Yes! We address this in the section "Implications for understanding human prejudice".
The simplicity and strength of our results suggests a new null hypothesis for explaining origins of prejudicial behavior in
humans, namely, the implicit transmission of ingroup/outgroup identity information through language. That is, before providing
an explicit or institutional explanation for why individuals make decisions that disadvantage one group with regards to another,
one must show that the unjust decision was not a simple outcome of unthinking reproduction of statistical regularities absorbed
with language. Similarly, before positing complex models for how prejudicial attitudes perpetuate from one generation to
the next or from one group to another, we must check whether simply learning language is sufficient to explain the observed
transmission of prejudice. These new null hypotheses are important not because we necessarily expect them to be true in
most cases, but because Occam’s razor now requires that we eliminate them, or at least quantify findings about prejudice in
comparison to what is explainable from language transmission alone
