[jaclaz]

Thanks for the link.

However I fail to understand two of the three points made:

1) Ok, fine

2) I cannot visualize how VR can help in "diversity training"

3) I am failing to see how/why Google should be involved in the issue, I mean, what about the mental health of all the other people (part of "overrepresented" and "fairlyrepresented" besides "underrepresented" groups) working for google and all the ones not working for Google?

They are all exposed to the same news.

And is it actually the news causing this influence on mental health (as opposed to the way the news are reported or - sadly - to the terrible things that happen in the world)?

[elliekelly]

> 2) I cannot visualize how VR can help in "diversity training"

Empathy. Most people are selfish and it can be difficult for us to care about an issue that hasn't impacted us directly. VR could give people the opportunity to experience what it's like to be someone totally different and "walk a mile in their shoes."

[jaclaz]

Yes about "walk a mile in their shoes" but I thought that the VR technology allows to see/experience something "different", i.e. project yourself, as you are, in an environment to which you wouldn't otherwise have access, but it doesn't change "you" (which should be actually the objective).

Let's take as a counter example a hypothetical (very realistic and VR as much as you want) shoot-em-all game, you may well play it at length and become (inside the game) the toughest soldier/killer in the world, but it is not like (mostly) you then go out and start shooting everyone.

But even if there wasn't this (hopefully) separation between "real" reality and the "virtual" one, I have difficulties in visualizing a "story board" of a virtual experience that could actually increase empathy towards a minority if you don't already have it, and that can do it more effectively than traditional education/culture (lessons, meetings, books, movies, etc.)

[elliekelly]

> I thought that the VR technology allows to see/experience something "different", i.e. project yourself, as you are, in an environment to which you wouldn't otherwise have access, but it doesn't change "you"

Yes, I think that's exactly why VR would help with diversity training. A lot of implicit bias comes from superficial differences in a person's outward physical appearance. Age, skin color, gender, even height and weight. VR could allow "you" (same skills, same knowledge, same capabilities) to experience the frustration of knowing that you're more than capable yet held back by something as silly as your avatars "skin."

> But even if there wasn't this (hopefully) separation between "real" reality and the "virtual" one, I have difficulties in visualizing a "story board" of a virtual experience that could actually increase empathy towards a minority if you don't already have it

I can. A VR room escape game would be a good opportunity. You would be assigned to complete ten room escape "levels" of approximately equal difficulty with a team of four other participants. It would be a new team for each level so at the end of the training you'd have worked on ten different "rooms" with 40 different people. At the beginning of the session you would be assigned one of a handful of generic avatars - whichever one most closely resembles your gender & skin color. You'd play as this avatar and your teammates will see and interact with your avatar.

At the end of each task you would quickly rate the group as a whole, rate your own performance within that group, and individually rate each of the other people on your team. I'm imagining five minutes to quickly respond to scale of 1-5 type metrics along the lines of technical skill, interpersonal skill, leadership skill, etc. as well as another few minutes to journal personal reflections - Did you enjoy working with that group? Did you feel like your team listened to your ideas? Valued your input? Do you feel accomplished? Frustrated?

But, unbeknownst to you, your teammates will only see "your" avatar for half of the tasks. For the other half, they'll be shown a slightly different avatar. For example, if you're a white woman your avatar might appear as a black woman for five of the tasks.

And you won't actually work with 40 different people, you'll work with the same four.

At the end of the session you'd see how your teammates rated your abilities for each level and how the ratings differed based on which of the two avatars they were shown. You'd also see how your ratings of your teammates differed based on the avatar you saw.

We all like to think we're immune to bias. We're not racist or sexist. We don't discriminate. And we all like to think people will judge us on our abilities. That it doesn't matter what we look like because we're smart and capable and of course people will be able to recognize that. But I think it would be eye-opening for people to experience the impact of unconscious bias from both sides at once. Because whether we're willing to admit it or not, none of us are immune. But the more aware we are of our bias blindspots - and the consequences of those blindspots - the better equipped we'll be to recognize them (in our own actions and the actions of others) and react to them accordingly.

[jaclaz]

I understand, thanks, and it seems to me like a nice approach, still I am not convinced that it will be intrinsecally superior to more traditional education.

[elliekelly]

That's nice, but you're wrong.

How do you feel right now? Frustrated? Annoyed? Do you think I'm a complete and total idiot?

I don't blame you. I also know exactly how you feel and where you're coming from. When I first wrote the comment you're replying to I initially had a few sentences at the end about how I wish more people on HN would create usernames that clearly belong to women so they could compare and contrast how they're treated and experience the frustration of what I call the "casual dismissal."

There are a lot of things I love about tech and about HN but one of the things that really drives me nuts is how often women's ideas and opinions are quickly brushed off as unconvincing or not fully-formed without any effort to articulate why. It's frustrating to contribute to a thoughtful conversation only to be told your contribution is without merit by a person who can't even be bothered to explain any further than a shallow and meaningless "I'm not convinced."

And it happens constantly. I've seen it happen to others and I've experienced it first hand. And it is so beyond frustrating to participate in a discussion only to have the other person respond with "that's nice, but I'm not convinced."

As you can see, you are not immune. But perhaps if you spent a little time on HN as a woman you'd have a better understanding of what I'm talking about.

[jaclaz]

>How do you feel right now? Frustrated? Annoyed? Do you think I'm a complete and total idiot?

Absolutely not.

You were so kind as to share your view on the matter and I thanked you for your well-thought out and detailed reply/proposal.

And I had no intention to dismiss it in any way, if you felt like that I beg your pardon.

That's it, before your post I couldn't even imagine a VR based kind of experience, now you provided a good example, which doesn't mean that - as said - it will be intrinsically better than more traditional non-VR methods, in my opinion.

I already tried to explain the reasons why, a simulation is a simulation and most people are aware of that, thus I cannot believe that an experience like the one you described can actually "stick" in the minds of the participants, I think that most of them will simply take it for a "game about an escape room", unless they have a previous sensitivity to the racial or gender (or whatever other) biases.