Hart Blanton

The Effects of Stereotype Threat and Double-Minority Status on the Test Performance of Latino Women

This study investigated the interactive influences of diagnosticity instructions, gender, and ethnicity as they related to task performance. In a laboratory experiment of 120 male and female, Latino and White college students, both a gender-based and an ethnicity-based stereotype-threat effect were found to influence performance on a test of mathematical and spatial ability. Closer inspection revealed that the gender effect was qualified by ethnicity, whereas the ethnicity effect was not qualified by gender. This suggests that the ethnicity of Latino women sensitized them to negative stereotypes about their gender, leading to a performance decrement in a context in which stereotype threat was activated. In contrast, it appeared that the gender of Latino women did not sensitize them to negative stereotypes about their ethnicity, because both male and female Latinos evidenced ethnicity-based stereotype threat. These findings have implications for the interplay between multiple group identities as they relate to concern for confirming negative stereotypes.

Peer Influences on Risk Behavior: An Analysis of the Effects of a Close Friend.

Cross-sectional research suggests that peer influence has a moderate to strong impact on adolescent risk behavior. Such estimates may be inflated owing to third-variable confounds representing either friendship selection effects or the operation of parallel events. Approximately 1,700 peer dyads in Grades 7 to 11 were studied over a 1-year period to estimate the influence of closest friends on sexual activity and binge drinking. Analyses suggested that peer influence was small but reliable when both selection effects and parallel events were taken into account. Peer influence varied as a function of individual-peer similarity and maternal relations but not in accord with other theoretical predictions. It is suggested that the magnitude of peer effects in previous research may be overestimated in many contexts.

When better-than-others compare upward: Choice of comparison and comparative evaluation as independent predictors of academic performance

Social comparison theory has linked improved performance to both the tendency to compare with others who are performing well and the tendency to view the self as better than others. However, little research has investigated the effects of either variable outside of a controlled laboratory environment, Moreover, there is reason to believe that the 2 tendencies would be in opposition to one another, because people who compare upward might subsequently view themselves as relatively less competent. The results of a longitudinal study of 876 students in their Ist year of secondary education indicated that both variables independently predicted improved academic performance and that these 2 tendencies did not conflict.

From seeing to being : Subliminal social comparisons affect implicit and explicit self-evaluations

The authors hypothesize that social comparisons can have automatic influences on self-perceptions. This was tested by determining whether subliminal exposure to comparison information influences implicit and explicit self-evaluation. Study 1 showed that subliminal exposure to social comparison information increased the accessibility of the self. Study 2 revealed that subliminal exposure to social comparison information resulted in a contrast effect on explicit self-evaluation. Study 3 showed that subliminal exposure to social comparison information affects self-evaluations more easily than it affects mood or evaluations of other people. Studies 4 and 5 replicated these self-evaluation effects and extended them to implicit measures. Study 6 showed that automatic comparisons are responsive to a persons perceptual needs, such that they only occur when people are uncertain about themselves. Implications for theories of social cognition, judgment, and comparison are discussed.

Predicting ethnic and racial discrimination: a meta-analysis of IAT criterion studies.

This article reports a meta-analysis of studies examining the predictive validity of the Implicit Association Test (IAT) and explicit measures of bias for a wide range of criterion measures of discrimination. The meta-analysis estimates the heterogeneity of effects within and across 2 domains of intergroup bias (interracial and interethnic), 6 criterion categories (interpersonal behavior, person perception, policy preference, microbehavior, response time, and brain activity), 2 versions of the IAT (stereotype and attitude IATs), 3 strategies for measuring explicit bias (feeling thermometers, multi-item explicit measures such as the Modern Racism Scale, and ad hoc measures of intergroup attitudes and stereotypes), and 4 criterion-scoring methods (computed majority-minority difference scores, relative majority-minority ratings, minority-only ratings, and majority-only ratings). IATs were poor predictors of every criterion category other than brain activity, and the IATs performed no better than simple explicit measures. These results have important implications for the construct validity of IATs, for competing theories of prejudice and attitude-behavior relations, and for measuring and modeling prejudice and discrimination.

