Laurie T. O'Brien

Social norms and the expression and suppression of prejudice: the struggle for internalization.

The authors studied social norms and prejudice using M. Sherif and C. W. Sherifs (1953) group norm theory of attitudes. In 7 studies (N = 1,504), social norms were measured and manipulated to examine their effects on prejudice; both normatively proscribed and normatively prescribed forms of prejudice were included. The public expression of prejudice toward 105 social groups was very highly correlated with social approval of that expression. Participants closely adhere to social norms when expressing prejudice, evaluating scenarios of discrimination, and reacting to hostile jokes. The authors reconceptualized the source of motivation to suppress prejudice in terms of identifying with new reference groups and adapting oneself to fit new norms. Suppression scales seem to measure patterns of concern about group norms rather than personal commitments to reducing prejudice; high suppressors are strong norm followers. Compared with low suppressors, high suppressors follow normative rules more closely and are more strongly influenced by shifts in local social norms. There is much value in continuing the study of normative influence and self-adaptation to social norms, particularly in terms of the group norm theory of attitudes.

Stereotype Threat and Arousal: Effects on Women's Math Performance

Theories of arousal suggest that arousal should decrease performance on difficult tasks and increase performance on easy tasks. An experiment tested the hypothesis that the effects of stereotype threat on performance are due to heightened arousal. The authors hypothesized that telling participants that a math test they are about to take is known to have gender differences would cause stereotype threat in women but not in men. In the experiment, each participant took two tests—a difficult math test and an easy math test. Compared to women in a “no differences” condition, women in the “gender differences” condition scored better on the easy math test and worse on the difficult math test. Mens performance was unaffected by the manipulation. These data are consistent with an arousal-based explanation of stereotype threat effects. Data were inconsistent with expectancy, evaluation apprehension, and persistence explanations of the stereotype threat phenomenon.

Using the implicit association test to measure age differences in implicit social cognitions.

Two studies investigated the use of the Implicit Association Test (IAT; A. G. Greenwald, D. E. McGhee, & J. L. K. Schwartz, 1998) to study age differences in implicit social cognitions. Study I collected IAT (implicit) and explicit (self-report) measures of age attitudes, age identity, and self-esteem from young, young-old, and old-old participants. Study 2 collected IAT and explicit measures of attitudes toward flowers versus insects from young and old participants. Results show that the IAT provided theoretically meaningful insights into age differences in social cognitions that the explicit measures did not, supporting the value of the IAT in aging research. Results also illustrate that age-related slowing must be considered in analysis and interpretation of IAT measures.

Ethnic Variation in Gender-STEM Stereotypes and STEM Participation: An Intersectional Approach

Stereotypes associating men and masculine traits with science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields are ubiquitous, but the relative strength of these stereotypes varies considerably across cultures. The present research applies an intersectional approach to understanding ethnic variation in gender-STEM stereotypes and STEM participation within an American university context. African American college women participated in STEM majors at higher rates than European American college women (Study 1, Study 2, and Study 4). Furthermore, African American women had weaker implicit gender-STEM stereotypes than European American women (Studies 2-4), and ethnic differences in implicit gender-STEM stereotypes partially mediated ethnic differences in STEM participation (Study 2 and Study 4). Although African American men had weaker implicit gender-STEM stereotypes than European American men (Study 4), ethnic differences between men in STEM participation were generally small (Study 1) or nonsignificant (Study 4). We discuss the implications of an intersectional approach for understanding the relationship between gender and STEM participation.

Gender Differences in Entitlement: The Role of System-Justifying Beliefs

Two studies examine the relationship between system-justifying beliefs and perceived pay entitlement and how this relationship differs as a function of gender. In Study 1, personal endorsement of system-justifying beliefs was associated with higher levels of pay entitlement among men. In contrast, personal endorsement of system-justifying beliefs was associated with slightly, but not significantly, lower levels of pay entitlement among women. In Study 2, a system-justification prime significantly increased reports of pay entitlement among men but had no effect on reports of pay entitlement among women. Results illustrate that system-justifying beliefs contribute to the creation and maintenance of gender differences in entitlement.

White Americans' opposition to affirmative action: Group interest and the harm to beneficiaries objection

We focused on a powerful objection to affirmative action - that affirmative action harms its intended beneficiaries by undermining their self-esteem. We tested whether White Americans would raise the harm to beneficiaries objection particularly when it is in their group interest. When led to believe that affirmative action harmed Whites, participants endorsed the harm to beneficiaries objection more than when led to believe that affirmative action did not harm Whites. Endorsement of a merit-based objection to affirmative action did not differ as a function of the policys impact on Whites. White Americans used a concern for the intended beneficiaries of affirmative action in a way that seems to further the interest of their own group.

System-justifying ideologies and academic outcomes among first-year Latino college students.

The present study examines the relationship between system-justifying ideologies and academic outcomes among 78 first-year Latino college students (21 men, 57 women, mean age = 18.1 years) attending a moderately selective West Coast university. Endorsement of system-justifying ideologies was negatively associated with grade point average (GPA); however it was positively associated with feelings of belonging at the university. In addition, system-justifying ideologies were negatively associated with perceptions of personal discrimination. In contrast, ethnic identity centrality was unrelated to GPA, feelings of belonging, and perceptions of personal discrimination once the relationship between system-justifying ideologies and these outcomes was statistically taken into account. The results of the present study suggest that endorsement of system-justifying ideologies may be a double-edged sword for Latino college students, involving trade-offs between academic success and feelings of belonging.

Prototypes of Discrimination: How Status Asymmetry and Stereotype Asymmetry Affect Judgments of Racial Discrimination

This research investigated status asymmetry and stereotype asymmetry features of the racial discrimination prototype. Consistent with status asymmetry predictions, Black observers made greater attributions to discrimination when the victim was Black and the perpetrator was White than when the roles were reversed. In contrast, White observers made similar attributions to discrimination, regardless of status asymmetry. In partial support of the stereotype asymmetry hypothesis, Black and White observers made greater attributions to discrimination for Black victims in a domain where Blacks are negatively stereotyped than positively stereotyped. However, attributions to discrimination for White victims were unaffected by the domain.