Implicit stereotypes and women’s math performance: How implicit gender-math stereotypes influence women’s susceptibility to stereotype threat

This experiment examined the effects of implicit gender-math stereotyping and implicit gender and math identification on women’s math performance under stereotype threat and reduced threat conditions. Results showed that of the three, only implicit gender-math stereotyping moderated stereotype threat effects on women’s math performance: women who showed less implicit math-gender stereotyping showed the largest performance difference across experimental conditions. These results suggest that women’s implicit associations between gender and math interact with situational cues to influence their math performance: women who implicitly associate women more than men with mathematics were most benefited by reduction of stereotype salience during testing.     

The many faces of stereotype threat: Group- and self-threat

Contending with negative intellectual stereotypes has been shown to depress the academic performance of targets of the stereotypes [Steele, C. M. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance. American Psychologist, 52, 613-629]. The present paper examines whether women’s mathematics performance is differentially affected by the concern of confirming that a negative stereotype is true of the self (self-threat), than by the concern of confirming that the stereotype is true of their gender (group-threat). In two studies we independently manipulated these different threats for women taking a mathematics test. Gender identification moderated the effect of group-threats on test performance; only women highly identified with their gender underperformed. The performance of less gender-identified women was unaffected by group-threats. In contrast, gender identification did not moderate the effect of self-threats—both high- and low-identified women underperformed. The results of these studies suggest that women’s math performance is differentially affected by the source of the threat.     

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 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.     

Distinctiveness-based stereotype threat and the moderating role of coaction contexts

Two experiments, using computer avatars, examined the role of coaction contexts (competition versus cooperation) in distinctiveness-based stereotype threat. In Experiment 1, African-American participants performed an anagram-solving task with two ostensible coactors either in a high-distinctiveness (participant being a numerical minority with two Caucasian coactors) or in a low-distinctiveness (racial-cues absent with silhouette-image avatars) environment; coaction contexts were structured either in terms of competition or in terms of cooperation. Participants situated in the high-distinctiveness environment performed better when they engaged in cooperation than in competition whereas those in the low-distinctive environment did not show a significant difference. In Experiment 2, which was conducted to replicate and extend Experiment 1 with a different social category/domain, females took a mathematics test with two ostensible coactors. Whereas the competition versus cooperation difference was not significant among participants placed in a low-distinctiveness (female-majority or all-female) environment, participants situated in a high-distinctiveness (female-minority) environment showed significantly lower levels of stereotype-associated concerns and better performance on the math test in cooperation than in competition. Our findings suggest that distinctiveness-based stereotype threat is less likely to occur when the context of group performance is framed as cooperation as opposed to competition.     

Solo status, stereotype threat, and performance expectancies: Their effects on women’s performance

Women working in male-dominated environments may find themselves to be the only woman present, and that negative stereotypes about women persist in the environment. This experiment tested women’s performance in solo status (SS: being the only woman present) and under stereotype threat (ST: when women are stereotyped as poor performers). White male and female participants (157) learned information, then tested on it in an opposite-gender (SS) or same-gender group (nonsolo). In addition, the information was described as being traditional math material (ST) or a type of math information impervious to gender stereotypes (no threat). Women performed more poorly in SS than nonsolos, and under ST than no threat. Experiencing both factors was more detrimental to women’s performance than experiencing one or the other. Men’s performance was the same across all conditions. Performance expectancies partially mediated the effect of SS, but not ST, on performance.     

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.     

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.     

An Examination of Implicitly Activated,Explicitly Activated,and Nullified Stereotypes on Mathematical Performance: It's Not Just a Woman's Issue

This study was designed to examine the different ways that stereotypes might become activated in testing situations and the effects this activation has on task performance. In Experiment 1, women undergraduates exposed to an explicitly activated stereotype (i.e., told men outperform women in mathematics) performed worse than women exposed to a nullified stereotype (i.e., told men and women perform at the same level in mathematics). The stereotype threat also was activated implicitly under normal conditions (i.e., just given the test with nothing else stated) such that performance in this condition was at the same (low) level as the explicitly activated threat. In Experiment 2, the results were replicated with White male undergraduates using the stereotype that Asians are better than Whites in mathematics. In addition, in a small field survey we found that this belief about ethnicity did occur spontaneously for White men in college calculus courses. Taken together, the results of these studies suggest that even under normal circumstances, math test situations may lead to nonoptimal performance for both stigmatized (women) and traditionally nonstigmatized (White men) group members. Implications for threat nullification techniques are discussed.     

Effects of Salient Multiple Identities on Women's Performance Under Mathematics Stereotype Threat

Previous research on affective extremity and social identity complexity suggested that women's mathematics stereotype threat might be alleviated by reminding individual women of their multiple roles and identities, most of which would presumably be unrelated and thus impervious to negative stereotypes regarding math performance. To test this hypothesis, we primed the relevant stereotype and then asked men and women college students to draw self-concept maps with many or few nodes. When they drew no maps or maps with few nodes, highly math-identified women scored significantly worse than highly math-identified men on a subsequent Graduate Record Examination-like math test, but when they drew maps with many nodes, they scored as well as those men. Theoretical and practical implications of the results are discussed.     

