Very intresting test, is that a gun or a cell phone?

[archigos]

Game Over
Your Score: 700
Average reaction time:
Black Armed:625.24ms
Black Unarmed:688.12ms
White Armed:656.48ms
White Unarmed:707.2ms

Flawless until the last image

 

[freakshow10mm]

Game Over
Your Score: 330
Average reaction time:
Black Armed:793.36ms
Black Unarmed:976.36ms
White Armed:863.84ms
White Unarmed:870.32ms

Screwed up at first mixing up the shoot vs no shoot buttons.

I think some of what the black vs white is that the blacks with the guns had silver guns more often than the whites did, who had primarily black guns. The contrast of siver gun with black hand is easier to pick up than a white hand with a black gun. I focused on the hands. Some of those were tricky.

 

[czbegenner]

Game over
Score 210
Black armed 524.56ms
Black unarmed 813.12ms
White armed 541.16ms
White unarmed 603.12ms

 

[retgarr]

Game Over
Your Score: 560
Average reaction time:
Black Armed:620.2ms
Black Unarmed:733.48ms
White Armed:593.28ms
White Unarmed:732.68ms

After taking a unisom

 

[davidconatser]

Game Over
Your Score: -2320
Average reaction time:
Black Armed:2064.92ms
Black Unarmed:1522.68ms
White Armed:1650.64ms
White Unarmed:1266.32ms

Very few of the models looked even remotely threatening. Except maybe for poor gun handling. Most of them could use more training.

Reholstering would not be an issue since I doubt I would have drawn on any of them.

I wonder if competition shooting where the target just has an outline of a gun conditions folks to fire too quickly at the sight of a gun and perhaps reinforces the liberal bias.

Force Science http://www.forcescience.org/ has done some good work on threat assessment and response.

 

[tmajors]

I went to about 100pts then thought this "test" is BS. I'm not sure I would have shot any of the guys I saw with a gun because none of them I saw were in a threatening pose to me and there were no innocent victims around that they were threatening.

 

[Tarvis]

Totally worthless test with inconclusive results.

 

[Blackbeard]

Yes, what would have been better would be a video where the subject is either hostile or not -- draws a weapon, charges, etc. Then see what the reaction differences are between white/black. It'd also be interesting to see some with OC weapons holstered, and see if they get shot.

 

[coylh]

I didn't like this test:

* There's no scoring difference for being faster or slower. In practice this meant that I took more time than actually necessary in evaluating.

* The action for "shoot" is the same as the action for "don't shoot". In reality, the action for don't shoot might be to do nothing. So what if I didn't re-holster "quick enough"?

* The "you're in Milan, oh wait you're at McDonald's" background shuffle was unrealistic.

 

[Daemon688]

The Implicit Associations Test was orginally developed at Harvard. The original authors of the page in their introduction specifically cited the Amidou Diallo case in NYC. As the name implies, it's testing your implicit associations! IIRC, the basic hypothesis was: If you hold stereotypic views that blacks are more likely to be criminals, dangerous, etc., then you should be faster to respond to shoot than if they were white.

So basically, if you're faster to shoot when they're black and have a gun when compared to shooting when they're white and have a gun, then you probably hold those stereotypic views about black people.

Originally tested on students and in later studies with police officers. Police officers were less likely to make this error (thankfully).

P.S. This study had nothing to do with CCW.

https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/

 

[Flyboy]

I'd like to see the same thing run, but with a third category of people: white people wearing black gloves.

I, like most of us, looked at the hands. I noticed that there were several times I didn't even consciously notice the color of the person, though I remember the color and appearance of several of the guns. I found it easiest to identify dark guns on a light background, and bright guns on a dark background (this ought to be obvious).

I wonder if forcing the color near the gun would have an effect on the outcome.

I'd also like to see subjects (the people taking the test) sorted by level of training. I'd bet that shooters--particularly those with formal training--would be both faster and more accurate than non-shooters.

 

[atblis]

Another thing. Considering the size of the images, how far away would those people be away from you.

100 yards?

 

[Eightball]

Average reaction time:
Black Armed:782.96ms
Black Unarmed:748.64ms
White Armed:672.44ms
White Unarmed:727.44ms

Roughly even times for me for the different skin colors--i.e. their color doesn't matter, the perceived threat does. Would've been faster all-around, but the images were weird to me, and it took me a minute or two to get used to it all.

This could've been more interesting if they had firearms that weren't full-size Beretta 92s and the like, but rather small things like a Jennings, Kahr, or whatnot. Could make the results rather interesting.

 

[Oana]

Of course, you could also drop people into a real sim and see how they deal with that. That would be even more interesting.

Bottom line, it needs work.

 

[Feanaro]

I was biased against whites(no scores, went off on a tangent, closed the window thinking I had the scores on the clipboard). I think contrast plays a great role in this. Black gun on a white hand was an easy shoot. Silver gun on a black hand was an easy shoot and so on. These sort of factors are hard to control for.