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.     

Complaining about a compliment: Evaluating attributions of positive outcomes to discrimination

People evaluate stigmatized group members negatively when they attribute negative personal outcomes to discrimination, even when discrimination is the likely cause. The present studies examined whether similar interpersonal costs exist for attributing a positive personal outcome to discrimination in the context of positive stereotypes. In Study 1, 129 participants read an excerpt written by an Asian student who attributed an unexpectedly high essay grade to discrimination, writing quality, or easy grading. Participants evaluated the student least favourably when he attributed the positive outcome to discrimination. In Study 2, 140 participants evaluated a successful Asian job applicant less favourably than a successful, white applicant, although both applicants attributed the positive outcome to group membership. The implications for how stigmatized group members perceive and respond to prejudice and discrimination are discussed.     

The impact of feminist stereotypes and sexual identity on feminist self-identification and collective action

ABSTRACT

The present study sought to examine the role of sexual identity and exposure to stereotypes of feminism on women’s self-identification as a feminist, endorsement of feminist attitudes, and intention to engage in collective action. Participants (N = 312; all women) disclosed their sexual identity as either heterosexual or non-heterosexual (sexual minority) and were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: exposure to positive stereotypes of feminists, to negative stereotypes of feminists, control condition (no exposure to stereotypes). Results showed stark differences between heterosexual and sexual minority women, with sexual minority women scoring significantly higher on self-identification as feminist, feminist attitudes, and collective action intentions. Exposure to positive stereotypes of feminists increased feminist self-identification regardless of sexual identity. Exposure to negative stereotypes reduced self-identification with feminism, and lower identification mediated the path between negative stereotyping and collective action. Implications of these findings for the advancement of women’s rights movements are discussed.     

Effects of status and outcome on attributions and just-world beliefs: How the social distribution of success and failure may be rationalized

The distribution of success and failure to social groups is supported by lay theories about the characteristics of social groups and the causes of their outcomes, as well as by beliefs about entitlement of groups to succeed or fail. This paper presents a study where a target individual’s socio-economic status (high vs. low) and outcome in a major academic achievement task (success vs. failure) were manipulated in a 2 × 2 experimental design. It was found that high-status success and low-status failure, i.e. the system-consistent outcomes, were attributed relatively more to stable internal causes (ability), whereas high-status failure and low-status success, i.e. the system-inconsistent outcomes, were attributed relatively more to unstable causes (effort). Second, participants’ belief in a just world was higher in high-status success and low-status failure than in high-status failure and low-status success.     

People as intuitive prosecutors: The impact of social-control goals on attributions of responsibility

Three experiments explored determinants of punitive character attributions to norm violators. Experiment 1 showed that ideological conservatism and manipulated threat to society increased anger and attributional punitiveness when there was ambiguity about culpability. Experiment 2 showed that informing observers that norm violations were widespread and rarely punished increased attributional punitiveness by activating anger-charged retributive goals. Experiment 3 showed that liberals and conservatives alike felt justified in assigning greater blame to high-status perpetrators who commit acts of negligence with more severe consequences but that only conservatives felt justified in doing so for low-status perpetrators. Overall, the results reinforce the hypothesis that societal threat activates a prosecutorial mindset identifiable by a correlated cluster of attributions, emotions, punishment goals and punitiveness.     

Blame contagion: The automatic transmission of self-serving attributions

When people blame others for their mistakes, they learn less and perform worse. This problem is magnified when blame becomes embedded in the shared culture of groups and organizations. Yet, little is known about whether—and, if so, how—the propensity to blame spreads from one person to another. Four experiments addressed this issue, demonstrating that blame is socially contagious: observing an individual make a blame attribution increased the likelihood that people would make subsequent blame attributions for their own, unrelated, failures (Experiments 1, 2, and 4). Results also indicated that this “blame contagion” is due to the transmission of goals. Blame exposure led to the inference and adoption of a self-image protection goal (Experiment 3), and blame contagion was eliminated when observers had the opportunity to alleviate this self-image protection goal via self-affirmation (Experiment 4). Implications for research on causal attributions, social contagion, and cultural transmission are discussed.     

The social face of emotion recognition: Evaluations versus stereotypes

The goal of the present paper was to demonstrate the influence of general evaluations and stereotype associations on emotion recognition. Earlier research has shown that evaluative connotations between social category members and emotional expression predict whether recognition of positive or negative emotional expressions will be facilitated (e.g. Hugenberg, 2005). In the current paper we tested the hypothesis that stereotype associations influence emotion recognition processes, especially when the difference between valences of emotional expressions does not come into play. In line with this notion, when participants in the present two studies were asked to classify positive versus negative emotional expressions (i.e. happy versus anger, or happy versus sadness), valence congruency effects were found. Importantly, however, in a comparative context without differences in valence in which participants were asked to classify two distinct negative emotions (i.e. anger versus sadness) we found that recognition facilitation occurred for stereotypically associated discrete emotional expressions. With this, the current results indicate that a distinction between general evaluative and cognitive routes can be made in emotion recognition processes.     

