Stigma Consciousness and the Race Gap in College Academic Achievement

Stereotyped individuals vary in how chronically self-conscious they are of their stigmatized status, a variable called stigma consciousness. The present study examined whether stigma consciousness was negatively related to academic achievement in college for academically stigmatized (Black and Hispanic) students, but not for academically non-stigmatized (White and Asian) students. Results revealed that stigmatized students who were high in stigma consciousness had lower GPAs than stigmatized students who were low in stigma consciousness. Moreover, GPAs of stigmatized students who were low in stigma consciousness did not differ from those of non-stigmatized students. These results complement recent laboratory investigations of stigma consciousness among women and contribute to the literature on stereotype threat by extending the phenomenon to real-world academic performance.     

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.     

A lesson not to be learned? Understanding stereotype threat does not protect women from stereotype threat

This research examines whether reading a text presenting scientific evidence concerning the phenomenon of stereotype threat improves or disrupts women’s performance in a subsequent math task. In two experimental conditions participants ( $N = 118$ ) read a text summarizing an experiment in which stereotypes, and not biological differences, were shown to be the cause of women’s underperformance in math (Gender-relevant condition), or the deficits of Afro-Americans on verbal tests (Control condition). Results showed that, whereas men’s performance was not affected by the information provided, women who properly understood the mechanism of stereotype threat had their math performance disrupted in the Gender-relevant condition. These findings suggest that the mere presentation of research evidence on stereotype threat, in the absence of other interventions aimed at reducing the aversive effects of negative stereotypes, may have harmful effects on the targets of stigma.     

When avoiding failure improves performance: Stereotype threat and the impact of performance goals

We examined the impact of inducing performance-avoidance and approach goals (versus no goal) on women??s math performance in stereotype threatening versus nonthreatening situations. Two experiments showed that inducing either stereotype threat (versus no-threat) or a performance-avoidance goal (versus no goal) alone led to decreased math performance. However, inducing both stereotype threat and a performance-avoidance goal increased women??s performance and challenge appraisals. These findings are consistent with the theory of regulatory fit. Performance and challenge appraisals increased when there was a fit between the motivation associated with stereotype threat (avoid failure) and the induced goal (avoid performing worse than others). Implications for stereotype threat, achievement goals and regulatory focus theories 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.     

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.     

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.     

Stigma Consciousness in the Classroom: A Comparison of Pakistani Women’s Motivation and Well-being in Science and Non-science Fields of Study

Drawing from the Stereotyped Task Engagement Process (Smith, Educational Psychology Review, 16: 177–206, 2004) we compared undergraduate women in Pakistan majoring in science (51%) and non-science (49%) on their self-reported academic experiences. Results showed women in science fields who were gender atypical reported higher levels of stigma consciousness. This stigma consciousness influenced academic motivation and well-being, particularly as a function of field of study and gender typicality. Specifically, performance-avoidance goal adoption was highest and well being was lowest among atypical women who were high in stigma consciousness studying science especially compared to those in non-science fields who were more gender-typical and less stigma conscious. Implications for enhancing the academic experience for all women in the face of stigma 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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Mind the Gap: Framing of Women’s Success and Representation in STEM Affects Women’s Math Performance under Threat

Interventions designed to combat the negative effects of stereotype threat have primarily taken an individual-based approach. The current study sought to expand upon these strategies by taking a group-based approach to reduce stereotype threat effects. Specifically, we investigated whether the success and numerical representation of women in STEM positively impacts women’s math performance and affective reactions. We hypothesized that 1) women under threat (control) would perform worse than men; 2) there would be a larger performance difference for women than men when exposed to the success and balanced representation of women in STEM compared to the control condition; 3) there would be a larger performance difference for women than men between the balanced condition and the unbalanced condition where women are portrayed as successful, but not equally represented in STEM. For this study, male (n?=?56) and female (n?=?66) U.S. undergraduates from a large southern California state university read information about women’s success and representation in STEM (or no information), completed a math exam under stereotype threat conditions, and then expressed their threat-based concerns. Results revealed that women performed worse than men in the control condition. Women in the balanced condition performed better than women in the control and unbalanced conditions. Men’s performance was unaffected by the balance or imbalance of women in STEM. Women’s affective reactions largely mirrored the performance results. This study provides compelling evidence for using a group-based approach highlighting women’s advances in STEM to alleviate stereotype threat.     

You're Just Saying That Because I'm a Woman: Stigma Consciousness and Attributions to Discrimination

This study adds to tests of the construct validity of stigma consciousness by asking if people high in stigma consciousness demonstrate a greater tendency than people low in stigma consciousness to make attributions to discrimination. In a study that approached this question from both an individual difference and a situational perspective, women high or low in stigma consciousness made attributions for a negative evaluation, ostensibly written by a male peer. Under control conditions, women low in trait stigma consciousness demonstrated less of a tendency to make attributions to discrimination than women high in trait stigma consciousness. When they experienced a situationally induced increase in stigma consciousness, however, participants low in trait stigma consciousness demonstrated just as great a tendency to make attributions to discrimination as their high stigma conscious counterparts. The results provide further validation for the stigma consciousness construct, and raise questions about who benefits from attributions to discrimination.     

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.     

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.     

Improving performance expectancies in stereotypic domains: task relevance and the reduction of stereotype threat

The experiments presented here extend previous research on reducing stereotype threat, along with examining the mediating role of performance expectancies. Women who generated shared academic characteristics between men and women predicted higher scores for themselves on a math test compared to the baseline and those who generated shared non‐academic characteristics or shared physical characteristics. No effects were found for male participants' performance expectancies on an English test. Extending the relevance of these findings for stereotype threat research, women completing a math test, who first completed the shared academic characteristics task, both expressed higher performance expectancies and greater accuracy in math performance than participants in all other conditions. A partially mediating role of performance expectancies in relation to task and math performance was also found. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

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.     

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.