Jessi L. Smith

Understanding the Process of Stereotype Threat: A Review of Mediational Variables and New Performance Goal Directions.

Stereotype threat is a situational experience in which an individual feels vulnerable and pressured by the possibility of confirming or being judged by a stereotype. This threatening experience leads to performance decrements, even among highly skilled individuals. This article chronicles empirically tested mechanisms for how stereotype threat negatively impacts performance outcomes. A review of relevant published investigations illustrate that a number of intuitive mediators have been suggested and tested, often with discouraging results. Thus, one objective of this article is to provide researchers with a comprehensive and straightforward account of such tested mechanisms to assist with future works. Indeed, there is much room for research in this area considering that to date, as measured, no individual mediator has completely explained the stereotype threat–poor performance relationship. As such, the second objective of this article is to propose a multiple mediator approach drawing from achievement goal theory. The Stereotyped Task Engagement Process Model is presented. This model hypothesizes that performance goal adoption can offer insights into the potential multiple processes involved in stereotype-threat effects on performance.

An Examination of Implicitly Activated, Explicitly Activated, and Nullified Stereotypes on Mathematical Performance: It's Not Just a Woman's Issue.

This study was designed to examine the different ways that stereotypes might become activated in testing situations and the effects this activation has on task performance. In Experiment 1, women undergraduates exposed to an explicitly activated stereotype (i.e., told men outperform women in mathematics) performed worse than women exposed to a nullified stereotype (i.e., told men and women perform at the same level in mathematics). The stereotype threat also was activated implicitly under “normal” conditions (i.e., just given the test with nothing else stated) such that performance in this condition was at the same (low) level as the explicitly activated threat. In Experiment 2, the results were replicated with White male undergraduates using the stereotype that “Asians are better than Whites” in mathematics. In addition, in a small field survey we found that this belief about ethnicity did occur spontaneously for White men in college calculus courses. Taken together, the results of these studies suggest that even under normal circumstances, math test situations may lead to nonoptimal performance for both stigmatized (women) and traditionally nonstigmatized (White men) group members. Implications for threat nullification techniques are discussed.

The Stereotyped Task Engagement Process: The Role of Interest and Achievement Motivation

Competence-based stereotypes can negatively affect womens performance in math and science (referred to as stereotype threat), presumably leading to lower motivation. The authors examined the effects of stereotype threat on interest, a motivational path not necessarily mediated by performance. They predicted that working on a computer science task in the context of math-gender stereotypes would negatively affect undergraduate womens task interest, particularly for those higher in achievement motivation who were hypothesized to hold performance-avoidance goals in response to the threat. Compared with when the stereotype was nullified, while under stereotype threat an assigned performance-avoidance (vs. -approach) goal was associated with lower interest for women higher in achievement motivation (Study 1), and women higher (vs. lower) in achievement motivation were more likely to spontaneously adopt performance-avoidance goals (Study 2). The motivational influence of performance-avoidance goals under stereotype threat was primarily mediated by task absorption (Study 3). Implications for the stereotyped task engagement process (Smith, 2004) are discussed.

Development of the Domain Identification Measure: A Tool for Investigating Stereotype Threat Effects

The present study examined the psychometric properties of an individual difference measure of identification within the mathematics and English domains (which may be substituted for any domain of interest to the researcher). Factor analytic results substantiated the presence of English and Mathematics subscales, which yielded scores that were internally consistent and stable over time. Predicted math test performance differences and gender differences were found as a function of identification, providing support for the reliability and validity of scores on the scale. Use of the scale may aid in the understanding of test performance differences at both the global and individual level, especially for individuals susceptible to stereotype threat.

When Trying Hard Isn’t Natural Women’s Belonging With and Motivation for Male-Dominated STEM Fields As a Function of Effort Expenditure Concerns

Feeling like one exerts more effort than others may influence women’s feelings of belonging with science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) and impede their motivation. In Study 1, women STEM graduate students perceived they exerted more effort than peers to succeed. For women, but not men, this effort expenditure perception predicted a decreased sense of belonging, which in turn decreased motivation. Study 2 tested whether the male-dominated status of a field triggers such effort expectations. We created a fictional “eco-psychology” graduate program, which when depicted as male-dominated resulted in women expecting to exert relatively more effort and decreased their interest in pursuing the field. Study 3 found emphasizing effort as expected (and normal) to achieve success elevated women’s feelings of belonging and future motivation. Results suggest effort expenditure perceptions are an indicator women use to assess their fit in STEM. Implications for enhancing women’s participation in STEM are discussed.

A stereotype boost or choking under pressure? Positive gender stereotypes and men who are low in domain identification.

