Jenessa R. Shapiro

Measuring the Impact of Programs that Challenge the Public Stigma of Mental Illness

Public stigma robs people with mental illnesses from rightful opportunities related to work and other important life goals. Advocates have developed anti-stigma programs meant to address the prejudice and discrimination associated with these conditions. Evidence is now needed to make sense of program impact; this paper looks at measurement issues related to stigma change. Community-based participatory research is central to this research and includes the involvement of a diverse collection of stakeholders in all phases of evaluation. Investigators should be cautious about measures vis-à-vis social desirability effects and should directed by social validity of targeted audiences. Conceptual domains with some research support that correspond with assessments include behavior, penetration, psychological perspective, knowledge, and physiological/information processes. These issues are summarized as ten recommendations for evaluation of anti-stigma programs.

From Stereotype Threat to Stereotype Threats: Implications of a Multi-Threat Framework for Causes, Moderators, Mediators, Consequences, and Interventions:

More than 100 articles have examined the construct of stereotype threat and its implications. However, stereotype threat seems to mean different things to different researchers and has been employed to describe and explain processes and phenomena that appear to be fundamentally distinct. Complementing existing models, the authors posit a Multi-Threat Framework in which six qualitatively distinct stereotype threats arise from the intersection of two dimensions—the target of the threat (the self/ones group) and the source of the threat (the self/outgroup others/ingroup others). The authors propose that these threats constitute the core of the broader stereotype threat construct and provide the foundation for understanding additional, as of yet uncharacterized, stereotype threats. The proposed threats likely differentially peril those with different stigmatizable characteristics, have different eliciting conditions and moderators, are mediated by somewhat different processes, are coped with and compensated for in different ways, and require different interventions to overcome.

Aggress to Impress: Hostility as an Evolved Context-Dependent Strategy

Given the high costs of aggression, why have people evolved to act aggressively? Comparative biologists have frequently observed links between aggression, status, and mating in nonhuman animals. In this series of experiments, the authors examined the effects of status, competition, and mating motives on mens and womens aggression. For men, status motives increased direct aggression (face-to-face confrontation). Mens aggression was also boosted by mating motives, but only when observers were other men. For women, both status and mating motives increased indirect aggression (e.g., socially excluding the perpetrator). Although neither status nor mating motives increased womens direct aggression, women did become more directly aggressive when motivated to compete for scarce resources. These context- and sex-specific effects on human aggression contribute to a broader understanding of the functional nature of aggressive behavior.

You Wear Me Out The Vicarious Depletion of Self-Control

Acts of self-control may deplete an individuals self-regulatory resources. But what are the consequences of perceiving other peoples use of self-control? Mentally simulating the actions of others has been found to elicit psychological effects consistent with the actual performance of those actions. Here, we consider how simulating versus merely perceiving the use of willpower can affect self-control abilities. In Study 1, participants who simulated the perspective of a person exercising self-control exhibited less restraint over spending on consumer products than did other participants. In Study 2, participants who took the perspective of a person using self-control exerted less willpower on an unrelated lexical generation task than did participants who took the perspective of a person who did not use self-control. Conversely, participants who merely read about another persons self-control exerted more willpower than did those who read about actions not requiring self-control. These findings suggest that the actions of other people may either deplete or boost ones own self-control, depending on whether one mentally simulates those actions or merely perceives them.

The Role of Gender Identities and Stereotype Salience With the Academic Performance of Male and Female College Athletes

An experiment was conducted to examine factors that moderate the experience of academic identity threat among college athletes who represent a stigmatized group on most college campuses (Yopyk & Prentice, 2005). It was hypothesized that because they are more engaged in academics, female college athletes would be especially threatened by the prospect of confirming the “dumb-jock” stereotype. As predicted, female college athletes performed more poorly when their athletic and academic identities were explicitly linked, but only on moderately difficult test items. The results also revealed that male college athletes performed significantly better (see stereotype reactance and self-affirmation) on more difficult test items when only their athletic identity was primed prior to the test. This is an important finding as there is little research on the impact of positive stereotypes on performance. The discussion focuses on the different motivational processes (i.e. self-affirmation) that impact the academic performance of male and female college athletes when aspects of their campus identity are primed within a classroom context.

