The perils of double consciousness: The role of thought suppression in stereotype threat

The goal of the present research is to demonstrate, and then alleviate, the role of thought suppression in depressing women’s math performance under stereotype threat. We hypothesize that when taking a math test, women (but not men) attempt to suppress thoughts of the math-related gender stereotype. Suppression leads to underperformance when it uses up cognitive resources. In Study 1, women underperform on a math test and show postsuppressional rebound of the stereotype when cognitive resources are reduced. In Study 2, women suppress the stereotype after a math test begins, but show rebound when the test is complete. In Study 3, making the stereotype irrelevant to the test improves performance and reduces postsuppressional rebound. In Studies 4 and 5, we test a strategy women can use to make suppression easier, and show that it restores math performance. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.     

Combating stereotype threat: The effect of self-affirmation on women’s intellectual performance

The present studies were designed to investigate the effects of self-affirmation on the performance of women under stereotype threat. In Study 1, women performed worse on a difficult math test when it was described as diagnostic of math intelligence (stereotype threat condition) than in a non-diagnostic control condition. However, when women under stereotype threat affirmed a valued attribute, they performed at levels comparable to men and to women in the no-threat control condition. In Study 2, men and women worked on a spatial rotation test and were told that women were stereotyped as inferior on such tasks. Approximately half the women and men self-affirmed before beginning the test. Self-affirmation improved the performance of women under threat, but did not affect men’s performance.     

The Costs of Accepting Gender Differences: The Role of Stereotype Endorsement in Women's Experience in the Math Domain

Two studies were designed to examine the costs of stereotype endorsement for women's self-perceptions, career intentions, and susceptibility to stereotype threat in the math domain. Study 1, a survey of women majoring in math-related fields, revealed that women who believe that status differences between the sexes are legitimate were more likely to endorse gender stereotypes about women's math abilities, which in turn predicted more negative self-perceptions of math competence and less interest in continuing study in one's field. In Study 2, women who tended to endorse gender stereotypes were found to be more susceptible to the negative effects of stereotype threat on their math test performance. The implications of these results for research on stereotype endorsement and women's math achievement are discussed.     

Arousal and stereotype threat

Seemingly insignificant features of the context can undermine the quantitative performance of skilled females—an effect attributed to stereotype threat. The present studies tested the hypotheses that stereotype threat triggers arousal, and that attributions about that arousal could moderate the effects of stereotype threat on performance. To examine whether arousal is triggered by stereotype threat, we conducted two experiments in which female participants were asked to take a math test under conditions of stereotype threat or not. In Study 1, women under stereotype threat performed better on an easy threat-irrelevant task, but worse on a difficult threat-irrelevant task than women not under threat. In Study 2, threatened women underperformed on a math test, but this underperformance was attenuated for women directed to misattribute their arousal. These results suggest that arousal—and how arousal is attributed—may play an important role in the debilitating effects of stereotype threat.     

We can do it: the interplay of construal orientation and social comparisons under threat

The authors investigated how a collective self-construal orientation in combination with positive social comparisons "turns off" the negative effects of stereotype threat. Specifically, Experiment 1 demonstrated that stereotype threat led to increased accessibility of participants' collective self ("we"). Experiment 2 showed that this feeling of "we-ness" in the stereotype threat condition centered on the participants' stereotyped group membership and not on other important social groups (e.g., students). Experiment 3 indicated that in threat situations, when participants' collective self is accessible, positive social comparison information led to improved math test performance and less concern, whereas in nonthreat situations, when the collective self is less accessible, positive comparison information led to worse test performance and more concern. Our final experiment revealed that under stereotype threat, only those comparison targets who are competent in the relevant domain (math), rather than in domains unrelated to math (athletics), enhanced participants' math test performance.     

Children's Gender Stereotypes About Math: The Role of Stereotype Stratification1

Women underperform on standardized math tests compared to men. However, girls perform as well if not better than boys in math. In this paper, it is proposed that this discrepancy may be explained in part by a process of stereotype stratification, in which targets of a negative in‐group stereotype view themselves as a member of a subgroup to which the stereotype does not apply. Two experiments with elementary‐school children provide support for this theory. In Study 1, girls placed advanced math pictures with males more often than basic math pictures. In addition, girls rated men as liking and as being better at math than women, but viewed boys and girls as being equal on these variables. In Study 2, girls were more likely to draw a man when told a story about an adult mathematician, but were more likely to draw a girl when told of a child mathematician. The social and educational implications of these findings are discussed.     

Knowing is half the battle: teaching stereotype threat as a means of improving women's math performance

We tested whether informing women about stereotype threat is a useful intervention to improve their performance in a threatening testing situation. Men and women completed difficult math problems described either as a problem-solving task or as a math test. In a third (teaching-intervention) condition, the test was also described as a math test, but participants were additionally informed that stereotype threat could interfere with women's math performance. Results showed that women performed worse than men when the problems were described as a math test (and stereotype threat was not discussed), but did not differ from men in the problem-solving condition or in the condition in which they learned about stereotype threat. For women, attributing anxiety to gender stereotypes was associated with lower performance in the math-test condition but improved performance in the teaching-intervention condition. The results suggest that teaching about stereotype threat might offer a practical means of reducing its detrimental effects.     

