Unconscious biases, including implicit and cognitive biases, are pervasive in our daily lives and can significantly impact our decisions, even when we strive to be fair and objective. For workplace investigators, recognizing and addressing these biases is crucial to conducting thorough, impartial and fair investigations.

What are Implicit Biases?

Implicit biases are unconscious preferences for one group—either our own or a group with a higher social status—often accompanied by corresponding negative attitudes towards members of other groups. Implicit biases include negative stereotypes based on factors like age, race or gender, such as an assumption that an older person would struggle with technology, that an Asian person speaks limited English, or that a woman should not be assertive. Implicit biases can stem from stereotypes perpetuated by the media, personal experiences or observations of the experiences of others around us.

By their nature, implicit biases affect our views even if we are not consciously aware this is happening. Free online tools like the Implicit Association Test can provide insights into these biases by measuring reaction times to specific associations, such as linking faces of people from different racial backgrounds with positive or negative words. The results can reveal unwitting preferences that may contradict a person’s conscious beliefs and values.

What Other Types of Biases Can Impact Investigations?

“Cognitive biases” is a term for a more general category of the mental shortcuts our brains have evolved to rely on to process information quickly, which can lead to errors in judgment and decision-making. All these biases have the potential to affect the reliability of investigations by subtly influencing how investigators perceive and gather evidence.

One major challenge arises from confirmation bias, in which investigators tend to subconsciously seek out evidence that aligns with our initial assumptions while disregarding or discounting the significance of contradictory information. This bias can lead to inaccurate conclusions. For example, participants in studies were more likely to assign guilt when they formed a hypothesis before reviewing all evidence—even when exonerating details were provided.

Other cognitive biases identified by social scientists that may impact investigations include the following:

• Priming or Anchoring: The impact of the first information provided on one’s judgments about a situation.
• The Halo/Horn Effect: The tendency to assume that positive or negative traits in one area extend to other areas, such as assuming an attractive person is more credible.
• Conformity Effect: The influence of the views of the majority of a group.
• Attribution Effect: The tendency to attribute others’ behaviors to their character rather than to situational factors.

How Can Investigators Combat Bias in Their Work?

However, the natural human susceptibility to these biases is not the end of the story. For example, studies show that confirmation bias can be overcome by conscious effort to seek out evidence contrary to one’s initial hypothesis. During the investigation, it is important to gather all relevant information on both sides of the issue before reaching a conclusion. As the investigation draws to a close, make sure that the discussion of findings includes an explicit analysis of the evidence that supports both sides. Experienced investigators know that going through this exercise sometimes leads to a realization that our initial inclinations were in fact outweighed by the evidence on the other side, leading us to change the findings as a result.

To mitigate implicit biases, workplace investigators can work to develop greater awareness of the experiences of groups other than our own and increase our cultural competency. Unconscious biases often manifest subtly, leaving a distinct impression on those we interact with. By increasing intentionality, investigators can both safeguard our impartiality and more effectively build rapport with parties and witnesses.
Exposure to diverse experiences and perspectives is a powerful way to address implicit bias. For instance, interacting with people from different backgrounds, consuming media that challenges stereotypes, and collaborating meaningfully with diverse teams can increase empathy, broaden understanding, and reduce prejudiced assumptions.

Developing Checks on Bias

Regular self-check-ins are also invaluable. Investigators should practice mindfulness, stepping back and observing what biases may be impacting us under the surface. A useful question to ask is whether our conclusions would be the same if the party were of a different gender, age or sexual orientation. Having a colleague review a draft report before concluding an investigation can also provide a helpful check on the biases that may have crept into the process unknowingly.

Overall, acknowledging the presence of biases and taking proactive steps to mitigate them can help ensure investigations are conducted fairly and that they reach accurate findings. This fosters trust with employees and results in outcomes that employers can rely on as they seek to maintain equitable and respectful workplaces for all employees.