-3 times greater chance based on population stats to be a victim of an unjustified killing if black.
- on an encounter level there’s no evidence of increased risk based on race.
- so, the problem appears to be in number of encounters in part. Here’s where my knowledge breaks down and I’d love for someone to identify errors here or counterpoints.

- is there a difference based on urban versus rural?
- police presence in low ses urban environments versus high ses urban environments seems like it would drive up asymmetrical encounter rates.
- problem: crime rate higher in former environment. Law abiding locals want police there so those areas can be moved peaceful and allow people to flourish and get on about their business.
- reducing encounter rate by leaving high crime areas seems like a bad solution
- increasing high ses encounter rate might increase unjustified white killings, narrowing the rate disparity, but that’s not a good solution either
- seems then that we need to work on changing contributory elements in policing styles for what is a low n event relative to their encounter rates. Meaning, by an overwhelming majority cops don’t kill unarmed citizens. That’s a big and challenging psychology problem.
- longer term solution - decrease ses disparity. That would probably solve it. But, obviously easier said then done and I disagree that cpusa.org is the solution (democratic socialism direction). I throw the latter in as I’ve seen various figures suggesting this is a failure of capitalism and so on.

I appreciate the effort to break this down. I think that's valuable. If I had more time to go through line by line I would. For now, I'll just say that that the assertion that "on an encounter level there's no evidence of increased risk based on race" seems to be inaccurate:

An Empirical Analysis of Racial Differences in Police Use of Force

This paper explores racial differences in police use of force. On non-lethal uses of force, blacks and Hispanics are more than fifty percent more likely to experience some form of force in interactions with police. Adding controls that account for important context and civilian behavior reduces, but cannot fully explain, these disparities. On the most extreme use of force – officer-involved shootings – we find no racial differences in either the raw data or when contextual factors are taken into account. We argue that the patterns in the data are consistent with a model in which police officers are utility maximizers, a fraction of which have a preference for discrimination, who incur relatively high expected costs of officer-involved shootings.

https://law.yale.edu/sites/default/files/area/workshop/leo/leo16_fryer.pdf

 

[beginner2011]

The statement I made referenced fatalities.

Ok. I think it's pretty clear that there is concern about police behaviors beyond events that end in fatalities. I would say that's inappropriately limiting the scope of the issue.

- seems then that we need to work on changing contributory elements in policing styles for what is a low n event relative to their encounter rates. Meaning, by an overwhelming majority cops don’t kill unarmed citizens. That’s a big and challenging psychology problem.
- longer term solution - decrease ses disparity. That would probably solve it.

Yes, these sound like great ideas to address reductions in fatalities.

The broader issue of inequities in use of force would also benefit from these reforms. There's also reason to believe that additional measures, such as ensuring adequate accountability (i.e., punishment for inappropriate use of force by police) might go a long way to reduce both inequities in use of force and fatality by police.

 

[beginner2011]

On the former, I agree there is concern beyond fatalities and that aggression more broadly needs to be addressed. But, we were talking about fatalities.

Only fatalities? Says who?

So, that was the scope of the issue. I.e., my statement was not inaccurate, nor inappropriately limiting scope.

I disagree. I think the majority of the protesters would probably disagree, as well.

 

[mypointlesspov]

A lot of posts in this thread serve as a fine example of why we need further cultural competence training in psych programs.

 

[beginner2011]

I responded to a post that was sourced to primarily a part of the discussion about higher fatality rate. I addressed fatality rate. But, this is semantics. You’d like to criticize something in my post rather than agree. Feel free.

I agree that enforcement disparities go beyond fatality rates.

I've agreed with plenty of your posts. Up until the discussion of this topic I'd estimate I've agreed with you the vast majority of the time and found your posts really valuable across threads and topics. I assure you this isn't a personal issue I have with you.

Look back at the thread and point out to me where it was indicated we were discussing fatality rate exclusively. As far as I can tell your post is the first instance of limiting the scope in that way. Maybe I'm wrong and missing something, but I think this is an example of a theme among people approaching this topic from a certain perspective that makes it really difficult for them to empathize and support protesters.

 

[foreverbull]

Speaking of scope, let’s remember that racism isn’t just found in police departments. Should we also start pulling research that suggests that employers toss out more applications with “ethnic” sounding names, research on rampant housing/realtor discrimination against African Americans, differential treatment in healthcare, etc. etc. etc.? Racism against black Americans starts from birth in this country and continues across the lifespan in numerous settings. All of this has research support yet the burden somehow lies with those who’ve experienced racism or are highly educated to inform everyone else and “prove” that it’s still happening.

