Steele uses a mix of experimental evidence and personal experience to back up his claims in this book. What is the effect of this?

While scientific experiments do a better job of definitively proving Steele’s point, personal stories paint a clearer, more relatable picture for the reader. As was the case with most of Steele’s own research, the personal stories get people started thinking about the problem, then the experimental data answers their questions.

One of the main themes of this book is dealing with bias. How is bias used or defined throughout Whistling Vivaldi?

Bias is mainly used here to mean preconceived notions. These notions are negative in most, but not all, cases. They also often come into play a lot more subtly than the outright discrimination Steele faced in his youth.

Steele says in his acknowledgements that “psychologists write articles not books.” What is the value of a book like Whistling Vivaldi?