The higher they are,the harder they fall: The effects of wrongdoer status on observer punishment recommendations and intentionality attributions

In two studies, we explore whether the status of a wrongdoer affects observers’ attributions for the wrongdoer’s actions and opinions about the wrongdoer’s deserved punishment. We find that observers attribute greater intentionality to the actions of high status wrongdoers than the identical actions of low status wrongdoers, and consequently recommend more severe punishments for the former than the latter. Additionally, we find that the relationship between a wrongdoer’s status and observers’ attributions is driven by observers’ perceptions of the wrongdoer’s underlying social motives: high status wrongdoers are presumed to be more interested in their own welfare (self-concerned), and less interested in the welfare of others (other-concerned), than low status individuals. These findings have implications for the psychology of retributive justice, and suggest that punitive reactions may be influenced as much by characteristics of the criminal as they are by characteristics of the crime.     

The effects of attributions of intent and apology on forgiveness: When saying sorry may not help the story

Despite the oft-cited positive effects of an apology on forgiveness, forgiveness does not always follow. In three studies we tested the ironic notion that, following an interpersonal transgression, an apology following an attribution of intent might further hinder, rather than benefit, the forgiveness process. The findings of three studies were systematically replicated and supported our primary prediction that, following attributions of intent, saying sorry does not always lead to forgiveness. When offenders intentionally committed a transgression, forgiveness was less likely following an apology. However, when offenses were unintentional, forgiveness was more likely following an apology. We also showed that these effects were explained by participants’ impression of the transgressor.     

Attributions to discrimination and self-esteem: Impact of group identification and situational ambiguity

This study examined group identification and situational ambiguity as moderators of attributions to discrimination and self-esteem following negative feedback. As predicted, high gender-identified women made more discrimination attributions than low identified women when situational prejudice cues were ambiguous, but not when prejudice cues were absent or overt. Also as predicted, women exposed to overt prejudice cues had higher self-esteem than those exposed to ambiguous cues or no prejudice cues. The relationship between discrimination attributions and self-esteem was positive among women exposed to overt prejudice but negative among those exposed to no prejudice. Across conditions, however, the more that women discounted ability as a cause of their negative feedback (i.e., blamed discrimination more than ability), the higher their self-esteem. Results qualify and extend prior research and demonstrate that personal and situational factors moderate both the tendency to make attributions to discrimination and the consequences of those attributions for self-esteem.     

When what you type isn’t what they read: The perseverance of stereotypes and expectancies over e-mail

People form impressions of others by communicating with them, but not all modes of communication transmit information with equal fidelity. E-mail, for instance, is an inherently more limited mode of communication than is voice because of its relative lack of paralinguistic and non-verbal cues. The present research investigated the implication of this distinction for the biasing influence of stereotypes and expectancies. Three experiments demonstrated that racial stereotypes and bogus expectancies influence people’s impressions of a target more strongly over e-mail than voice interactions (Studies 1-3). This occurred despite an experimental design that ensured that the word-for-word content was constant across the two mediums. Follow-up analyses revealed that the effect was due, at least in part, to the greater ambiguity of e-mail versus voice communication (Study 3). Although e-mail affords many benefits, the present research suggests that it may also have some unexpected costs.     

Indirect pathways between depressive symptoms and marital distress: the role of conflict communication, attributions, and attachment style

Previous studies have focused on concomitants of depression and marital distress in order to help explain the relationship between the two, suggesting that several variables, such as conflict communication, attributions, and attachment style, are associated with depression, marital distress, or both. Our contention is that the selected variables may be important mediators (hypothesis 1) or moderators (hypothesis 2) of the concomitance between depression and marital adjustment, exploring the direct and indirect ways in which depressive symptoms and marital adjustment are related. In total, 415 heterosexual couples were recruited, and a series of regression analyses was conducted to test our hypotheses separately for men and women. Results indicated that demand-withdrawal, avoidance, causal attributions, and secure, ambivalent, and avoidant attachment mediated the relation between depressive symptoms and marital adjustment in the female sample, whereas constructive communication and causal and responsible attributions were significant mediators of men's levels of depressive symptoms and marital adjustment. In addition, avoidance and secure attachment moderated the association between depressive symptoms and marital adjustment in the female sample, and causal attributions were significant moderators of the association between depressive symptoms and marital adjustment for men. Several conclusions and implications for theory and future research are discussed.     

Having a “senior moment”: Induced aging phenomenology, subjective age, and susceptibility to ageist stereotypes

The current research develops methods to experimentally manipulate subjective age in midlife and older adulthood to test whether subjective age moderates the effects of ageist stereotypes on a person’s well-being and expression of age-stereotypic social attitudes. Study 1 manipulates experiences of visual disfluency to test whether participants feel older when they experience unexplained visual disfluency. Study 2 crosses this fluency manipulation with a manipulation of the valence of primed aging stereotypes to test whether participants feel worse about themselves when they are primed with negative aging stereotypes and given an experience of unexplained visual disfluency. Study 3 tests whether participants express more age-stereotypic social attitudes when they are made to feel older through an experience of generation gaps and they are presented with evidence confirming the stereotype linking older age with psychological rigidity. These findings illuminate the phenomenological sources of variation in subjective age and suggest that subjective age influences adults’ susceptibility to ageist stereotypes.     

