Clinical utility of self-disclosure for adults who stutter: Apologetic versus informative statements

PurposeThe purpose of the present study was to explore the clinical utility of self-disclosure, particularly, whether disclosing in an informative manner would result in more positive observer ratings of the speaker who stutters than either disclosing in an apologetic manner or choosing not to self-disclose at all.MethodObservers (N = 338) were randomly assigned to view one of six possible videos (i.e., adult male informative self-disclosure, adult male apologetic self-disclosure, adult male no self-disclosure, adult female informative self-disclosure, adult female apologetic self-disclosure, adult female no self-disclosure). Observers completed a survey assessing their perceptions of the speaker they viewed immediately after watching the video.ResultsResults suggest that self-disclosing in an informative manner leads to significantly more positive observer ratings than choosing not to self-disclose. In contrast, use of an apologetic statement, for the most part, does not yield significantly more positive ratings than choosing not to self-disclose.ConclusionClinicians should recommend their clients self-disclose in an informative manner to facilitate more positive observer perceptions.     

« Femmes au volant,danger au tournant » Les conductrices sont-elles victimes d’une menace de stéréotype ?

Owing to the sexuation of occupations associating technical attributes with men and relational skills with women, the latter are less numerous in professions where driving is involved. The negative stereotype associating women with poor driving skills is thus likely to have a cognitive and behavioral impact. According to the model of the stereotype threat, could activation of the threat inhibit the performance of women in a Highway Code test? After performing an association task that demonstrated a largely negative stereotype, 56 female students took a Highway Code test in two conditions: an experimental condition where the stereotype was activated by a comparison between men and women (N = 17); and a control condition without activation (N = 39). Subjects performed less well in the experimental condition, demonstrating the expected effects of the stereotype threat.     

刻板印象威胁效应的消除：干预策略及其展望

刻板印象威胁效应的产生主要受到情境线索、所在刻板印象威胁群体的集体表征及群体认同、信念和动机等个人特质因素的影响。本文以认同威胁模型为基础,针对影响刻板印象威胁效应产生的主要因素,分别从改善情境、改变认知图式和训练积极的内隐态度和动机等多个方面系统地探讨了干预刻板印象威胁可能采用的策略,主要包括提供对困难的外归因、提供角色榜样、启动积极身份特征、提供多重社会身份信息、鼓励自我肯定、强调智力增长观、训练积极内隐态度及重塑任务环境等。在系统梳理各种干预策略的基础上,本文还探讨了当前该领域研究存在的不足和未来的发展方向。     

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.     

Looking through the eyes of the powerful

Across four experiments, we test the idea that power decreases metastereotyping, and that this effect is mediated by reduced perspective taking. Metastereotypes refer to the beliefs that members of group A share about the stereotypes that members of specific outgroup B typically have about ingroup A. We propose that the dominant psychological orientation of the powerless is aimed at seeing how others see them. In an intergroup situation they are therefore inclined to activate and apply metastereotypes. In the first three experiments we consistently find that low power leads to more metastereotyping than high power and control (in Experiment 3). Specifically, we show this effect with three different manipulations of power, namely a role manipulation (Experiment 1), experiential priming (Experiment 2), and parafoveal priming (Experiment 3). In the fourth experiment we uncover the mediating role of perspective taking. Together these findings provide strong evidence that powerlessness leads to metastereotyping.     

Power and the suppression of unwanted thoughts: Does control over others decrease control over the self?

Suppressing unwanted thoughts increases the accessibility of these thoughts after suppression is released. Two studies test the hypothesis that the magnitude of post-suppressional rebound is moderated by power. Study 1 measured participants’ thoughts about a white bear under suppression and expression instructions, following Wegner, Schneider, Carter, and White (1987). Study 2 measured stereotype accessibility after a task that required participants to describe one day in the life of an African-American under suppression or no-suppression instructions. Consistently across the two studies, powerful participants showed stronger post-suppressional rebound relative to powerless participants. The consequences of these findings for decision making and stereotyping are discussed.     

Priming meritocracy and the psychological justification of inequality

The belief that status in society is based on merit is a central feature of the American Dream. This belief system justifies status inequalities by locating the cause of status differences in the individual talents and efforts of group members. We hypothesized that activating meritocratic beliefs increases the extent to which individuals psychologically justify status inequalities, even when those inequalities are disadvantageous to the self. Specifically, we hypothesized that priming meritocracy prompts individuals to engage in system-justifying psychological responses when they experience threat either at the personal or group level. Across two studies, priming meritocracy led members of a low status group to justify both personal and group disadvantage by decreasing perceptions of discrimination (Studies 1 and 2) and increasing the extent to which they stereotyped themselves and their group in status-justifying ways (Study 2).     

Stereotype threat and test performance: A primer for school psychologists

Ethical guidelines require school psychologists to ensure that their assessment practices are nondiscriminatory, but typical discussions on this topic neglect the possible discriminatory effects of cultural stereotypes on assessment results. Recent research on stereotype threat shows that students' knowledge of stereotype-based negative expectations about their test performance can depress their actual test performance. This paper discusses the range of conditions that promote stereotype threat and identifies important moderators and mediators of the phenomenon. Several practical suggestions are offered for school psychologists to consider when interviewing students, interpreting assessment results, and developing programs to increase schoolwide achievement.     

Origins of the stuttering stereotype: stereotype formation through anchoring-adjustment

The stereotype of people who stutter is predominantly negative, holding that stutterers are excessively nervous, anxious, and reserved. The anchoring–adjustment hypothesis suggests that the stereotype of stuttering arises from a process of first anchoring the stereotype in personal feelings during times of normal speech disfluency, and then adjusting based on a rapid heuristic judgment. The current research sought to test this hypothesis, elaborating on previous research by [White, P. A., & Collins, S. R. (1984). Stereotype formation by inference: A possible explanation for the “stutterer” stereotype. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 27, 567–570]. Participants provided ratings of a hypothetical typical person who stutters, a person suffering from normal speech disfluency and a typical male on a 25-item semantic differential scale. Results showed a stereotype of people who stutter similar to that found in previous research. The pattern of results is consistent with the anchoring–adjustment hypothesis. Ratings of a male stutterer are very similar to a male experiencing temporary disfluency, both of which differ from ratings of a typical male. As expected, ratings of a stutterer show a small but statistically significant adjustment on several traits that makes the stereotype of stutterers less negative and less emotionally extreme than the temporarily disfluent male. Based on the results of this research, it appears that stereotype formation is a result of generalization and adjustment from personal experience during normal speech disfluency.

Educational objectives: The reader will be able to: (1) explain how the negative stereotype of people who stutter arises; (2) discuss the negative implications of stereotypes in the lives of people who stutter; and (3) summarize why the stereotype of people who stutter is so consistent and resistant to change.