Validity evidence for a novel instrument assessing medical student attitudes toward instruction in implicit bias recognition and management.

BACKGROUND: Implicit bias instruction is becoming more prevalent in health professions education, with calls for skills-based curricula moving from awareness and recognition to management of implicit bias. Evidence suggests that health professionals and students learning about implicit bias ("learners") have varying attitudes about instruction in implicit bias, including the concept of implicit bias itself. Assessing learner attitudes could inform curriculum development and enable instructional designs that optimize learner engagement. To date, there are no instruments with evidence for construct validity that assess learner attitudes about implicit bias instruction and its relevance to clinical care. METHODS: The authors developed a novel instrument, the Attitude Towards Implicit Bias Instrument (ATIBI) and gathered evidence for three types of construct validity- content, internal consistency, and relationship to other variables. RESULTS: Authors utilized a modified Delphi technique with an interprofessional team of experts, as well as cognitive interviews with medical students leading to item refinement to improve content validity. Seven cohorts of medical students, N = 1072 completed the ATIBI. Psychometric analysis demonstrated high internal consistency (α = 0.90). Exploratory factor analysis resulted in five factors. Analysis of a subset of 100 medical students demonstrated a moderate correlation with similar instruments, the Integrative Medicine Attitude Questionnaire (r = 0.63, 95% CI: [0.59, 0.66]) and the Internal Motivation to Respond Without Prejudice Scale (r = 0.36, 95% CI: [0.32, 0.40]), providing evidence for convergent validity. Scores on our instrument had low correlation to the External Motivation to Respond Without Prejudice Scale (r = 0.15, 95% CI: [0.09, 0.19]) and the Groningen Reflection Ability Scale (r = 0.12, 95% CI: [0.06, 0.17]) providing evidence for discriminant validity. Analysis resulted in eighteen items in the final instrument; it is easy to administer, both on paper form and online. CONCLUSION: The Attitudes Toward Implicit Bias Instrument is a novel instrument that produces reliable and valid scores and may be used to measure medical student attitudes related to implicit bias recognition and management, including attitudes toward acceptance of bias in oneself, implicit bias instruction, and its relevance to clinical care.

How to Make or Break Implicit Bias Instruction: Implications for Curriculum Development.

PURPOSE: To analyze faculty experiences regarding facilitating discussions as part of the institution's curriculum on racial and ethnic implicit bias recognition and management. METHOD: Between July 2014 and September 2016, the authors conducted 21 in-depth interviews with faculty who had experience teaching in implicit bias instruction or were interested in facilitating discussions related to implicit bias and the Implicit Association Test. Grounded theory methodology was used to analyze interview transcripts. RESULTS: Participants identified challenges that affect their ability to facilitate instruction in implicit bias. Faculty described the influence of their own background and identities as well as the influence of institutional values on their ability to facilitate implicit bias discussions. They noted the impact of resistant learners and faculty during discussions and made suggestions for institutional measures including the need for implementation of formalized longitudinal implicit bias curricula and faculty development. CONCLUSIONS: Faculty facilitating sessions on implicit bias must attend faculty development sessions to be equipped to deal with some of the challenges they may face. Buy-in from institutional leadership is essential for successful implementation of implicit bias teaching, and medical educators need to consider formalized longitudinal curricula addressing the recognition and management of implicit biases.