Alleviating women’s mathematics stereotype threat through salience of group achievements

Stereotype threat impairs performance in situations where a stereotype holds that one’s group will perform poorly. Two experiments investigated whether reminding women of other women’s achievements might alleviate women’s mathematics stereotype threat. In Experiment 1, college women performed significantly better on a difficult mathematics test when they were first told that women in general make better participants than men in psychology experiments. In Experiment 2, college women performed significantly better on a difficult mathematics test when they first read about four individual women who had succeeded in architecture, law, medicine, and invention. The results are seen as having implications for theories of stereotype threat, self-evaluation, and performance expectations.     

Perceiver threat in social interactions with stigmatized others

The extent to which stigmatized interaction partners engender perceivers' threat reactions (i.e., stigma-threat hypothesis) was examined. Experiments 1 and 2 included the manipulation of stigma using facial birthmarks. Experiment 3 included manipulations of race and socioeconomic status. Threat responses were measured physiologically, behaviorally, and subjectively. Perceivers interacting with stigmatized partners exhibited cardiovascular reactivity consistent with threat and poorer performance compared with participants interacting with nonstigmatized partners, who exhibited challenge reactivity. In Experiment 3, intergroup contact moderated physiological reactivity such that participants who reported more contact with Black persons exhibited less physiological threat when interacting with them. These results support the stigma-threat hypothesis and suggest the utility of a biopsychosocial approach to the study of stigma and related constructs.     

A threat in the computer: the race implicit association test as a stereotype threat experience

Three experiments test whether the threat of appearing racist leads White participants to perform worse on the race Implicit Association Test (IAT) and whether self-affirmation can protect from this threat. Experiments 1 and 2 suggest that White participants show a stereotype threat effect when completing the race IAT, leading to stronger pro-White scores when the test is believed to be diagnostic of racism. This effect increases for domain-identified (highly motivated to control prejudice) participants (Experiment 2). In Experiment 3, self-affirmation inoculates participants against stereotype threat while taking the race IAT. These findings have methodological implications for use of the race IAT and theoretical implications concerning the malleability of automatic prejudice and the potential interpersonal effects of the fear of appearing racist.     

Sexual harassment under social identity threat: the computer harassment paradigm

Two laboratory experiments investigated the hypothesis that threat to male identity would increase the likelihood of gender harassment. In both experiments, using the computer harassment paradigm, male university students (N=80 in Experiment 1, N=90 in Experiment 2) were exposed to different types of identity threat (legitimacy threat and threat to group value in Experiment 1 and distinctiveness threat and prototypicality threat in Experiment 2) or to no threat and were then given the opportunity to send pornographic material to a virtual female interaction partner. Results show that (a) participants harassed the female interaction partner more when they were exposed to a legitimacy, distinctiveness, or prototypicality threat than to no threat; (b) this was mainly true for highly identified males; and (c) harassment enhanced postexperimental gender identification. Results are interpreted as supporting a social identity account of gender harassment.     

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.     

The difference isn't black and white: stereotype threat and the race gap on Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices

This study addresses recent criticisms aimed at the interpretation of stereotype threat research and methodological weaknesses of previous studies that have examined race differences on Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices (APM). African American and White undergraduates completed the APM under three conditions. In two threat conditions, participants received either standard APM instructions (standard threat) or were told that the APM was an IQ test (high threat). In a low threat condition, participants were told that the APM was a set of puzzles and that the researchers wanted their opinions of them. Results supported the stereotype threat interpretation of race differences in cognitive ability test scores. Although African American participants underperformed Whites under both standard and high threat instructions, they performed just as well as Whites did under low threat instructions.     

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.     

Stereotype threat: the effect of expectancy on performance

The goal of this study was to investigate to role of expectancy as a potential mediator of performance deficits under stereotype threat. In Experiment 1, female students were assigned to one of three experimental conditions in which they were told that women perform worse (Negative information), equally (Control) or better (Positive information) than men in logical–mathematical tests. Later, they were given a difficult math test and asked to estimate their performance prior to taking the test. Consistent with predictions, participants who considered logical–mathematical abilities important and received negative information regarding the ingroup showed lower levels of expectations and a sharp decrease in performance compared to women in the positive and control conditions. Moreover, expectancy was found to partially mediate the effect of stereotype threat on performance. In Experiment 2, we tested the generalizability of these results to non‐stigmatized groups. A group of Black Americans living in Italy were provided with favorable or unfavorable information about either their minority (Blacks) or their majority (Americans) ingroup. Consistent with predictions, participants both in the minority and in the majority condition had lower expectations and under‐performed after negative information about the ingroup. However, the level of expectancy was found to mediate the decrease in performance for participants in the Black but not in the American condition. In the discussion of these results it is suggested that, although comparable performance deficits are found for minority and majority members, the underlying processes may be different. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Stereotype threat undermines academic learning