Different Groups, Different Threats: A Multi-Threat Approach to the Experience of Stereotype Threats

Two studies demonstrated that different negatively stereotyped groups are at risk for distinct forms of stereotype threats. The Multi-Threat Framework articulates six distinct stereotype threats and the unique constellations of variables (e.g., group identification, stereotype endorsement) that elicit each stereotype threat. Previous research suggests that different negatively stereotyped groups systematically vary across these stereotype threat elicitors; a pilot study confirms these differences. Across two studies, groups that tend to elicit low stereotype endorsement (religion, race/ethnicity, congenital blindness) were less likely to report experiencing self-as-source stereotype threats (stereotype threats requiring stereotype endorsement) and groups that tend to elicit low group identification (mental illness, obesity, blindness later in life) were less likely to report experiencing group-as-target stereotype threats (stereotype threats requiring group identification). This research suggests that traditional models may overlook the experiences of stereotype threats within some groups and that interventions tailored to address differences between stereotype threats will be most effective.

Expectations of Obese Trainees: How Stigmatized Trainee Characteristics Influence Training Effectiveness

This study identifies stigma as a potential precursor to self-fulfilling prophecies in training interactions. Expectations held by leaders often result in actions that elicit expectancy-confirming behaviors from their subordinates. The results of the present study suggest that trainee weight (manipulated with a photograph depicting the trainee as either obese or average weight for height) influenced female trainer expectations and evaluations of the training and trainee. Furthermore, the results suggest that negative expectations held by trainers were related to trainee evaluations of the training and the trainer and, for less flexible trainers, to decrements in trainee performance on the trained task. Overall, the results suggest that trainer expectations can be influenced by stereotypes held about trainee characteristics, thus undermining training effectiveness.

More Memory Bang for the Attentional Buck: Self-Protection Goals Enhance Encoding Efficiency for Potentially Threatening Males.

When encountering individuals with a potential inclination to harm them, people face a dilemma: Staring at them provides useful information about their intentions but may also be perceived by them as intrusive and challenging—thereby increasing the likelihood of the very threat the people fear. One solution to this dilemma would be an enhanced ability to efficiently encode such individuals—to be able to remember them without spending any additional direct attention on them. In two experiments, the authors primed self-protective concerns in perceivers and assessed visual attention and recognition memory for a variety of faces. Consistent with hypotheses, self-protective participants (relative to control participants) exhibited enhanced encoding efficiency (i.e., greater memory not predicated on any enhancement of visual attention) for Black and Arab male faces—groups stereotyped as being potentially dangerous—but not for female or White male faces. Results suggest that encoding efficiency depends on the functional relevance of the social information people encounter.

Following in the Wake of Anger: When Not Discriminating Is Discriminating

Does seeing a scowling face change your impression of the next person you see? Does this depend on the race of the two people? Across four studies, White participants evaluated neutrally expressive White males as less threatening when they followed angry (relative to neutral) White faces; Black males were not judged as less threatening following angry Black faces. This lack of threat-anchored contrast for Black male faces is not attributable to a general tendency for White targets to homogenize Black males—neutral Black targets following smiling Black faces were contrasted away from them and seen as less friendly—and emerged only for perceivers low in motivation to respond without prejudice (i.e., for those relatively comfortable responding prejudicially). This research provides novel evidence for the overperception of threat in Black males.

Perceived perspective taking: When others walk in our shoes.

A great deal of psychological research has investigated the influence of perspective taking on individuals, indicating that perspective taking increases the extent to which people like, feel a sense of self-other overlap with, and help those whose perspective they take. However, previous investigations of the topic have been limited to the study of the perspective taker, rather than the individual whose perspective has been taken. The purpose of the current work is to begin to fill this large gap in the literature by examining the consequences of believing that another individual is taking ones perspective, a phenomenon we refer to as perceived perspective taking. Over a series of 6 experiments, we demonstrate that perceiving that ones perspective has been taken confers many of the same interpersonal benefits as taking anothers perspective. Specifically, our data suggest that believing that another person has successfully taken ones perspective results in an increased liking for, a greater sense of self-other overlap with, and more help provided to that person. Consistent with predictions, we find that ones self-other overlap with the perspective taker and the amount of empathy one perceives the perspective taker to feel operate in tandem to mediate the link between perceived perspective taking and liking for the perspective taker. Further, a mediational path from perceived perspective taking to helping behavior through liking is supported. Future directions are discussed, along with implications for theory and application in domains such as intergroup relations, conflict resolution, and political campaigning.