Coping sense of humor reduces effects of stereotype threat on women's math performance

Two studies demonstrated that coping sense of humor buffered women against the effects of stereotype threat on math performance. Using a correlational design, Study 1 demonstrated that women low in coping sense of humor assessed their performance on standardized math tests lower than did men and lower than did women high in coping sense of humor. Using an experimental design, Study 2 showed that coping sense of humor was positively related to women's performance on a math test taken under conditions of stereotype threat but not under conditions of no stereotype threat. Mediation analyses suggest that in the stereotype-threat condition, state anxiety mediated the relationship between coping sense of humor and test performance. Women higher in coping sense of humor performed better because they felt less anxiety while taking the test.     

Choking under the pressure of a positive stereotype: gender identification and self-consciousness moderate men's math test performance

Choking under pressure occurs when an individual underperforms due to situational pressure. The present study examined whether being the target of a positive social stereotype regarding math ability causes choking among men. Gender identification and self-consciousness were hypothesized to moderate the effect of math-gender stereotypes on men's math test performance. Men high in self-consciousness but low in gender identification significantly underperformed when exposed to gender-relevant test instructions. No significant effects were found under a gender-irrelevant condition. These findings are discussed in the contexts of research on stereotype threat, stereotype lift, and choking under pressure.     

Discounting the Difficult: How High Math-Identified Women Respond to Stereotype Threat

In this study, we examined how math identity moderates women's response to gender-related stereotypes in the domain of mathematics. Male and female college students with varying degrees of math identification took a challenging math test with a gender-related stereotype either activated (i.e., stereotype threat) or nullified. Consistent with previous research, women performed worse than men in the stereotype threat condition, but equal to men in the stereotype nullification condition when performance was adjusted for math SAT scores. Moreover, when faced with stereotype threat, high math-identified women discounted the validity of the test more than did less math-identified women or men in general. We discuss potential benefits and drawbacks of a discounting strategy for women who are highly identified with math.     

Can the Media Help Women Be Better at Math? Stereotype Threat,Selective Exposure,Media Effects,and Women's Math Performance

This study examines women's media selections when under the gender–math stereotype threat and the subsequent media effects on their math performance through the lens of the Selective Exposure Self‐ and Affect‐Management (SESAM) model, mood management theory, and social comparison theory. Female college students were randomly assigned to the stereotype threat condition or the control condition; then, they selectively browsed magazine pages showing female role models in stereotypical domains (beauty or family) and counterstereotypical domains (career or science) before taking the math test. The results show that women spent more time on career magazines when under threat, and this selective exposure's effect on their math performance was moderated by their assimilation to the role models.     

Threatened to distraction: Mind-wandering as a consequence of stereotype threat

Two experiments tested the hypothesis that the threat of a negative stereotype increases the frequency of mind-wandering (i.e., task-unrelated thought), thereby leading to performance impairments. Study 1 demonstrated that participants anticipating a stereotype-laden test mind-wandered more during the Sustained Attention to Response Task. Study 2 assessed mind-wandering directly using thought sampling procedures during a demanding math test. Results revealed that individuals experiencing stereotype threat experienced more off-task thoughts, which accounted for their poorer test performance compared to a control condition. These studies highlight the important role that social forces can have on mind-wandering. More specifically, these results serve as evidence for task-unrelated thought as a novel mechanism for stereotype threat-induced performance impairments.     

The role of prevention focus under stereotype threat: Initial cognitive mobilization is followed by depletion

Previous research has demonstrated that stereotype threat induces a prevention focus and impairs central executive functions. The present research examines how these 2 consequences of stereotype threat are related. The authors argue that the prevention focus is responsible for the effects of stereotype threat on executive functions and cognitive performance. However, because the prevention focus is adapted to deal with threatening situations, the authors propose that it also leads to some beneficial responses to stereotype threat. Specifically, because stereotype threat signals a high risk of failure, a prevention focus initiates immediate recruitment of cognitive control resources. The authors further argue that this response initially facilitates cognitive performance but that the additional cognitive demands associated with working under threat lead to cognitive depletion over time. Study 1 demonstrates that stereotype threat (vs. control) facilitates immediate cognitive control capacity during a stereotype-relevant task. Study 2 experimentally demonstrates the process by showing that stereotype threat (vs. control) facilitates cognitive control as a default, as well as when a prevention focus has been experimentally induced, but not when a promotion focus has been induced. Study 3 shows that stereotype threat facilitates initial math performance under a prevention focus, whereas no effect is found under a promotion focus. Consistent with previous research, however, stereotype threat impaired math performance over time under a prevention focus, but not under a promotion focus.     

