Joshua Aronson

When Beliefs Yield to Evidence: Reducing Biased Evaluation by Affirming the Self

People often cling to beliefs even in the face of disconfirming evidence and interpret ambiguous information in a manner that bolsters strongly held attitudes. The authors tested a motivational account suggesting that these defensive reactions would be ameliorated by an affirmation of an alternative source of self-worth. Consistent with this interpretation, participants were more persuaded by evidence impugning their views toward capital punishment when they were self-affirmed than when they were not (Studies 1 and 2). Affirmed participants also proved more critical of an advocate whose arguments confirmed their views on abortion and less confident in their own attitudes regarding that issue than did unaffirmed participants (Study 3). Results suggest that assimilation bias and resistance to persuasion are mediated, in part, by identity-maintenance motivations.

Stigma as Ego Depletion How Being the Target of Prejudice Affects Self-Control

This research examined whether stigma diminishes peoples ability to control their behaviors. Because coping with stigma requires self-regulation, and self-regulation is a limited-capacity resource, we predicted that individuals belonging to stigmatized groups are less able to regulate their own behavior when they become conscious of their stigmatizing status or enter threatening environments. Study 1 uncovered a correlation between stigma sensitivity and self-regulation; the more Black college students were sensitive to prejudice, the less self-control they reported having. By experimentally activating stigma, Studies 2 and 3 provided causal evidence for stigmas ego-depleting qualities: When their stigma was activated, stigmatized participants (Black students and females) showed impaired self-control in two very different domains (attentional and physical self-regulation). These results suggest that (a) stigma is ego depleting and (b) coping with it can weaken the ability to control and regulate ones behaviors in domains unrelated to the stigma.

4 – Stereotype Threat and the Academic Underperformance of Minorities and Women

Publisher Summary It is now a known fact that groups that have been subjected to constant negative stereotyping based on their academic proficiency and ability, tend to perform poorly in the academic spheres. Women subjected to this kind of negative stereotyping also show negative trends in performance, though in a slightly different pattern. However, the very existence of the pattern is alarming. Though it can be argued that there has been considerable improvement in these conditions in the recent years, the ill effects and the very existence of “stereotype threat” cannot be ruled out. This kind of threat, if strong enough, along with decreasing academic performance, can also pose serious threats to an individuals social interaction patterns as well as overall intellectual performance. Understanding the stereotype threat model can help in undermining the performance patterns in women and minorities. This chapter elaborates on the various aspects of stereotype threat so as to understand how exactly peoples performances are affected by this condition. It also highlights intervention plans and methods to reduce the threat.

The Ups and Downs of Attributional Ambiguity Stereotype Vulnerability and the Academic Self-Knowledge of African American College Students

This research examined whether stereotype vulnerability—the tendency to expect, perceive, and be influenced by negative stereotypes about ones social category—is associated with uncertainty about ones academic self-knowledge in two important ways. We predicted that stereotype-vulnerable African American students would (a) know less about how much they know than less vulnerable students do and (b) have unstable academic efficacy. In Study 1, Black and White participants took a verbal test and indicated the probability that each of their answers was correct. As expected, stereotype-vulnerable Black participants were more miscalibrated than other participants. In Study 2, participants completed measures of self-efficacy twice daily for 8 days. Also as expected, the academic efficacy of stereotype-vulnerable Blacks fluctuated more—and more extremely—than that of other participants. The results suggest that, in addition to undermining intellectual performance, stigma interferes with academic self-knowledge.

Shades of Threat: Racial Identity as a Moderator of Stereotype Threat

This study investigated Black racial identity attitudes as a moderator of intellectual performance in potentially stereotype threatening situations. Ninety-eight African American students were randomly assigned to one of three stereotype threatening conditions: low threat, medium threat, or high threat. Analyses confirmed a stereotype threat effect with participants performing significantly better on the task in the low threat condition. Additional analyses of the test takers’ racial identity profiles under high and low threat conditions revealed a significant interaction between Internalization status attitudes and the type of threat condition. In the low stereotype threat condition, Internalization status attitudes moderated performance on the intellectual task (i.e., items from the verbal section of the GRE). In this condition, after controlling for SAT verbal score, students who strongly endorsed Internalization racial identity attitudes correctly solved more items than students who did not identify as strongly with Internalization status attitudes. Implications of these findings are discussed.

