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.     

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.     

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.     

The effect of gender stereotype activation on challenge and threat motivational states

The effect of gender stereotype activation on challenge/threat motivational states was examined. Male and female participants completed a difficult math test described as either gender-biased or gender-fair, while continuous cardiovascular data were recorded. During the math test, women in the gender-biased condition exhibited a threatened motivational state, whereas women in the gender-fair condition exhibited challenge. The cardiovascular pattern of data was reversed for men, with men exhibiting challenge when a gender bias was implied, but threat when it was not. Motivational implications of stereotype threat and psychophysiological measurement 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.     

A League of Their Own: Do Single-Sex Schools Increase Girls�� Participation in the Physical Sciences?

With the rapid shifts in the education of women in the United States, and the underrepresentation of women in fields of science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM), an issue generating much controversy is whether women may benefit more from single-sex education or coeducation. The present study surveyed 548 U.S. high-school boys and girls from single-sex and coeducational high-schools from the Midwest. Half of the participants completed a mathematics test under stereotype threat (ST) condition and half under no threat condition. Although girls in single-sex schools had higher achievement motive and self-esteem than those in coeducational schools, they were not more likely to pursue STEM careers. Overall, students in single-sex schools outperformed students from coeducational schools on the math test. Girls?? math performance was significantly higher in the ST condition than in the no threat condition.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Blatant Stereotype Threat and Women's Math Performance: Self-Handicapping as a Strategic Means to Cope with Obtrusive Negative Performance Expectations

Research on the effect of stereotype threat has consistently shown that a reduction of stereotype threat due to decreased salience of negative stereotypic expectations in testing situations results in a performance boost. This article reports on an experiment (n = 75 high school students) designed to test the impact of increased salience of negative stereotypic expectations on math performance. As expected, female participants in the condition of heightened salience of negative stereotypic expectations underperformed in comparison to their control group counterparts. Moreover, it was found that the effect of blatant stereotype threat resulted in increased self-handicapping tendencies in women, which in turn led to significantly impaired math 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.     

Calculus GPA and Math Identification as Moderators of Stereotype Threat in Highly Persistent Women

The present research tested whether the effect of stereotype threat on calculus performance was moderated by calculus GPA and math identification in advanced undergraduate women majoring in science, technology, and engineering (STEM) fields. Women (n = 102) were randomly assigned to one of three conditions—stereotype threat, gender equivalence, or no mention (of gender). Confirming stereotype threat theory, at high levels of calculus GPA and math identification, women performed the worst in the stereotype threat condition, intermediate in the gender equivalence condition, and best in the no mention condition. Strategies to counter the inimical effects of stereotype threat are discussed     

Variations of Gender–math Stereotype Content Affect Women’s Vulnerability to Stereotype Threat

To determine whether variations in stereotype content salience moderates stereotype threat effects, 66 US female undergraduate students were given a standardized math exam, and the salience of specific gender–math stereotype content was manipulated before the exam. Women exerted more effort on each problem and performed better on a math exam when threatened with an effort-based stereotype compared to when threatened with the ability-based stereotype or control (where no stereotype was explicitly mentioned). Implications of these results are discussed in terms of stereotype and social identity threat theory, as well as how the socio-cultural salience of ability versus other components of the gender–math stereotype may impact women who pursue math and science-based domains.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.