Page 47 - Mike Ratner CC - WISR Complete Dissertation - v6
P. 47

car long afterwards because she felt disempowered by her race and gender. An example of implicit

               stereotype on the other hand is one that is relatively inaccessible to conscious awareness and/or


               control. Even if you say that men and women are equally good at math, it is possible that you

               associate math more strongly with men without being actively aware of it.  In this case we would


               say  that    definitely   you   would    have  an  implicit  math  +  men  stereotype.

               (https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/faqs.html#faq1)



                       ‘Implicit Bias’ was the topic of the Albany, New York series of Community Conversations

               that I have documented and written about as one of the two case-studies I have included for this


               dissertation.  The other  case study  observed the Zeidler Center’s facilitation of the Red  Blue

               (Across the Divide) Milwaukee dialogues sponsored by the Millennium Action Project (MAP).



                       In  this  research  I  explored  the  experience  of  engaging  in  Community  Conversations

               observing the combined mechanics of group interactions and influences of collective behavior and

               disagreement within the context of relating to one another as others are also dealing with these


               perceptions in the occurrence of having a civil dialogue in a deliberative process.  I have attempted

               to model this experience from the openly shared perspective of group participants and facilitators.



                       In addition to my making informal observations, I interviewed Community Conversation

               attendees about their personal experiences to zone in on how it felt to talk during their public


               engagement processes. Specifically, the research examined the acknowledgement of conflict (in

               the form of tension and disagreement) and considered how it is responded to and addressed among


               members of the group. Yankelovich (2001) referred to this sequence of events in group dialogue

               as the “working through” (p. 64) process.  The term working through is described as a realization

               or a shift in direction of dialogue and engagement from one of information and idea sharing to


               dialogue that turns to addressing hard issues that can only be resolved by a change in perspective.

                                                             28
   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52