Stereotype threat and inflexible perseverance in problem solving

The present research examines whether women burdened by stereotype threat, a threat of confirming negative ingroup stereotypes (Steele, C. M., & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(5), 797-811), are less able to abandon old strategies and employ newer, more efficient ones when conditions change. In two studies, stereotype threat was found to increase inflexible perseverance: women made to believe they were taking a diagnostic math/spatial ability test, compared to those not threatened by stereotypes, were more likely to use previously successful but presently inefficient or incorrect strategies. In Study 1, participants under stereotype threat also suppressed relevant stereotypes to the greatest degree, and their inflexible perseverance was predicted by the degree to which they suppressed these stereotypes. Implications for test performance and potential decision-making effects of stereotype threat are discussed.     

The mismatch effect: when testosterone and status are at odds

Why do some people strive for high status, whereas others actively avoid it? In the present studies, the authors examined the psychological and physiological consequences of a mismatch between baseline testosterone and a person's current level of status. The authors tested this mismatch effect by placing high and low testosterone individuals into high or low status positions using a rigged competition. In Study 1, low testosterone participants reported greater emotional arousal, focused more on their status, and showed worse cognitive functioning in a high status position. High testosterone participants showed this pattern in a low status position. In Study 2, the emotional arousal findings were replicated with heart rate, and the cognitive findings were replicated using a math test. In Study 3, the authors demonstrate that testosterone is a better predictor of behavior than self-report measures of the need for dominance. Discussion focuses on the value of measuring hormones in personality and social psychology.     

The role of performance-avoidance goals and worry in mediating the relationship between stereotype threat and performance

To understand the process underlying stereotype threat better, we developed and tested a model integrating the extant stereotype threat research with insights from achievement goal theory. The core tenet of this model is that stereotype threat impairs performance through performance-avoidance goal adoption and worry about one’s performance. To test this model, women under stereotype threat and not under threat reported their test-related achievement goals before completing a difficult math test. In addition, participants reported their state test anxiety, including worry, immediately before or after completing the math test. Results revealed that performance-avoidance goals and worry mediated the effect of stereotype threat on performance. Contributions of this model to the stereotype threat literature are discussed.     

The Interplay among Stereotypes, Performance-Avoidance Goals, and Women's Math Performance Expectations

This project was designed to examine whether and how achievement goals contribute to the effect of gender stereotypes on women's low expectancies for success on math tasks. Study 1 confirmed predictions from the Stereotyped Task Engagement Process (STEP) model (Smith, 2004) by demonstrating that, compared to a counter-stereotype situation, women reminded of the gender-stereotype endorsed performance-avoidance goals. Study 2 tested whether performance-goal adoption differed between men and women. Results showed that, compared to men, women in a stereotype salient math situation were more likely to endorse performance-avoidance achievement goals. This performance-avoidance goal adoption in turn, accounted for the negative relationship between participants' gender and performance expectations for a standardized math test.     

Stereotype threat and arousal: effects on women's math performance

Theories of arousal suggest that arousal should decrease performance on difficult tasks and increase performance on easy tasks. An experiment tested the hypothesis that the effects of stereotype threat on performance are due to heightened arousal. The authors hypothesized that telling participants that a math test they are about to take is known to have gender differences would cause stereotype threat in women but not in men. In the experiment, each participant took two tests--a difficult math test and an easy math test. Compared to women in a "no differences" condition, women in the "gender differences" condition scored better on the easy math test and worse on the difficult math test. Men's performance was unaffected by the manipulation. These data are consistent with an arousal-based explanation of stereotype threat effects. Data were inconsistent with expectancy, evaluation apprehension, and persistence explanations of the stereotype threat phenomenon.     

Social Identity versus Reference Frame Comparisons: The Moderating Role of Stereotype Endorsement

Two studies tested the prediction that belief in a negative stereotype about an in-group will cause members to shift from viewing their in-group as a social identity to viewing it as a frame of reference. The stereotype that was the focus of inquiry was the belief that women have less aptitude at math and spatial tasks than do men. In both studies, female participants took a test of math and spatial ability and then received social comparison information about their abilities relative to a male and a female confederate. In Study 1, participants felt enhanced when the two women outperformed the male confederate, even when this meant that the participants themselves performed worse than the other woman. If participants were first reminded of the negative stereotype, however, they felt best when they outperformed the other woman, even if this meant that the two women performed worse than the man. Study 2 showed that the effects of stereotype activation were especially pronounced among female participants who showed moderate to high levels of stereotype endorsement. These findings suggest that belief in stereotypes about the in-group can lead to in-group comparison and contrast, even in contexts in which a group member's ability level challenges the validity of the stereotype.     

Why they leave: the impact of stereotype threat on the attrition of women and minorities from science, math and engineering majors

This paper examines the effects of group performance anxiety on the attrition of women and minorities from science, math, and engineering majors. While past research has relied primarily on the academic deficits and lower socioeconomic status of women and minorities to explain their absence from these fields, we focus on the impact of stereotype threat—the anxiety caused by the expectation of being judged based on a negative group stereotype. Using data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Freshmen, our findings indicate that minorities experience stereotype threat more strongly than whites, although women do not suffer from stereotype threat more than men. Our findings also reveal that stereotype threat has a significant positive effect on the likelihood of women, minorities, and surprisingly, white men leaving science, technology, engineering and math majors.