Exploring Reader Bias

Sentient

In the recent blogpost Exploring Reader Bias Barbara Moore said "Sometimes we aren't aware of how... biases show up in our work."

To address this issue she created a useful exercise that any tarot reader can benefit from.

She shared that "The idea was born when one of my students did practice readings for public figures. She admitted that when she read for Trump that she had trouble finding anything positive to say because of how she felt about him, because of her judgment of his character and his choices. As readers, we know that not all our clients share our beliefs and are walking different paths than ours. When we feel very strongly about their paths, it can be hard to give an objective reading free from our own ideas about what is best."

Could you do a reading on a public figure you disliked in a unbiased way?

In the post Nothing’s Shocking – the Art of the Pokerface Theresa Reed came at the issue from a different angle, but with a similar message. Her example made me chuckle.

Would anyone like to try Barbara's Moore's exercise?
 

Shade

It's definitely a tough thing to work ourselves out of.

I recently lead a workshop in which I had the participants do a reading to help resolve a conflict in their life. I had them pull a card representing themselves in the conflict, a card representing the other party, and a card to help resolve the differences. For most people who attended they were surprised that the card representing the person they were in conflict with was so positive. I asked them to try to imagine what they would say to a phantom client if these cards had been pulled by them and that lead to even greater discomfort as they had to articulate what they might tell themselves to do.
 

Sentient

Shade, That sounds like an interesting workshop. Was it aimed at beginners or more advanced students?

If I understand your example correctly, the attendees were uncomfortable being forced to admit that the 'other side' also had legitimate points and a valid perspective.

There's a therapeutic process of reverse role-playing, where party A speaks as though they're party B on some contentious issue, with party B right there, and then party B speaks as though they're party A. Somehow, with the roles reversed, each side "hears" themselves and how they come across better when their words and ideas are coming out of someone else's mouth. Rarely does it fail to be instructive.
 

violetdaisy

I try to be unbiased and to admit if my own bias may be influencing a reading. I like the idea of doing a reading about someone you don't like and someone you do with the same question "blind" to which person is which other than A and B. It sounds fun but I am in a "funk" today so just about any reading I do would be *meh* right now. Honestly though, unless the individual in question affects my life directly it doesn't really matter if I agree with them or not and even if I don't like a person I might concede that see things in the same way they do on certain subject matter. People involved in the things below affect me and I would have a difficult time not being biased.

1. Health insurance issues in Indiana affect my family, and thereby me, directly.
2. Education (and the absolute rubbish it is right now) affects my daughter, and thereby me.
3. Corrupt city government that misused government funding, affects my community, and thereby me, indirectly. (our city had mass funds to demolish the multitude of abandoned, dilapidated, and unstable homes and decided to make "round-a-bouts" in unnecessary places and other fun projects, and fill their pockets instead).
 

Alta

That sounds like a worthwhile exercise, and by sticking with public figures it would feel less harmful. But I especially liked her last line:

Unfold the papers and learn which reading was for which client. Note your reactions

To me that would be the key learning in this exercise.
 

G6

I didn't get the blind reading part of the exercise that you don't know who you're reading for until after you've done the reading?

I think everyone has biases when they're reading and some more so than others. At the same time the cards are the cards. You can't change them to be something they're not. If someone asked about a relationship and you get the three of swords the 5 cups and the 10 of swords you can't say I see wedding bells in June.
 

gregory

I didn't get the blind reading part of the exercise that you don't know who you're reading for until after you've done the reading?

I think everyone has biases when they're reading and some more so than others. At the same time the cards are the cards. You can't change them to be something they're not. If someone asked about a relationship and you get the three of swords the 5 cups and the 10 of swords you can't say I see wedding bells in June.
I very much get the blind reading thing. We've done that in ISG and it's amazing the responses you get when people find out which reading is for them.

If the reading is blind you don't have a focus in that sense - but if you drew those cards for an exercise centred around relationships, you'd clearly have to give that a negative take. If the person you were reading for turns out to have a wedding planned next month, that could be hugely valuable to them - and if they had TOLD you they had that wedding planned - or if you knew - that could very well have coloured what you said, or even what you saw. We are all human.
 

G6

I very much get the blind reading thing. We've done that in ISG and it's amazing the responses you get when people find out which reading is for them.

If the reading is blind you don't have a focus in that sense - but if you drew those cards for an exercise centred around relationships, you'd clearly have to give that a negative take. If the person you were reading for turns out to have a wedding planned next month, that could be hugely valuable to them - and if they had TOLD you they had that wedding planned - or if you knew - that could very well have coloured what you said, or even what you saw. We are all human.

So the cards know whose name is on the paper without you seeing it. You just know the question. Is that how it goes?
 

gregory

So the cards know whose name is on the paper without you seeing it. You just know the question. Is that how it goes?
I have never in my excessively long life claimed to know how it all works. I have no idea at all. And I truly believe no-one knows. But - it seems to. We've had people in ISG saying OMG I was sure so and so's reading was for me, but this one makes so much more sense.... How can that happen ? You tell me....

But what Barbara's pupil said about reading on Trump - you KNOW how that goes. I can imagine you reading on him. And if you get - say - 10 Cups, Six wands and the World for the effect his presidency will have on the US - how easily could you admit that these cards show he is a good thing ?
 

G6

I have never in my excessively long life claimed to know how it all works. I have no idea at all. And I truly believe no-one knows. But - it seems to. We've had people in ISG saying OMG I was sure so and so's reading was for me, but this one makes so much more sense.... How can that happen ? You tell me....

But what Barbara's pupil said about reading on Trump - you KNOW how that goes. I can imagine you reading on him. And if you get - say - 10 Cups, Six wands and the World for the effect his presidency will have on the US - how easily could you admit that these cards show he is a good thing ?

What is ISG? I'm just trying to get the game. People put their questions in a hat and you don't know whose is whose you just read on it. Is that the jist?

Btw, I didn't get those cards for the effect of Trump's presidency. 😜😊😉