rogue_scholarx

I live in Chicago and we have access to a bunch of information regarding the judges. I mean, I'm sure only 10% of people actually read it because some of the stuff I saw was just flooring. One judge threatened to jail a rape victim for refusing to watch a video of her own rape, and was re-elected.

Seriously, judicial elections are horrible.

Edit: got some of the facts wrong in my initial comment. Here is an article: https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-2006-03-02-0603020210-story.html

Raw sockets it is.

Mostly just curious, but are you aware of any studies or meta-analyses of how implicit bias and confirmation bias work alongside one another, particularly regarding political beliefs?

For others: confirmation bias is the system that essentially makes us assign more importance to an event that supports a pre-existing belief. It seems that a particularly strong implicit bias combined with confirmation bias could inadvertently drag people into certain political beliefs (i.e. regarding who uses welfare, etc.)

If not, researchers, feel free to borrow/steal this idea for your next study.

Yeah. That kind of money is just... Hard to argue against.

Ditto. I'm kind of excited to play with this.