Two experiments tested whether stereotype threat can undermine the acquisition of academic knowledge and thus harm performance even in nonthreatening settings. In Experiment 1, Black and White students studied rare words in either nonthreatening or threatening conditions. One to two weeks later, participants recalled word definitions, half in a nonthreatening "warm-up" and half in a threatening "test." Replicating past research, Black students performed worse on the test than on the warm-up. But importantly, Black students who had studied in the threatening rather than nonthreatening environment performed worse even on the warm-up. White students were unaffected. In Experiment 2, a value affirmation eliminated the learning-threat effect and provided evidence of psychological process. The results suggest that stereotype threat causes a form of "double jeopardy" whereby threat can undermine both learning and performance. The discussion addresses implications for the interpretation of group differences and for understanding how brief threat-reducing interventions can produce long-lasting benefits.     

Economic threat undermines the satisfaction of psychological needs for competence and autonomy

During times of macroeconomic instability, the prospect of personal financial deficiency becomes a pervasive concern. This research examined the psychological consequences of contemplating threatening economic futures. In two experiments, we tested whether economic threat undermined the satisfaction of the basic psychological needs for competence and autonomy. In Experiment 1, Canadian university students primed with an economic threat (compared with a threat‐neutral topic) reported feeling less competent and autonomous. In Experiment 2, American adults primed with an economic threat reported less competence and autonomy compared to both those primed with (a) a noneconomic threat and (b) a threat‐neutral topic. Participants under economic threat also reported lower well‐being compared with threat‐neutral participants. This effect was mediated by self‐perceived competence and autonomy.     

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.     

Reducing stereotype threat by blurring intergroup boundaries

The authors aimed to establish whether interventions designed to reduce intergroup bias could be applied to the stereotype threat domain. In three experiments, the hypothesis was tested that blurring intergroup boundaries would reduce stereotype threat. In the first study, it was found that female participants who thought about characteristics shared between the genders tended to show less preference for stereotypical female careers than did participants in the baseline condition. In Experiment 2, participants who thought about overlapping characteristics answered more math questions correctly compared to a baseline group and participants who thought about differences between the genders. In Experiment 3, a specific threat manipulation was included. Participants who completed the overlapping characteristics task before receiving the threat completed significantly more math questions correctly than did participants in the baseline and threat conditions. The findings support the idea that interventions designed to reduce intergroup bias can be applied successfully in the reduction of stereotype threat.     

Stereotype threat may not impact women's inhibitory control or mathematical performance: Providing support for the null hypothesis

Underpinned by the findings of Jamieson and Harkins (2007; Experiment 3), the current study pits the mere effort motivational account of stereotype threat against a working memory interference account. In Experiment 1, females were primed with a negative self- or group stereotype pertaining to their visuospatial ability and completed an anti-saccade eye-tracking task. In Experiment 2 they were primed with a negative or positive group stereotype and completed an anti-saccade and mental arithmetic task. Findings indicate that stereotype threat did not significantly impair women's inhibitory control (Experiments 1 and 2) or mathematical performance (Experiment 2), with Bayesian analyses providing support for the null hypothesis. These findings are discussed in relation to potential moderating factors of stereotype threat, such as task difficulty and stereotype endorsement, as well as the possibility that effect sizes reported in the stereotype threat literature are inflated due to publication bias.     

Challenge versus threat effects on the goal–performance relationship

This study tested the situational effects of goals and stress on the performance of complex tasks and on adaptation to change in the task. Difficult goals often exceed the individual's resources and thus create stress. However, stress may be appraised as either challenge or threat. Challenge is experienced when there is an opportunity for self-growth with available coping strategies, whereas threat is experienced when the situation is perceived as leading to failure with no available strategies to cope with it. We hypothesized that participants who appraised the situation as a challenge would perform better and adapt better to changes under difficult goal conditions, as compared with general goals or strategy goals. By contrast, threat appraisals would be better addressed by strategy goals rather than difficult goals. One hundred and fifty five students performed a task, which required their making predictions concerning the value of 120 companies' stocks based on three manipulated cues. We used a three by three by two factorial design in which goals, stress, and change (as a repeated factor) were varied to test the hypotheses. Results supported the main hypotheses and demonstrated that the same level of goal difficulty may lead to high or low performance and adaptation to change depending on the appraisal of the situation as challenging or threatening. The theoretical and practical implications of these findings are further discussed.     