These protests are fueled not just by violence against our black Americans (although certainly that is a huge catalyst and not to be dismissed), but a lifetime of being treated unfairly in this country because of the color of their skin rooted deeply in attitudes and behaviors that have been justified for hundreds of years via religious scripture. Racism has persisted even without the Bible being an acceptable source/argument for subjugation currently, without legal slavery, without Jim Crow laws, etc. We can debate the statistics in police brutality studies, which is fine, but will we continue to do so for every single line of research that supports the idea that racism exists? When will we have enough “proof” to satisfy those who are “skeptical?”

 

[R. Matey]

“wrong” is a smidge broad. The topic is up for debate, necessarily, as to effectively intervene we need to understand mechanisms. And, I think the mechanisms are far more complex than current active “I don’t like black people” racism from cops.

So, let’s assume something in the range of the following is true

- in the many, many thousands of encounters police have with people per year, a very small number result in a fatality.
- of that small number, most are adjudicated justified (a non insig number of which others may disagree with).
- of that small number where there’s agreement/disagreement on justification, you have some where in the vicinity of 2-3 times greater chance based on population stats to be a victim of an unjustified killing if black.
- on an encounter level there’s no evidence of increased risk based on race.
- so, the problem appears to be in number of encounters in part. Here’s where my knowledge breaks down and I’d love for someone to identify errors here or counterpoints.

You're taking a frequentist approach to this problem that I think warrants scrutiny. I think this question is better thought of as a Bayesian question (e.g.: under what conditions does the probability of x event occur rather than how often does x event occur). The problem with framing the question under frequentist assumptions is that it insinuates that the problem is rare, and therefore, insignificant (e.g.: an outlier). IMO the better question to ask: "Under what conditions does police brutality against POC occur?" I mean "brutality" intentionally, because it's rational to view brutality is a proxy to murder with the latter being an extreme case of the former. I think no one here would disagree that racism influences behavior on some level and it makes sense to extend that logic to police officers so long as they continue to be people. So starting with the assumption of racist beliefs as an antecedent makes complete sense to me. It's also logical to assume we mean high crime urban areas as that is where these events continue to occur.

 

[R. Matey]

The problem is rare (fatalities/encounters) and significant, which complicates intervention targets and measurement of success. I think the structural component of this may actually render racist beliefs as an antecedent unnecessary. I.e., non racist cops may kill black peoples at higher rates by population due to SES and crime rate distributions. Thus, we need, in my opinion, to think about developing interventions for the problem assuming both potentially overt racist and non racist sources of disparity. If non-fatal aggression is indeed predictive of fatal aggression, then yes, with the goal of ending the latter, stemming the former is sensible. Though, stemming the former should be a goal in of itself.

Where we're going now is a theoretical debate. I, for one, would theorize that race interacts complexly with SES and crime which I would call systematic racism due to the consequence of historic disadvantages POCs experience in this country. If anything adding these just adds explanatory power to the model, but taking racism out likely reduces it. Separating those grains of sand seems counterproductive to the point though I do tend to agree that looking at merely one dimension of a problem is naive. Ideally, an intervention would target the police who serve all three anyways because this is where the problem lies.

 

[beginner2011]

I think you're both really smart people, and you're taking a really carefully considered scientific approach to investigating the question that you've raised.

I also think that it's noteworthy that this is where a discussion on the topic of "Protesting as a Psychologist" has led. Noteworthy in a way that makes me concerned about the perception of others and general direction of our field in this area.

 

[R. Matey]

I think you're both really smart people, and you're taking a really carefully considered scientific approach to investigating the question that you've raised.

I also think that it's noteworthy that this is where a discussion on the topic of "Protesting as a Psychologist" has led. Noteworthy in a way that makes me concerned about the perception of others and general direction of our field in this area.

Psychology is a ultimately scientific enterprise so I'm not really sure what you were expecting. I'm thinking about this problem like a social scientist who cares about the issue would. Articulating the problem accurately is the first step in finding an effective solution to the problem. In the thread you cited above, I drew a distinction between advocacy as a psychologist and advocacy as a citizen. If someone wants to protest what's happening, good on them. But they are protesting as a citizen not as a psychologist. I read the OP's concerns as essentially "what are the bad things that can happen to me professionally if I protest?" A discussion about what interventions would be effective, as protesting is a form of intervention, seemed to flow naturally from this.

