Journal of Psychology and Cognition

All submissions of the EM system will be redirected to Online Manuscript Submission System. Authors are requested to submit articles directly to Online Manuscript Submission System of respective journal.
Reach Us +441518081136

Rapid Communication - Journal of Psychology and Cognition (2025) Volume 10, Issue 2

Implicit vs. Explicit Bias: Understanding the Two Faces of Prejudice

Zoe Calderon*

Department of Addictive Behaviour and Addiction Medicine, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany

*Corresponding Author:
Zoe Calderon
Department of Addictive Behaviour and Addiction Medicine
University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany
E-mail: zoe.cald@gmail.com

Received: 03-Mar-2025, Manuscript No. AAJPC-25-166657; Editor assigned: 04-Mar-2025, PreQC No. AAJPC-25-166657 (PQ); Reviewed: 18-Mar-2025, QC No. AAJPC-25-166657; Revised: 24-Mar-2025, Manuscript No. AAJPC-25-166657 (R); Published: 31-Mar-2025, DOI: 10.35841/aajpc-10.2.281

Citation: Calderon Z. Implicit vs. Explicit bias: Understanding the two faces of prejudice. J Psychol Cognition .2025;10(2):281

Visit for more related articles at Journal of Psychology and Cognition

Introduction

Prejudice is not always overt or intentional. In modern psychology and social science, the conversation has expanded from obvious discriminatory actions to include subtler, unconscious processes that shape our judgments and behavior. Two core constructs—implicit bias and explicit bias—represent the dual faces of prejudice. While explicit bias refers to attitudes and beliefs that people deliberately express, implicit bias operates below the level of consciousness, often in contradiction to our declared values [1].

Understanding the contrast and interaction between these two forms is essential in identifying and combating discrimination that persists even in societies that pride themselves on equality and fairness.Explicit bias involves conscious attitudes and beliefs we have about a group or individual. These biases are deliberate and controllable. People with explicit bias are typically aware of their prejudices and may openly express them. Examples include racist slurs, sexist hiring policies, or openly stating a preference for one group over another [2].

Explicit biases are often shaped by cultural conditioning, personal experiences, and group norms, and are typically reinforced by education, religion, or political ideology. While social pressure may encourage people to conceal these biases, they can still surface in moments of anger, stress, or when individuals feel emboldened [3].

Implicit bias, in contrast, refers to automatic, unconscious associations people make between different groups of people and stereotypes. These biases are learned over time through media exposure, socialization, and environmental cues, often beginning in early childhood. Implicit bias operates without intent, making it especially insidious [4].

For example, someone may genuinely believe they are non-prejudiced but still instinctively associate young Black men with danger or assume that women are less competent in science and technology roles. These automatic associations can influence decisions in hiring, law enforcement, healthcare, and education, often without the decision-maker realizing it [5].

The Implicit Association Test (IAT), developed by Harvard researchers, has been widely used to measure these unconscious biases and has revealed disturbing patterns in how people associate traits such as honesty, intelligence, and trustworthiness with race, gender, or age [6].

Both forms of bias stem from the brain’s natural tendency to categorize information. Categorization helps in making quick decisions, but it can also lead to overgeneralization and stereotyping.Explicit biases are usually taught and reinforced through social, religious, or political messages.Implicit biases, on the other hand, are absorbed passively from repeated exposure to stereotypes in media, conversations, and observed behavior. For instance, repeated portrayal of Muslims as terrorists or women as caregivers in media can unconsciously influence viewers' associations [7].

Neuroscientific research has shown that implicit bias is connected to activity in the amygdala, a brain region involved in emotion and fear. This biological element reinforces the idea that unconscious bias can be reflexive, but not unchangeable [8].

Studies show Black patients are less likely to be given pain medication due to implicit biases among healthcare professionals.Teachers may unconsciously discipline minority students more harshly or expect less academic success [9].

Implicit racial bias can influence policing practices, leading to racial profiling and disproportionate incarceration rates.Hiring managers may overlook qualified candidates from minority groups due to unconscious assumptions about competence or "cultural fit."While explicit biases are easier to identify and regulate through anti-discrimination laws, implicit biases require internal reflection, structured training, and institutional changes to detect and mitigate [10].

Conclusion

The dual nature of prejudice—implicit and explicit bias—reveals the complex ways in which discriminatory attitudes operate. While explicit bias may be socially condemned, implicit bias continues to shape behaviors and decisions, often beneath the radar of conscious thought. Recognizing and addressing both forms of bias is critical for building more inclusive, equitable societies.

In the fight against prejudice, the first step is awareness. The next is action. By understanding how biases operate and influence us, we can begin to unlearn them, not just as individuals, but collectively—as communities, institutions, and cultures.

References

  1. Serrano-Pozo A, Das S, Hyman BT. APOE and Alzheimer's disease: Advances in genetics, pathophysiology, and therapeutic approaches. Lancet Neurology. 2021;20(1):68-80.

    2. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  2. Khan S, Barve KH, Kumar MS. Recent advancements in pathogenesis, diagnostics and treatment of Alzheimer’s disease. Curr Neuropharmacol. 2020;18(11):1106-25.

    3. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  3. Naseri NN, Wang H, Guo J, et al. The complexity of tau in Alzheimer’s disease. Neurosci Lett. 2019;705:183-94.

    4. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  4. Graff-Radford J, Yong KX, Apostolova LG, et al. New insights into a typical Alzheimer's disease in the era of biomarkers. Lancet Neurology. 2021;20(3):222-34.

    5. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  5. Hane FT, Robinson M, Lee BY, et al. Recent progress in Alzheimer’s disease research, part 3: Diagnosis and treatment. J Alzheimers Dis. 2017;57(3):645-65.

    6. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  6. Ballard R, Perez-Reisler M. Developmental aspects of pediatric mental health. Pediatr Ann. 2020;49(10):e426-30.

    7. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  7. Bauger L, Bongaardt R. Structural developmental psychology and health promotion in the third age. Health Promot Int. 2018;33(4):686-94.

    8. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  8. Chastain EJ.Information Theory, Developmental Psychology, and the Baldwin Effect. Front Neurorobot. 2018;12:52.

    9. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  9. Frankenhuis WE, Tiokhin L. Bridging evolutionary biology and developmental psychology: Toward an enduring theoretical infrastructure. Child Dev. 2018;89(6):2303-6.

    10. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  10. Kline MA, Shamsudheen R, Broesch T. Variation is the universal: Making cultural evolution work in developmental psychology. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2018;373(1743):20170059.

    11. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Get the App