The consequences of stereotype threat on the academic performance of White and non-White lower income college students

This research examined whether socioeconomic stereotypes produce stereotype threat among lower, middle, or upper income college students who are either White or non-White. Before completing an academic test, participants were either told that the purpose of the research was to understand why lower income students generally perform worse on academic tests or to examine problem-solving processes. Results showed that lower income students exposed to stereotype threat experienced greater test anxiety and performed worse on the academic test than their middle income and higher income counterparts. However, lower income students who experienced stereotype threat exerted as much effort on the test as lower income students who did not experience stereotype threat. Nonetheless, they were less likely to identify with school-related subjects. Stereotype threat and reduced performance did not influence lower income students’ self-esteem. Participant race did not influence these findings. The research is discussed in light of cognitive dissonance theory. Portions of the results were presented at the 2004 American Psychological Society Conference, Chicago, IL. Lisa A. Harrison is an assistant professor of psychology at California State University, Sacramento. Her research interests include stereotypes and prejudice, gender role norms and female athletes, and the influence of social identity on judgments of interpersonal violence. E-mail: lharriso@csus.edu Chiesha M. Stevens is currently working toward her MA in industrial/organizational psychology at California State University, Long Beach Adrienne N. Monty is currently working toward her MA in psychology at California State University, Sacramento Christine Coakley received her BA in psychology from California State University, Sacramento where she is currently working toward her MA in industrial/organizational psychology. Her research interests include stereotype threat, optimism, motivation and employee burnout in special education. E-mail: Sac78629@saclink.csus.edu     

Suffering from the possibility of status loss: Physiological responses to social identity threat in high status groups

In this research, we examine the emergence of social identity threat among members of high status groups, by assessing physiological responses to threat in addition to more traditional (self‐report) measures. We argue that physiological measures are better suited than explicit responses to indicate the emergence of social identity threat when high status groups face the possibility of future group status loss. In Experiment 1, members of an experimentally created high status group displayed higher systolic blood pressure (SBP) and pulse pressure (PP) when inter‐group status differences were unstable than when they were stable, even though participants in both conditions reported identical levels of collective self‐esteem. In Experiment 2, only male participants (i.e., high status group members) displayed increased SBP and PP when discussing changing gender–status relations in society, particularly when this happened in an inter‐group context (i.e., when discussing with females). The increased threat that emerged under these conditions could not be inferred from self‐reported inter‐group perceptions (endorsement of sexism). We conclude that whereas self‐report measures can help assess how high status group members perceive the current inter‐group situation, physiological measures are needed to reveal the social identity threat they experience when they anticipate the possibility for future change in inter‐group relations. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Don’t hate me because I’m beautiful: Self-enhancing biases in threat appraisal

We compare people’s intuitive judgments about how the self and others respond to threat. We propose that people hold a self-enhancing belief in ”threat immunity,” i.e., they see themselves as more secure than other people in the face of threat. In Study 1, people assumed that they threatened others more than others threatened them. In Study 2, people on project teams estimated that both they and their teammates provoked roughly equal levels of threat in others, although they experienced less threat than did other people. Study 3 experimentally manipulated threat perceptions in an interactive context and revealed that when people held self-enhancing threat appraisals, those with whom they interacted experienced lower satisfaction with the outcome and relationship. Finally, Study 4 demonstrated that, as compared to people who affirmed themselves and thus focused on the self, people who affirmed another person displayed lower threat immunity. The self-enhancing nature of these threat appraisals reveals how competition and envy emerge in organizations—or at least, how people imagine they emerge.     

Reducing the effect of stereotype threat: the role of coaction contexts and regulatory fit

Two experiments examined the effects of competition and cooperation contexts, as well as regulatory fit, on reducing the negative influence of stereotype threat. Experiment 1 demonstrated that in high stereotype threat conditions, participants in the cooperation context scored significantly higher on a math test than those in the competition context, while participants in low stereotype threat conditions did not differ in both contexts. Experiment 2 found that under stereotype threat, participants with induced prevention focus scored significantly higher on a math test in the cooperation context than those in the competition context or control group. At the same time, participants with induced promotion foci did not differ between the contexts. Thus, while the cooperation context may counteract the effect of stereotype threat, inducing a promotion focus may create a regulatory fit in the competition context that could also remove the effect of stereotype threat.     

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.