Your compliment felt a bit backhanded to me and I didn't appreciate it. I care deeply about this issue, which I demonstrate in my private life with both my money and my time.

 

[Neo_Super_Ego]

Speaking of scope, let’s remember that racism isn’t just found in police departments. Should we also start pulling research that suggests that employers toss out more applications with “ethnic” sounding names, research on rampant housing/realtor discrimination against African Americans, differential treatment in healthcare, etc. etc. etc.? Racism against black Americans starts from birth in this country and continues across the lifespan in numerous settings. All of this has research support yet the burden somehow lies with those who’ve experienced racism or are highly educated to inform everyone else and “prove” that it’s still happening.

These protests are fueled not just by violence against our black Americans (although certainly that is a huge catalyst and not to be dismissed), but a lifetime of being treated unfairly in this country because of the color of their skin rooted deeply in attitudes and behaviors that have been justified for hundreds of years via religious scripture. Racism has persisted even without the Bible being an acceptable source/argument for subjugation currently, without legal slavery, without Jim Crow laws, etc. We can debate the statistics in police brutality studies, which is fine, but will we continue to do so for every single line of research that supports the idea that racism exists? When will we have enough “proof” to satisfy those who are “skeptical?”

Well said. Sometimes we get too caught up in the details to take a step back and reflect as you did so well. Thank you!

 

[futureapppsy2]

Psychology is a ultimately scientific enterprise so I'm not really sure what you were expecting. I'm thinking about this problem like a social scientist who cares about the issue would. Articulating the problem accurately is the first step in finding an effective solution to the problem. In the thread you cited above, I drew a distinction between advocacy as a psychologist and advocacy as a citizen. If someone wants to protest what's happening, good on them. But they are protesting as a citizen not as a psychologist. I read the OP's concerns as essentially "what are the bad things that can happen to me professionally if I protest?" A discussion about what interventions would be effective, as protesting is a form of intervention, seemed to flow naturally from this.

Your compliment felt a bit backhanded to me and I didn't appreciate it. I care deeply about this issue, which I demonstrate in my private life with both my money and my time.

As someone who understands and respects the role of protesting in social justice but personally doesn't want to do it (for a number of reason, including physical access), I'm grateful that I can contribute to social justice through my research. To me, spending the time, money, and energy to research a phenomenon--what it looks like, what correlates with and causes it, and how to address it--is a sign of really caring deeply about the issue.

 

[ExecutiveDysfunction]

As someone who understands and respects the role of protesting in social justice but personally doesn't want to do it (for a number of reason, including physical access), I'm grateful that I can contribute to social justice through my research. To me, spending the time, money, and energy to research a phenomenon--what it looks like, what correlates with and causes it, and how to address it--is a sign of really caring deeply about the issue.

100% agreed, as someone (I think PsyDr) mentioned recently, politicians only care about evidence and financials, and this is a huge portion of that.

Another area I think we (societally, not just psychologists and scientists) is accurate dissemination of research findings. Pop science articles miss the point in many instances and research findings can be (intentionally or unintentionally) misconstrued to support arguments. Anyone remember that article on gender transitioning that was championed as evidence of negative outcomes for anti-trans protestors when it actually found the opposite?

I don’t have a good answer for this. As others have said, involvement in organizations and advocacy groups who will actually make things happen in Washington. As for the general public, that’s a tougher crowd to reach effectively.

 

[KunoichiDoc]

I hope that if you're a current or future provider or clinician, that you read about and research micro aggressions, so that you can develop compassion for why people still protest. They protest against institutional racism, white supremacy, and injustice. These same injustices impact disparities in healthcare and disproportionate treatment in communities from which people like George Floyd are a part. It's not just that this one police officer was arrested. Hope does society allow this to even happen in the first place.

yep. It’s pretty irresponsible at this point, honestly. And, it should be noted, the police officer was already arrested and charged. Protesting seems to make little sense. Rioting even less. What’s the goal?

It's

 

[Fan_of_Meehl]

I hope that if you're a current or future provider or clinician, that you read about and research micro aggressions, so that you can develop compassion for why people still protest. They protest against institutional racism, white supremacy, and injustice. These same injustices impact disparities in healthcare and disproportionate treatment in communities from which people like George Floyd are a part. It's not just that this one police officer was arrested. Hope does society allow this to even happen in the first place.
It's

So, is Scott O. Lilienfeld--a psychologist whose work has been critical of the term/construct of 'microaggressions'--an insensitive bigot or merely an incompetent psychologist?