Rising to the threat: Reducing stereotype threat by reframing the threat as a challenge

In two experiments, we found that the performance-inhibiting consequences of stereotype threat were eliminated when the threat was subtly reframed as a challenge. In Experiment 1, Black school children in North Carolina completed a 10-item mathematics test. Participants who reported their race before taking the test performed more poorly than participants who reported their race after completing the test, unless the test was framed as a challenge. Experiment 2 replicated this effect with undergraduates at a prestigious university. When reminded that they graduated from high schools that were poorly represented at the university, they performed more poorly than their peers on a math test. However, when the test was reframed as a challenge, this threat had no effect on their performance. These findings are discussed in terms of their theoretical and practical applications for both educational and athletic training.     

Effects of role model deservingness on overcoming performance deficits induced by stereotype threat

Previous research has shown that exposure to successful role models can restore performance that had been impaired by stereotype threat, and that some role models are more effective than others. The present research examined the effects of role model deservingness on women's mathematics test performance after being placed under stereotype threat. In Experiment 1, a woman who attained success by herself (deserved) proved a more effective role model than an equally likable and successful woman whose success was handed to her (not deserved). In Experiment 2, women role models proved more effective at combating stereotype threat when their successes were attributable to internal‐stable (deserved) than external‐unstable (not deserved) causes, an effect that was partially mediated by reduction in extra‐task thinking. The results are seen as having implications for theories of stereotype threat and causal attribution. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Stereotype Threat in Men on a Test of Social Sensitivity

This study provides evidence of stereotype threat in men on a test of a feminine ability called social sensitivity, that is, the ability to decode nonverbal cues. Men who were told that the test assessed social sensitivity and produced better scores for women than men performed worse on the test than did men who were told that the test assessed information processing. Because social sensitivity can be an automatic skill and stereotype threat uses mental capacity, this effect was moderated by self-reported strategy usage. Mens performance worsened in the threat condition only when they reported more deliberative and less intuitive strategies for decoding nonverbal cues.     

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.     

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.     

Stereotype susceptibility narrows the gender gap in imagined self-rotation performance

Three studies examined the impact of stereotype messages on men’s and women’s performance of a mental rotation task involving imagined self-rotations. Experiment 1 established baseline differences between men and women; women made 12% more errors than did men. Experiment 2 found that exposure to a positive stereotype message enhanced women’s performance in comparison with that of another group of women who received neutral information. In Experiment 3, men who were exposed to the same stereotype message emphasizing a female advantage made more errors than did male controls, and the magnitude of error was similar to that for women from Experiment 1. The results suggest that the gender gap in mental rotation performance is partially caused by experiential factors, particularly those induced by sociocultural stereotypes.     

Identity bifurcation in response to stereotype threat: Women and mathematics

Three studies explored women’s bifurcation of feminine identity as a response to threatening stereotypes in the domain of mathematics. Study 1 demonstrated that women in a math class who previously had completed a large number of math courses disavowed “feminine characteristics” strongly associated with stereotypes about women’s potential for math success (e.g., flirtatiousness, planning to have children) but not characteristics perceived to be weakly associated with these stereotypes (e.g., empathy, nurturance), more than women who had completed fewer math courses. Studies 2 and 3 directly manipulated stereotype threat by presenting a scientific article reporting stereotype-consistent sex differences in math aptitude. As predicted, women strongly identified with mathematics responded to this threatening article by disavowing feminine characteristics strongly associated, but not those weakly associated, with the relevant negative stereotypes, while women not strongly identified with mathematics showed no such differentiation in response. Theoretical and practical implications of these results are discussed.     

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.     

Stereotype threat: the moderating role of Locus of Control beliefs

The goal of the present study was to test the moderating role of Locus of Control beliefs on performance deficits typically associated with stereotype threat. The results from Experiment 1 were consistent with predictions. First, consistent with the Stereotype Threat model, participants showed a decrease in performance when the task was perceived as a potential test of the in‐group's negative stereotype (lacking logical mathematical intelligence in the case of women and lacking social intelligence in the case of men). Most important, participants' Locus of Control beliefs were found to moderate participants' vulnerability to stereotype threat: individuals with an Internal Locus of Control, although generally performing better, showed a sharper decrease in the stereotype threat condition compared to individuals with External Locus of Control beliefs. Experiment 2 replicated the results from Experiment 1. Findings are discussed in relation to the psychological characteristics of Internal Locus of Control that may render individuals more vulnerable to the negative effects of stereotype threat. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Hostile environments, stereotype threat, and math performance among undergraduate women

This study examined the impact of hostile environments and stereotype threat on women’s math performance. A hostile environment was created with a derogatory cartoon related to women's math ability. Stereotype threat was removed by informing women participants that “men and women perform equally” on the math test. Results showed that hostile environments and stereotype threat significantly interacted leading to differential math performance for number of math problems attempted and answered correctly. Additionally, women in hostile and stereotype threat conditions experienced differential emotional reactions during the math test. Results are discussed in terms of theoretical and practical importance. This article was based on the first author’s Master’s thesis. Parts of this study were presented at the American Psychological Society 10th Annual Conference (1998) in Washington D.C. The authors would like to thank David Mueller, Jason Joly, and Chris Termini for their help in collecting and entering data. We would also like to thank Eddie Clark and Michael Leippe for their helpful feedback and guidance on this paper.