In 3 studies, we examined the effect of a positive gender stereotype (e.g., men are superior to women in math and computer science) on performance and motivation as a function of domain identification, with a special emphasis on men low in domain identification. Drawing from past research on stereotype boost and choking under pressure, we predicted that for men low in domain identification, performance would ironically suffer in the positive stereotype condition compared to a nullified stereotype condition. In all 3 studies, we found that men lower in domain identification performed better in nullified stereotype conditions and poorly in gender- stereotypical conditions. Results suggest that the interaction between the expectancies conveyed by a stereotype and the value placed on a domain by an individual may influence performance and motivation regardless of stereotype valence.

Quality of evidence revealing subtle gender biases in science is in the eye of the beholder

Significance Ever-growing empirical evidence documents a gender bias against women and their research—and favoring men—in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. Our research examined how receptive the scientific and public communities are to experimental evidence demonstrating this gender bias, which may contribute to women’s underrepresentation within STEM. Results from our three experiments, using general-public and university faculty samples, demonstrated that men evaluate the quality of research unveiling this bias as less meritorious than do women. These findings may inform and fuel self-correction efforts within STEM to reduce gender bias, bolster objectivity and diversity in STEM workforces, and enhance discovery, education, and achievement. Scientists are trained to evaluate and interpret evidence without bias or subjectivity. Thus, growing evidence revealing a gender bias against women—or favoring men—within science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) settings is provocative and raises questions about the extent to which gender bias may contribute to women’s underrepresentation within STEM fields. To the extent that research illustrating gender bias in STEM is viewed as convincing, the culture of science can begin to address the bias. However, are men and women equally receptive to this type of experimental evidence? This question was tested with three randomized, double-blind experiments—two involving samples from the general public (n = 205 and 303, respectively) and one involving a sample of university STEM and non-STEM faculty (n = 205). In all experiments, participants read an actual journal abstract reporting gender bias in a STEM context (or an altered abstract reporting no gender bias in experiment 3) and evaluated the overall quality of the research. Results across experiments showed that men evaluate the gender-bias research less favorably than women, and, of concern, this gender difference was especially prominent among STEM faculty (experiment 2). These results suggest a relative reluctance among men, especially faculty men within STEM, to accept evidence of gender biases in STEM. This finding is problematic because broadening the participation of underrepresented people in STEM, including women, necessarily requires a widespread willingness (particularly by those in the majority) to acknowledge that bias exists before transformation is possible.

Feeling the Threat Stereotype Threat as a Contextual Barrier to Women’s Science Career Choice Intentions

Social cognitive career theory (SCCT; Lent, Brown, & Hackett, 1994, 2000) holds that contextual barriers inhibit self-efficacy and goal choice intentions from points both near and far from the active career development situation. The current study examined the influence of one such proximal barrier, stereotype threat, on attainment of these outcomes among women considering careers in science. Participants were female undergraduate students (N = 439) enrolled in chemistry and physics laboratory classes. As predicted, results indicated that stereotype threat exerted a significant negative indirect effect on women’s science career choice intentions in physics but not chemistry. Single-pathway models positing a chain of effects of stereotype threat via science self-efficacy and intentions to pursue undergraduate research were also shown to fit the data better than multiple-pathway models in both physics and chemistry. Implications for the career development of women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) are discussed.

Investigating a Measure of Computer Technology Domain Identification: A Tool for Understanding Gender Differences and Stereotypes

The aim of this project is to further examine the construct of domain identification (i.e., a person’s positive phenomenological experiences with, and perceived self-relevance of, a domain), specifically as it applies to computer technology (CT). The authors model a knownmeasure of math identification to first develop a measure ofCTidentification. The authors then test whether the new CT identification measure could uniquely explain the relationship between individuals’ gender and CT career pursuit, above and beyond math identification. Finally, the authors examine the relationships between men’s and women’s CT domain identification, their perceptions of the CT field, and their interpersonal orientation to determine whether existing relationships among these variables might explain individuals’ willingness to consider a number of CT-and non-CT-related fields.

No Place for a Woman: Evidence for Gender Bias in Evaluations of Presidential Candidates

In the 110th Congress, 16% of United State Senators are women. In contrast, the role of President of the United States of America has always been occupied by a man. As such, being a man is the one common attribute to all successful presidential candidates, rendering “male” a necessary qualification for the role. The gender-incongruency hypothesis predicts that gender bias is less likely in domains such as the Senate where women are relatively more prevalent. However, in the case of the presidency, the potential exists for gender bias against women presidential candidates. Using an experimental, single-candidate, design we tested the hypotheses that young voters would similarly evaluate a man and woman candidate for Senate (Study 1) but negatively evaluate a presidential candidates resume ascribed to a woman, compared to the same resume ascribed to a man (Study 2). Results confirmed the gender-incongruency hypothesis and suggest that although bias may be less evident in evaluations of some Senate candidates, gender bias remains a significant obstacle for women presidential candidates.