Deviance regulation: A theory of action and identity.

The authors propose a behavioral decision theory relevant to the maintenance of desirable identities. The theory, termed deviance regulation theory (DRT), predicts that actions translate into meaningful identities to the extent that they cause the individual to deviate from reference group norms. This straightforward proposition is used to predict the patterning of behavior across a wide array of social contexts. The authors present evidence that predictions generalize across Eastern and Western cultures and to both personal and collective identities. Finally, they show how DRT alters current theoretical assumptions about social motives and social and cultural influence, and they illustrate how it can help explain the structure of both informal and formal social forces.

Implicit Self-Esteem: Nature, Measurement, and a New Way Forward

Gaining insight into the nature and consequences of peoples global self-evaluations (i.e., their self-esteem) has been fraught with difficulty. Nearly 2 decades ago, researchers suggested that such difficulties might be addressed by the development of a new class of measures designed to uncover implicit self-esteem. In this article, we evaluate the construct validity of the 2 most common measures of implicit self-esteem, the Implicit Association Test (IAT) and Name-Letter Test (NLT). Our review indicates that the research literature has not provided strong or consistent support for the validity of either measure. We conclude that both tests are impoverished measures of self-esteem that are better understood as measures of either generalized implicit affect (IAT) or implicit egotism (NLT). However, we suggest that there surely are aspects of self-esteem that people are unwilling or unable to report and suggest a general approach that may allow researchers to tap these unspoken aspects of self-esteem.

Strong Claims and Weak Evidence: Reassessing the Predictive Validity of the IAT

The authors reanalyzed data from 2 influential studies-A. R. McConnell and J. M. Leibold and J. C. Ziegert and P. J. Hanges-that explore links between implicit bias and discriminatory behavior and that have been invoked to support strong claims about the predictive validity of the Implicit Association Test. In both of these studies, the inclusion of race Implicit Association Test scores in regression models reduced prediction errors by only tiny amounts, and Implicit Association Test scores did not permit prediction of individual-level behaviors. Furthermore, the results were not robust when the impact of rater reliability, statistical specifications, and/or outliers were taken into account, and reanalysis of A. R. McConnell & J. M. Leibold (2001) revealed a pattern of behavior consistent with a pro-Black behavioral bias, rather than the anti-Black bias suggested in the original study.

Does Social Comparison Make a Difference? Optimism as a Moderator of the Relation between Comparison Level and Academic Performance

Previous research has demonstrated that poor academic performance is associated with a downward shift in preferred level of academic comparison level (ACL). The current study assessed the long-term impact of this downward shift on the academic performance of college students and also examined the extent to which optimism moderated the relation between ACL and performance. Results indicated that a decline in academic performance led to a decline in preferred ACL, but only among students who were low in dispositional optimism. Change in ACL, in turn, was prospectively linked (positively) with change in academic performance for low optimists and marginally for high optimists. Additional analyses suggested this relation was mediated by performance expectations. Finally, change in ACL was also indirectly linked with depression for low optimists. Thus, low optimists who raised their ACLs had higher subsequent grade point averages and experienced a decrease in depression. The relations between levels of preferred comparison and outcome, and possible mediators of these relations, are discussed.

Tests of multiplicative models in psychology: a case study using the unified theory of implicit attitudes, stereotypes, self-esteem, and self-concept.

Theories that posit multiplicative relationships between variables are common in psychology. A. G. Greenwald et al. recently presented a theory that explicated relationships between group identification, group attitudes, and self-esteem. Their theory posits a multiplicative relationship between concepts when predicting a criterion variable. Greenwald et al. suggested analytic strategies to test their multiplicative model that researchers might assume are appropriate for testing multiplicative models more generally. The theory and analytic strategies of Greenwald et al. are used as a case study to show the strong measurement assumptions that underlie certain tests of multiplicative models. It is shown that the approach used by Greenwald et al. can lead to declarations of theoretical support when the theory is wrong as well as rejection of the theory when the theory is correct. A simple strategy for testing multiplicative models that makes weaker measurement assumptions than the strategy proposed by Greenwald et al. is suggested and discussed.