Measuring bias in manifestation determination reviews.

Manifestation determination reviews (MDRs) are federally mandated as a condition of extended removal for students with disabilities. Despite the potentially significant consequences MDRs hold for students with disabilities, data on the role that biases play in these high-stakes decisions are limited. This investigation sought to elucidate potential biases affecting MDRs across 105 school districts (N = 517) using two newly developed MDR measures assessing MDR knowledge and perceived student intentionality. In an online investigation using experimental and cross-sectional strategies, school personnel made MDR decisions after being randomly assigned to read a vignette about a Black or White student who might have acted out due to an emotional disability. Results revealed that racial and stigmatizing biases covaried with MDR decisions. Higher MDR substantive knowledge (whether the student's misconduct was a manifestation of their disability) was associated with a manifestation decision for the White student only. For both students, greater endorsement of student intentionality was associated with making more nonmanifestation decisions. Black students were held to a higher behavioral standard than White students when school personnel made local educational agency implementation failure decisions. Men school personnel were more likely to make nonmanifestation decisions and believed that the students had behavioral control and consequential awareness. Additionally, teachers endorsed more negative racial stereotypical beliefs about White and Black students than other school personnel. Our findings support the need to develop evidence-based training to help school personnel identify and address biases affecting MDR decisions, including measures that assess team members' knowledge and potential biases before these high-stakes decisions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).