 

[WisNeuro]

This would (possibly) open up a good line of dialogue within the bounds of psychological research and methodology. For anyone interested, here is a recent paper that summarizes some of Lillienfeld's criticisms. Second link is a rebuttal in the same issue

SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class research journals

Subscription and open access journals from SAGE Publishing, the world's leading independent academic publisher.

journals.sagepub.com

SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class research journals

Subscription and open access journals from SAGE Publishing, the world's leading independent academic publisher.

journals.sagepub.com

 

[AllyCat31]

A lot of posts in this thread serve as a fine example of why we need further cultural competence training in psych programs.

I completed a doctoral program in a diverse, urban setting that required a full year of coursework on multiculturalism as well as volunteer involvement in community programs and services (APA accred. requires one semester). When I began the internship interview process and later the postdoctoral process, I often found myself taken aback by some of the discussion about race and systemic racism from folks at similar levels of training. I am now on the other end of the country, again in an urban, diverse setting, albeit of a different makeup, and I still value this training so much.

 

[Fan_of_Meehl]

Just wanted to post Lilienfeld's 2017 paper that goes into some detail on his critique of the microaggression concept

 

[AllyCat31]

Just wanted to post Lilienfeld's 2017 paper that goes into some detail on his critique of the microaggression concept

You offer one article (2x) to support your position (ignoring the irony here that it is authored by a white male), and I will happily read it as I am unfamiliar with Lilienfield. I would hope, in the vain of being good, dutiful psychologists here, that you would investigate the numerous writings on the formulation of the term 'microaggresion' beginning in the 70s as an attempt to encapsulate these very real subtle racial expressions (the APA recommends Nadal, 2013; 2016, Sue, 2016, Lui & Quezada, 2019.

 

[Fan_of_Meehl]

You offer one article (2x) to support your position (ignoring the irony here that it is authored by a white male), and I will happily read it as I am unfamiliar with Lilienfield. I would hope, in the vain of being good, dutiful psychologists here, that you would investigate the numerous writings on the formulation of the term 'microaggresion' beginning in the 70s as an attempt to encapsulate these very real subtle racial expressions (the APA recommends Nadal, 2013; 2016, Sue, 2016).

I posted the article for context since the rebuttal article from the other side was...a rebuttal of that article. And the 2017 article I posted was NOT already one of the two 2019 articles already posted (by another poster). I posted a single (2017) article by Lilienfeld.

 

[AllyCat31]

I posted the article for context since the rebuttal article from the other side was...a rebuttal of that article. And the 2017 article I posted was NOT already one of the two 2019 articles already posted.

This concept was first coined in the 70s. So, the "other side" includes almost 50 years of literature.

 

[Fan_of_Meehl]

This concept was first coined in the 70s. So, the "other side" includes almost 50 years of literature.

Feel free to hunt down and post any articles you wish. Won't bother me in the slightest.

 

[AllyCat31]

Feel free to hunt down and post any articles you wish. Won't bother me in the slightest.

No thank you. It is not up to me to do your research.

 

[Fan_of_Meehl]

No thank you. It is not up to me to do your research.

Nor would I want you to.

 

[R. Matey]

You offer one article (2x) to support your position (ignoring the irony here that it is authored by a white male), and I will happily read it as I am unfamiliar with Lilienfield. I would hope, in the vain of being good, dutiful psychologists here, that you would investigate the numerous writings on the formulation of the term 'microaggresion' beginning in the 70s as an attempt to encapsulate these very real subtle racial expressions (the APA recommends Nadal, 2013; 2016, Sue, 2016, Lui & Quezada, 2019.

The article @Fan_of_Meehl posted is a critical review of that literature. Perhaps you should read it prior to reacting and calling people names.

 

[BuckeyeLove]

This aforementioned line of discourse is very familiar to me. I had to do 3 years of intense "diversity labs," where we examined each of our privileges and stimulus value in group format with not so great group facilitation, and these groups usually turned into all or nothing exercises in futility (ie no amount of listening or leaning in would suffice if you checked off too many of the privilege boxes). Nonetheless, it did benefit me in so many ways, truly, but so often it turned into the exact dialogue above (ie defensiveness, unwillingness to consider alternative hypothesis, unwillingness to examine confirmatory biases, etc.). I heard this is what has become of much of APA, is this true? cuz if so I'm glad Ive stuck with only my state org and specialty group.

 

[futureapppsy2]

Mod note: Please try to remain civil and professional, everyone..