William T. L. Cox, PhD
Assistant Scientist
Department of Psychology 
University of Wisconsin-Madison


 Twitter: @ScienceCox
www.facebook.com/ScienceCox Facebook: ScienceCox
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/William_Cox6 ResearchGate
https://wisc.academia.edu/ScienceCox Academia.edu

My work focuses on understanding and undermining the broad reach of narrow thinking. Specifically, I study cultural, social, cognitive, and neural mechanisms that perpetuate stereotypes and prejudice, and leverage basic science about those mechanisms to develop and refine interventions to reduce the expression of stereotyping and prejudice.

My amazing team of Research Assistants and I!

WPR - Does Anti-Bias Training Work?

posted May 30, 2018, 5:27 AM by William Cox   [ updated Jun 4, 2018, 12:44 PM ]

The New York Times, Science Section

posted Oct 11, 2017, 12:05 PM by William Cox

 Why Stanford Researchers Tried to Create a ‘Gaydar’ Machine. This journalist interviewed me extensively to point out the problems in recent, widely-publicized paper that purported to show that artificial intelligence algorithms can identify who is gay or straight. I think the journalist did a great job summarizing things!

Article in Science Magazine

posted Jun 23, 2017, 1:46 PM by William Cox   [ updated Jun 23, 2017, 1:47 PM ]

Science Magazine interviewed Trish Devine and me about one of our major projects over the past 4 years, a collaboration with Patrick Forscher and Markus Brauer testing for race and gender biases in the NIH Grant Review process. 

Interview on an episode of Invisibilia on NPR

posted Jun 15, 2017, 2:42 PM by William Cox   [ updated Jun 15, 2017, 3:43 PM ]

An episode of Invisibilia on NPR included interviews with me and Trish Devine about lots of our recent work. The part with me is at about 35 minutes in, then Trish is after me.

Article in The Atlantic about my work

posted May 8, 2017, 7:23 AM by William Cox   [ updated May 13, 2017, 8:50 AM ]

This is a nice article that covers a lot of my work the last two years!


Invited Article in The Conversation

posted Mar 15, 2017, 3:55 AM by William Cox   [ updated Mar 15, 2017, 3:55 AM ]

The Conversation asked me to write a piece on my past work on gaydar and stereotyping: https://theconversation.com/debunking-the-gaydar-myth-73750 

New paper: Ecological Invalidity of Existing Gaydar Research: In-Lab Accuracy Translates to Real-World Inaccuracy: Response to Rule, Johnson, & Freeman (2016)

posted Feb 15, 2017, 9:22 AM by William Cox

Rule, Johnson, and Freeman replied to our 2016 paper on "gaydar" research, but failed to address our major arguments. Here is our invited reply, just out in JSR!

In recent years, several empirical studies have claimed to provide evidence in support of the popular folk notion that people possess “gaydar” that enables them to accurately identify who is gay or lesbian (Rule, Johnson, & Freeman, 2016). This conclusion is limited to artificial lab settings, however, and when translated to real-world settings this work itself provides evidence that people’s judgments about who is gay/lesbian are not pragmatically accurate. We also briefly review evidence related to the consequences of perpetuating the idea of gaydar (i.e., “the gaydar myth”). Although past claims about accurate orientation perception are misleading, the work that gave rise to those claims can nevertheless inform the literature in meaningful ways. We offer some recommendations for how the evidence in past “gaydar” research can be reappraised to inform our understanding of social perception and group similarities/differences.

New paper: Experimental Research on Shooter Bias: Ready (or Relevant) for Application in the Courtroom?

posted Dec 11, 2016, 5:35 AM by William Cox   [ updated Dec 11, 2016, 5:37 AM ]

Cox & Devine (2016), Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition

Police officers are charged with protecting the public, and they must make difficult life-or-death decisions in tense circumstances. High-profile instances of officers shooting innocent Black people led to a flurry of shooter bias research, which examines how race influences split-second shooting decisions. We give an overview of the evidence in this literature to date, to evaluate the robustness of the evidence related to shooter bias and police officers. The extant experimental evidence from police officer samples is mixed, and does not allow us to make any strong inferences about the role of race in officers’ shooting decisions. We then discuss whether the questions asked by shooter bias research are even relevant to the decisions jurors must make during cases of officer-involved shootings. 

Our paper on "gaydar" as an alternate term for stereotyping is now available via free open access, thanks to our wonderful editor and publisher

posted Sep 11, 2015, 4:07 PM by William Cox   [ updated Sep 11, 2015, 4:11 PM ]

Following the recent media attention for our article, Dr. Cynthia Graham, the editor in chief of JSR and action editor of our paper, asked the publisher, Routledge/Taylor & Francis, to make our paper open access for free, and they graciously agreed! That's a wonderful gesture in support of our work The world may now access it for free from the publisher, here: Inferences About Sexual Orientation: The Roles of Stereotypes, Faces, and The Gaydar Myth.

Also, tune in to catch me on Wisconsin Public Radio on Tuesday the 15th at 4:05 pm!

Press release and infographic for the gaydar paper

posted Sep 5, 2015, 5:45 AM by William Cox   [ updated Jan 3, 2017, 4:16 AM ]

The UW-Madison communications office put together this lovely press release for us: The science of stereotyping: Challenging the validity of ‘gaydar’

It actually discusses two papers. The first is our new paper in the Journal of Sex Research, which explores "gaydar" in a series of 5 studies. After the studies, this paper also lays out the logic for why, mathematically, it is unlikely that there will ever be an accurate gaydar process. The second paper demonstrates one way that stereotyping (i.e., "gaydar") can actually promote anti-gay aggression.

Also, my wonderful research assistant Ellie Poikonen put together an infographic to explain the basic findings of the paper in a simple, visually appealing way. You can download and share it in different formats, and also see details about the claims in the infographic, here


1-10 of 19