Counter-stereotypic beliefs in math do not protect school girls from stereotype threat

The threat of being negatively stereotyped in math impairs performance of highly qualified females on difficult math tests, a phenomenon known as “stereotype threat”—ST. Perhaps more alarmingly, recent studies based on unselective samples of elementary-, middle-, and high-school students show that ST also operates in girls from the general population. Here we offer first evidence that ST does operate (with large effect sizes) even in middle-school girls who deny the negative gender stereotype. Children’s beliefs about the two genders math ability, therefore, do not necessarily moderate their susceptibility to ST, an important issue that remained unclear so far. This new finding is also of great practical significance: School girls’ counter-stereotypic beliefs cannot be taken as sufficient evidence for deciding whether the struggle against ST is or is not needed. Appropriate interventions should be the default option when aiming for true gender equality in math and science achievements.     

Stereotype strength and attentional bias: Preference for confirming versus disconfirming information depends on processing capacity

In two experiments, we investigated the relationships among stereotype strength, processing capacity, and the allocation of attention to stereotype-consistent versus stereotype-inconsistent information describing a target person. The results of both experiments showed that, with full capacity, greater stereotype strength was associated with increased attention toward stereotype-consistent versus stereotype-inconsistent information. However, when capacity was diminished, greater stereotype strength was associated with increased attention toward inconsistent versus consistent information. Thus, strong stereotypes may act as self-confirming filters when processing capacity is plentiful, but as efficient information gathering devices that maximize the acquisition of novel (disconfirming) information when capacity is depleted. Implications for models of stereotyping and stereotype change are discussed.     

A tool for thought! When comparative thinking reduces stereotyping effects

Stereotypes have pervasive, robust, and often unwanted effects on how people see and behave towards others. Undoing these effects has proven to be a daunting task. Two studies demonstrate that procedurally priming participants to engage in comparative thinking with a generalized focus on differences reduces behavioral and judgmental stereotyping effects. In Study 1, participants who were procedurally primed to focus on differences sat closer to a skinhead - a member of a negatively stereotyped group. In Study 2, participants primed on differences ascribed less gender stereotypic characteristics to a male and female target person. This suggests that comparative thinking with a focus on differences may be a simple cognitive tool to reduce the behavioral and judgmental effects of stereotyping.     

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.     

When internalization leads to automatization: The role of self-determination in automatic stereotype suppression and implicit prejudice regulation

Recent evidence suggests that self-determined prejudice regulation is negatively related to both self-reported prejudice and automatic racial bias. However, the social-cognitive processes involved in this association have not yet been examined. Thus, the current project sought to test the ‘internalization-automatization hypothesis’, that is, to assess the extent to which prejudice regulation is automatic for those high and low in self-determined motivation to regulate prejudice. To this end, two different experimental paradigms were used. In Experiment 1 (N = 84), differences in the automatic activation and application of stereotypes were assessed for those high and low in self-determined prejudice regulation. As expected, both types of prejudice regulators showed similar stereotype activation. However, only self-determined individuals inhibited the application of stereotypes following a prime. Experiment 2 (N = 134), assessed the impact of self-regulatory depletion on the regulation of implicit prejudice. As anticipated, for the self-determined regulators, prejudice regulation did not vary between depleted and non-depleted individuals. However, when non-self-determined prejudice regulators were depleted, prejudice increased, relative to non-depleted controls. Results are discussed in terms of an increased understanding of prejudice regulation through self-determination. Evidence of the automatization of self-determined prejudice regulation offers promising implications for the reduction of prejudice.

Stereotype accuracy

Methodological issues and empirical findings from stereotype accuracy research are reviewed. Methodological issues include the limitations of accuracy criteria and three methods of comparing perceived to actual group characteristics--signed discrepancies, absolute discrepancies, and within-subject correlations. Empirical findings concern the roles of cognitive processes, status and power, and social ideology in intergroup perceptions; stereotype development; individual differences in stereotyping; and stereotype use. It is argued that stereotype accuracy research is neither easy to do nor politically popular, but that it may challenge existing theory and stimulate new ideas about the nature of stereotyping processes.     

Do glasses change children’s perceptions? Effects of eyeglasses on peer- and self-perception

A literature overview is presented on the influence of eyeglasses on children’s perceptions. Children’s stereotypes of eyeglass wearers were mostly negative, but included smartness. Glasses were of relatively low importance in person categorization. Eyeglasses seemed non-destructive for global self-esteem, but negatively affected self-perceptions of physical appearance. Additionally, particularly older, urban children showed non-compliance, which probably indicates a dislike of glasses. It was concluded that children have negative and positive stereotypes of peers with eyeglasses. Wearing eyeglasses can negatively affect physical self-esteem.     

“You throw like a girl:” The effect of stereotype threat on women's athletic performance and gender stereotypes

Objectives“Stereotype threat” occurs when people perform worse at a task due to the pressure of a negative stereotype of their group's performance. We examined whether female athletes may underperform at an athletic task if prompted to think about gender stereotypes of athleticism. We also explored whether gender stereotypes regarding general athletic ability would be affected by a standard stereotype threat induction.DesignWe used a 2 (participant gender) × 2 (stereotype threat manipulation) factorial design with task performance and gender stereotypes of athleticism as dependent measures.MethodFemale and male tennis and basketball college student athletes performed two athletic tasks relevant to their sport: a difficult concentration task and an easier speed task. Participants were told beforehand that (1) there was a gender difference on the tasks (to induce stereotype threat) or (2) there was no gender difference (to remove any preexisting stereotype threat).ResultsOn the difficult task, women performed worse than men only when stereotype threat was induced. Performance on the easier speed task was unaffected by the stereotype information. Interestingly, women's beliefs regarding women's and men's general athleticism were also affected by the manipulation.ConclusionsWe concluded that one minor comment regarding a very specific athletic task may sometimes impair task performance and alter gender stereotypes of athleticism among women. Some implications for preventing negative stereotype threat effects are discussed.     

Sex differences in neural efficiency: Are they due to the stereotype threat effect?

The neural efficiency hypothesis postulates a more efficient use of brain resources in more intelligent people as compared to less intelligent ones. However, this relationship was found to be moderated by sex and task content. While the phenomenon of neural efficiency was previously supported for men when performing visuo-spatial tasks it occurred for women only when performing verbal tasks. One possible explanation for this finding could be provided by the well-studied phenomenon called stereotype threat. Stereotype threat arises when a negative stereotype of one’s own group is made salient and can result in behavior that confirms the stereotype. Overall, 32 boys and 31 girls of varying intellectual ability were tested with a mental rotation task, either under a stereotype exposure or a no-stereotype exposure condition while measuring their EEG. The behavioral results show that an activated negative stereotype not necessarily hampers the performance of girls. Physiologically, a confirmation of the neural efficiency phenomenon was only obtained for boys working under a no-stereotype exposure condition. This result pattern replicates previous findings without threat and thus suggests that sex differences in neural efficiency during visuo-spatial tasks may not be due to the stereotype threat effect.