Holding your place: Reactions to the prospect of status gains and losses

This paper examines individuals’ reactions to the prospect of gaining or losing status in groups. The results of three experiments provide evidence that individuals attach greater value to status when recalling the risk of status loss than when recalling the potential for status gain (Experiment 1), are willing to pay more to avoid a status loss than to achieve a status gain (Experiment 1), and put forth greater effort when striving to prevent status loss than when striving to gain status (Experiment 2). Finally, individuals who risk losing status allocate more resources toward personal status concerns (and away from group interests and potential monetary gain) than do individuals who have a chance of gaining status (Experiment 3). We discuss the implications of this research both in terms of individuals’ psychological experience of their status, as well as status attainment and maintenance concerns in groups.     

What children remember about ingroup and outgroup peers: effects of stereotypes on children's processing of information about group members

Three studies are reported about children's memory for stereotypic behaviors attributed to ingroup and outgroup members. According to research and theory in social cognition, cues present in the situation make cultural representations about group members accessible, and once primed, influence all phases of the information processing sequence. In Study 1, Euro Canadian and Native Canadian children (N=98) recalled stereotypic behaviors attributed to ingroup and outgroup members. In Study 2 (N=87), the influence of individual difference variables was explored. In Study 3 (N=32), the memory of Native Canadian children living on a First Nation reserve for behaviors attributed to ingroup and outgroup members was studied. Biases in recall were found in Studies 1 and 2, but in Study 3, outgroup favoritism, typically found among low status group members, was reversed among children attending a heritage school. Among the individual difference measures examined, age and level of cognitive development predicted what was remembered about group members. Older Euro Canadian children recalled more negative behaviors about outgroup members than did younger children, and more cognitively mature children recognized more information about ingroup than outgroup members. Results were discussed in terms of cognitive and situational factors influencing children's processing of group-relevant information and the challenges children in low status groups face in maintaining a sense of cultural identity.     

Disciplinary sanctioning of students with intellectual disabilities: revisiting the status liability hypothesis

We examined the impact of disability status on disciplinary sanctioning of a student committing a minor versus severe behavioral infraction. We used the status liability hypothesis as a framework. This hypothesis suggests that individuals with a higher personal status receive sanctioning differentially based on the severity of offense. Specifically, individuals of high status are predicted to be sanctioned less severely than persons with lower status given a minor offense. The hypothesis also predicts that individuals accorded high status will receive more punitive sanctioning when the act of deviance from social norms is perceived as severe. Pre-service teachers were randomly assigned to judge the behavior of a student with or without an intellectual disability committing a behavioral offense. A student with an intellectual disability was seen as influenced by dispositional factors, regardless of the offense, while a student without a disability who committed a minor offense was seen as influenced by situational factors. The behavior of a student with an intellectual disability was judged as less severe, and the student was 50% less likely to incur an in-school suspension. When a student with an intellectual disability was sanctioned, the length of suspension was equal to that of a student without a disability.

The ethno-racial segmentation jobs: The impacts of the occupational stereotypes on hiring decisions

ABSTRACT

This paper considers both the division of the labor market and the occupational stereotyping as explanatory mechanisms of discrimination in hiring decisions. It hypothesized that recruiters would favor candidates applying for a position that is stereotypically identified with their ethnic category. We solicited 146 recruiters in order to evaluate the hireability of either a native-born or an immigrant candidate, either competent or not competent, for either a prestigious or a low-skill occupation, and to justify their decision in writing. As predicted, both the hireability ratings and the narrative comments produced by recruiters showed that native-born applicants were preferred for prestigious jobs while immigrants tended to be selected more often for low-skill positions.The discussion addresses various issues related to decision-making in recruitment settings.     

Looking down and ramping up: The impact of status differences on effort in intergroup contexts

This paper examines how the status of an out-group impacts effort in intergroup settings. The results provide evidence that people work harder when their individual performance is compared to a lower, as opposed to higher, status out-group member. Moreover, comparisons to a lower status out-group were found to elicit motivation gains as these participants worked harder than participants in the control (Studies 1-3) or in-group comparison conditions (Studies 2 and 3). In Study 4, evidence for the role of threat as an underlying mechanism was provided as gains in effort for those compared with a lower status out-group member were eliminated when participants self- or group-affirmed prior to comparison. Finally, Study 5 shows that both social identity threat and self-categorization threat underlie increases in effort for participants compared to a lower status out-group member. We detail a theoretical basis for our claim that performance comparisons with lower status out-group members are especially threatening, and discuss the implications for this research in terms of social identity and self-categorization theories as they relate to effort in intergroup contexts.