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.     

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.     

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.     

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 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.     

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.     

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.     

No Doubt About It: When Doubtful Role Models Undermine Men's and Women's Math Performance Under Threat

ABSTRACT

Past work has shown that female role models are effective buffers against stereotype threat. The present research examines the boundary conditions of this role model effect. Specifically, we argue that female role models should avoid expressing doubt about their math abilities; otherwise they may cease to buffer women from stereotype threat. For men, a non-doubtful male role model should be seen as threatening, thus harming performance. A doubtful male role model, however, should be seen as non-threatening, thus allowing men to perform up to their ability in math. To test this reasoning, men and women were exposed to either an outgroup or ingroup role model who either expressed doubt or did not. Participants then took a math exam under stereotype threat conditions. As expected, doubtful ingroup role models hurt women, but helped men's performance. Outgroup role models' expressed doubt had no differential effect on performance. We also show that expressions of doubt take on a different meaning when expressed by a female rather than a male role model.     

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 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.     

Why do women underperform under stereotype threat? Evidence for the role of negative thinking

This study investigated the role of negative thinking as a potential mediator of performance deficits under stereotype threat. After being assigned to a stereotype-threat or a no-threat condition, 60 female participants were asked to complete a difficult math task. Using the thought-listing technique, women under stereotype threat reported a higher number of negative thoughts specifically related to the test and to mathematics compared with women in the no-threat condition. Moreover, women under stereotype threat also showed a sharp decrease in performance that (a) was most pronounced in the second half of the test and (b) was mediated by the increase in negative thinking.     

Self-Affirmation in Occupational Training: Effects on the Math Performance of French Women Nurses under Stereotype Threat

This study examined the conditions affecting the math performance of French female student nurses in a setting where they were likely to experience stereotype threat (supposedly poor scientific skills), but in a context which enhanced their status as women and strengthened their self-affirmation. We hypothesized that self-affirmation through their nursing identity would deflect the negative impact of the stereotype threat on performance and would reduce the threat’s harmful impact on attentional processes, as reflected in perceived stress, perceived concentration and self-estimate of performance. Ninety-five female students enrolled in a nursing school in France carried out a dosage calculation—a typical nursing task—which drew directly on their math skills. They were assigned to one of four experimental conditions: 2 (threat: task presented as being diagnostic of women’s difficulty in math calculation compared to men vs. no threat: task presented as a typical nursing-school exercise) x 2 (self-affirmation: choosing from a list and describing the most important characteristics for them as women and as nurses vs. control condition: same task but for the characteristics that were least important for them but important for other people). As expected, under stereotype threat relating to their math skills, women performed better under the self-affirmation condition than under the control condition. However, this improved performance was associated with a lower self-estimate of their performance. We discuss the consequences, in this specific occupational and cultural context, on the way women can overcome the negative impact of gender stereotypes.     

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 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.     

Endorsing a negative in-group stereotype as a self-protective strategy: Sacrificing the group to save the self

This work examined if stigmatized targets will embrace negative in-group stereotypes in order to protect their self-esteem from the threat of stereotypic failures. All studies focused on the stereotype that women have lower math ability than men. In Study 1, women who failed a math test showed buffered self-esteem if they were first given the opportunity to endorse this stereotype. Study 2 replicated this effect and showed that women, but not men, increased their endorsement of this stereotype following math failure. Study 3 showed that the tendency to embrace this stereotype in response to failure was most pronounced among women with high trait self-esteem. Together, these findings suggest that there are contexts in which stigmatized individuals can protect their self-esteem in the face of stereotypic failures by embracing the very stereotypes that would have predicted their failure.     

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.     

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.     

Stigma on my mind: Individual differences in the experience of stereotype threat

Stereotyped individuals vary in how chronically self-conscious they are of their stigmatized status, which Pinel (1999) has dubbed stigma consciousness. The current study investigated whether individual differences in stigma consciousness moderate the impact of gender stereotypes on the math performance of women. Results indicated that, under conditions designed to evoke stereotype threat (Steele, 1997), women high in stigma consciousness scored worse than women low in stigma consciousness on a math test. In the control (low threat) condition, stigma consciousness was unrelated to test performance. Possible mechanisms underlying this moderation are discussed.     

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.