When Bad Things Happen to Good Feedback: Exacerbating the Need for Self-Justification with Self-Affirmations

In numerous self-affirmation studies, Claude Steele and colleagues have demonstrated that self-affirmations reduce the need to justify dissonant behavior even when the affirmation is unrelated to the dissonance-evoking action. However, research has not sufficiently examined the impact of reaffirming self-aspects that are related to the dissonance. The authors argue that relevant affirmations of this sort can make salient the standards that are violated in the course of dissonant behavior; thereby increasing dissonance and the need for self justification. In a laboratory study using the induced-compliance paradigm, it was demonstrated that dissonance can be exacerbated by reaffirming standards that are violated in the course of the dissonant behavior.

Stereotype Threat: Contending and Coping with Unnerving Expectations

Publisher Summary Stereotype threat is partly situational. It is induced by features of the situation that can be changed and can be minimized by teaching students adaptive ways of coping with it. Stereotypes can spoil a persons experience–in school or in many social situationsStereotype threat arises in situations where a negative stereotype is relevant to evaluating performance. Thus, people in stereotype threatening situations appear to be thinking about the stereotype and its implications. In addition to whatever thoughts they bring to bear on their test, they are also contending with the stereotype and the extra burden of the possibility of confirming it. Psychological research shows that stereotypes are more than just benign “pictures in the head.” Rather, they are expectations that can undermine performance, either through prompting differential treatment of the stereotyped or by inducing stereotype threat in the stereotyped. Most likely, both processes occur at the same time in a self-confirming spiral of low expectations, hindered performance, and threatened belongingness. Test performance is but one manifestation of stereotype threat. The psychological immune system rationalizes, minimizes, and attempts to neutralize threats to the self. Research suggests that how people contend and cope with the unnerving expectations can have a dramatic effect on their academic achievement.

Unhealthy Interactions: The Role of Stereotype Threat in Health Disparities

Stereotype threat is the unpleasant psychological experience of confronting negative stereotypes about race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, or social status. Hundreds of published studies show how the experience of stereotype threat can impair intellectual functioning and interfere with test and school performance. Numerous published interventions derived from this research have improved the performance and motivation of individuals targeted by low-ability stereotypes. Stereotype threat theory and research provide a useful lens for understanding and reducing the negative health consequences of interracial interactions for African Americans and members of similarly stigmatized minority groups. Here we summarize the educational outcomes of stereotype threat and examine the implications of stereotype threat for health and health-related behaviors.

Forewarning and Forearming Stereotype-Threatened Students

This study investigated communicative strategies for helping female students cope with “stereotype threat”. Participants completed a difficult math test after reading one of three coping messages: a control message encouraging perseverance, a “suppression” message describing stereotype threat and instructing participants to suppress associated thoughts, and a “replacement” message describing the phenomenon and presenting an alternative, self-relevant positive stereotype. As predicted, a performance gap favoring males was observed in the control condition. This gap widened when students attempted to suppress threatening thoughts but narrowed when they were primed with the alternative positive stereotype. Our results demonstrate that priming a positive achieved identity (e.g., private college student) can subdue stereotype threat associated with an ascribed identity (e.g., female).

The cultural malleability of intelligence and its impact on the racial/ethnic hierarchy

This commentary highlights previous literature focusing on cultural and environmental explanations for the racial/ethnic group hierarchy of intelligence. Assumptions underlying definitions of intelligence, heritability/genetics, culture, and race are noted. Historical, contextual, and testing issues are clarified. Specific attention is given to studies supporting stereotype threat, effects of mediated learning experiences, and relative functionalism. Current test development practices are critiqued with respect to methods of validation and item development. Implications of the genetic vs. culture-only arguments are discussed with respect to the malleability of IQ. Rushton and Jensen (2005) review decades of literature to support a genetic basis for the racial/ethnic group hierarchy in intelligence, a position they have held unwaveringly for over 30 years. Their report gives little mention to findings that point to the impact of environment and race (i.e., race as a social construction) on intellectual development or performance—what they term the culture-only perspective. We are not among the culture-only adherents as characterized by Rushton and Jensen. While acknowledging the impact of biological factors on intelligence test performance, we have examined the impact of cultural/environmental factors that affect performance on aptitude and achievement measures. Our work, and that of others (e.g., Aronson, 2002; Sternberg, 1996), show us that intellectual performance is much more fragile and malleable than what is often noted in the current literature. The goals of our commentary are to highlight, briefly, assumptions underlying definitions (i.e., intelligence, heritability, genetics, culture, race) and clarify historical, contextual, and testing issues that were only briefly mentioned by Rushton and Jensen. Finally, we comment on the heuristic value and on policy implications of the research.