100 Humans: Life's Questions. Answered. (TV Series) Are You Biased? (2020) User Reviews

Racial bias based on split decisions

[scottishboy-47222 · 5/10 · 3 February 2022]

To truly test this, change up the outfits on the individuals. The guy wearing acred shirt over a light blue shirt is more of a threat in a split-second decision because of the use of red as an alert or warning color. Switching the shirts at minimum could have changed the results.

Poorly Controlled Experiments

[brianaem-64636 · 3/10 · 20 March 2020]

I've really enjoyed these episodes so far, but as a behavioral neuroscience major, I am very upset with how they ran this episode. Throughout this episode, the experimentalists set the humans up for failure.

In the match-making segment, they line the "matchees" up with the three guys, a space, then the three girls. There were implications that there were three straight couples to be made, despite it never being explicitly stated. Having the "matchees" mixed up by gender or other control measures could have easily reduced this bias and increased the likelihood that people would assign same sex couples.

Later, they had a "reaction game" where they were testing racial bias. They had the humans "shoot" gunmen, quickly choosing whether someone held a gun or a cellphone and whether or not to shoot. The real test was whether they would shoot the white or black man while both popped up with cellphones at the same time. This experiment, however, involved a lack of control, having one man in a hat and one without one. The dark hat will automatically shade the eyes and make instinct less likely to trust that person.

Overall, I've been enjoying watching this show and there are a lot of great experiments and points made, but the claims made in this episode were premature and overall, upsetting.

Poor science for a highly sensitive topic

[lkkam · 2/10 · 28 March 2020]

If the last two people/the majority of people that shot you (2/3) are wearing red, you will likely be triggered to shoot when you see red again. He was also using a black phone when the white guy used a grey phone. All the guns they used were black so guy in a red shirt holds up a black item, compared to cooler tone shirt person with a grey phone, which do you think you will feel more threatened by? This proved nothing when it could have been a really good teaching moment.

Don't call then "experiments"

[samuele-20362 · 2/10 · 17 April 2020]

Generically speaking most of these so called experiencing lack the standards that would make them reliable, as a result they're far from proving anything.

In the shooting test, notice how most of the subjects aimed at the white guy first, then moved onto JP and shot without thinking. This, according to the crew, proved they were biased.

What I believe actually happened there is the humans were being deceived in believing one of the "gunmen" was holding a phone and the other a gun: that's how it went every time except for the last test. The white guy wearing his light shirt appears far more noticeable in the dark environment where the test was hosted, compared to JP, who has a dark complexion and is wearing a red shirt (which matches the color scheme of the test environment).

As a result the humans:

• aimed at the white guy first (he was more easy to notice)
• saw the phone he was holding
• automatically deduced the other guy must've been holding a gun and shot him without checking his hands.

Were These Experiments Designed by Professionals?

[mwudrick · 3/10 · 25 March 2020]

The final segment was was totally lacking any sort of bias control.and felt more like a commentary on racial consciousness rather an experiment. Rather than putting the black man in a bright red shirt that made him stand out against the muted backdrop, everyone should have been dressed the same or at least similar. He was also poised more threateningly than the white male. They should have had similar stances. Very biased episode.

Poor scientific process

[aaurigema · 3/10 · 24 March 2020]

In addition to separating the men and women for the matchmaking test, and JP wearing a hat, JP was also wearing red, which especially in contrast to the green of the white man is more intimidating, in not saying their results were necessarily wrong, but more people are straight, so they needed a larger sample size without splitting them male and female, and both men should have been wearing the same clothes.

Terribly Controlled Experiments!

[salduccis · 1/10 · 11 April 2020]

You put one guy in a bright RED shirt and one guy in a PASTEL blue shirt, which one would you notice first??? Of course, the RED!!!! That was the color of the shirt of the black gentleman in the racial shooting experiment, where the black man was shot more often than the white man. He also jumped out in a quicker fashion. I can't imagine the producer did not realize these factors will influence in which direction the shooter would first orient. Almost like they had an agenda.... That said, I would agree that there is racial bias, but this experiment definitely stacked the decks...

Also, they compare proximity to like-folks and concluded that folks with tattoos got closer to a subject with tattoos than did non-tattooed people.. How do you know that folks with tattoos aren't just more comfortable approach ALL people?

I agree with another reviewer that separating the match-making groups into one group of males and one group of females suggests that the person is supposed to pick one from each group... These experiments are grossly manipulated and poorly controlled, again to stack the deck for the results they want. Shame on you!!!!!

Did they face check anything?

[Jackg30ff · 1/10 · 21 March 2020]

They talked on biases and did 'experiments' to see if people are biased against men or women. Then they talked to a 'gender studies professor' who talked about "facts" that were not factually correct. It seems like they have an hypothesis and they twist whatever the can to 'prove' it. A lot of feminist content has trigger warnings on them now a days. I'm surprised that such a feminist show doesn't have a 'men hate speech' trigger warning. Sammy and Zainab were fine. It was just whenever Alie spoke it ruined the credibility of anything.

Biased episode

[Dusius · 1/10 · 24 April 2020]

The whole episode is full of how you need to "hate" anything white, European etc in order to be considered progressive. Wrong experiments that lead to wrong conclusions.

Every time you try to prove a point you set the odds with small details gestures or how you deliver the questions.

[fakeemailfakeemail · 1/10 · 18 April 2020]

In the gun range that tests bias (not reaction time) you place the white individual in neutral and non threatening colors and his jump out was typically slower and less aggressive. The black individual was jumping out aggressively in comparison and wearing dark threatening colors with a dark red shirt and black pants. Typically colors associated with gangs and when you throw in the theatrics a non trained person trying to prove how fast their reaction time is they of course are going to process the easiest perceptions first. So when you make one look like a stereotypical gang member and one look like a slow moving high school student your going to get weighted results. I noticed quickly that this show seems to steer all their experiments in similar manners to prove the point of their own opinions. You can make experiments that have swayed results very easily based on small detail changes. I'm not saying the in this experiment referenced above doesn't have some social bias against the black individual but you clearly were trying exacerbate the results. Which voids you're results in this experiment.

4

[Edvis-1997 · 4/10 · 11 January 2021]

Instead of being entertaining and showing random questions, for example:

who drinks more coffee? who likes kids more? who is more competetive? and etc.

They're going to racism,gender stereotypes which makes some people look bad, show how our society "biased" this is not how science experiments should be done. This TV Series just divide people.