Toni Schmader

An Integrated Process Model of Stereotype Threat Effects on Performance

Research showing that activation of negative stereotypes can impair the performance of stigmatized individuals on a wide variety of tasks has proliferated. However, a complete understanding of the processes underlying these stereotype threat effects on behavior is still lacking. The authors examine stereotype threat in the context of research on stress arousal, vigilance, working memory, and self-regulation to develop a process model of how negative stereotypes impair performance on cognitive and social tasks that require controlled processing, as well as sensorimotor tasks that require automatic processing. The authors argue that stereotype threat disrupts performance via 3 distinct, yet interrelated, mechanisms: (a) a physiological stress response that directly impairs prefrontal processing, (b) a tendency to actively monitor performance, and (c) efforts to suppress negative thoughts and emotions in the service of self-regulation. These mechanisms combine to consume executive resources needed to perform well on cognitive and social tasks. The active monitoring mechanism disrupts performance on sensorimotor tasks directly. Empirical evidence for these assertions is reviewed, and implications for interventions designed to alleviate stereotype threat are discussed.

Coping with Negative Stereotypes about Intellectual Performance: The Role of Psychological Disengagement:

Two experiments tested the hypothesis that members of negatively stereotyped groups psychologically disengage their self-esteem from feedback received in stereotype-relevant domains. In both experiments, African American and European American college students received performance feedback on a bogus intelligence test and completed measures of self-esteem. In Experiment 1, European American students had higher self-esteem after success than after failure, whereas African American students had similar levels of self-esteem regardless of feedback. Whether the test had been described as racially biased or culturally fair had no effect. Experiment 2 examined the extent to which lesser responsivity among African Americans is the result of chronic disengagement from intelligence tests or situational disengagement initiated by priming racial stereotypes. Results indicate that both chronic disengagement and racial priming engender less responsivity to negative performance feedback among African American, but not European American, students. Performance expectancies, self-evaluations, and beliefs about test bias are discussed as possible mediators of this relationship.

Knowing Is Half the Battle Teaching Stereotype Threat as a Means of Improving Women's Math Performance

We tested whether informing women about stereotype threat is a useful intervention to improve their performance in a threatening testing situation. Men and women completed difficult math problems described either as a problem-solving task or as a math test. In a third (teaching-intervention) condition, the test was also described as a math test, but participants were additionally informed that stereotype threat could interfere with womens math performance. Results showed that women performed worse than men when the problems were described as a math test (and stereotype threat was not discussed), but did not differ from men in the problem-solving condition or in the condition in which they learned about stereotype threat. For women, attributing anxiety to gender stereotypes was associated with lower performance in the math-test condition but improved performance in the teaching-intervention condition. The results suggest that teaching about stereotype threat might offer a practical means of reducing its detrimental effects.

Coping With Ethnic Stereotypes in the Academic Domain: Perceived Injustice and Psychological Disengagement

Psychological disengagement is the defensive detachment of self-esteem from a particular domain. In the academic arena, disengagement can result from devaluing academic success or discounting the validity of academic outcomes. We review evidence for ethnic differences in these two processes of psychological disengagement and present results of a multiethnic study examining perceived ethnic injustice and academic performance as predictors of devaluing and discounting. Among African American students, beliefs about ethnic injustice (but not academic performance) predicted greater discounting and devaluing. Among European American students, poor academic performance (but not beliefs about ethnic injustice) predicted greater devaluing and discounting. Among Latino/a students, beliefs about ethnic injustice were associated with greater discounting, whereas poorer academic performance was associated with increased devaluing.

Perceiving personal discrimination: The role of group status and legitimizing ideology

It was hypothesized that relative group status and endorsement of ideologies that legitimize group status differences moderate attributions to discrimination in intergroup encounters. According to the status-legitimacy hypothesis, the more members of low-status groups endorse the ideology of individual mobility, the less likely they are to attribute negative outcomes from higher status group members to discrimination. In contrast, the more members of high-status groups endorse individual mobility, the more likely they are to attribute negative outcomes from lower status group members to discrimination. Results from 3 studies using 2 different methodologies provide support for this hypothesis among members of different high-status (European Americans and men) and low-status (African Americans, Latino Americans, and women) groups.

Attributions to discrimination and self-esteem: Impact of group identification and situational ambiguity

This study examined group identification and situational ambiguity as moderators of attributions to discrimination and self-esteem following negative feedback. As predicted, high gender-identified women made more discrimination attributions than low identified women when situational prejudice cues were ambiguous, but not when prejudice cues were absent or overt. Also as predicted, women exposed to overt prejudice cues had higher self-esteem than those exposed to ambiguous cues or no prejudice cues. The relationship between discrimination attributions and self-esteem was positive among women exposed to overt prejudice but negative among those exposed to no prejudice. Across conditions, however, the more that women discounted ability as a cause of their negative feedback (i.e., blamed discrimination more than ability), the higher their self-esteem. Results qualify and extend prior research and demonstrate that personal and situational factors moderate both the tendency to make attributions to discrimination and the consequences of those attributions for self-esteem.

Stereotype Threat and Executive Resource Depletion: Examining the Influence of Emotion Regulation.

Research shows that stereotype threat reduces performance by diminishing executive resources, but less is known about the psychological processes responsible for these impairments. The authors tested the idea that targets of stereotype threat try to regulate their emotions and that this regulation depletes executive resources, resulting in underperformance. Across 4 experiments, they provide converging evidence that targets of stereotype threat spontaneously attempt to control their expression of anxiety and that such emotion regulation depletes executive resources needed to perform well on tests of cognitive ability. They also demonstrate that providing threatened individuals with a means to effectively cope with negative emotions--by reappraising the situation or the meaning of their anxiety--can restore executive resources and improve test performance. They discuss these results within the framework of an integrated process model of stereotype threat, in which affective and cognitive processes interact to undermine performance.

10 – Coping with Stigma through Psychological Disengagement

Publisher Summary This chapter highlights the significance of social stigma and the negative effects it has on individuals in any culture and society. A number of popular theories of self-esteem formulation, like the theory of reflected appraisals, self-fulfilling prophecy and efficacy-based self-esteem, have shown that stigmatized individuals generally have low self-esteem. Adoption of effective coping strategies is extremely important to stave off the ill-effects that social stigma might have on a person. The importance of continuous social feedback and self-evaluation is deliberated upon in the chapter. The concept of ”devaluing” with views and hypotheses of noted authors further helps in understanding self-esteem related to performance domains. The related idea of “disidentification” is closely examined. ”Discounting”, which helps individuals select only valid, reliable feedback is also seen as a second route to psychological disengagement. The strategy of coping with negative stereotypes is explained with the help of a case study on African–Americans. It has been noted that disengagement, either chronic or temporary, reduces a persons emotional reactivity to appraisal in that particular area but the entire process may be totally situational and adaptive.

Vicarious Shame and Guilt

Participants recalled instances when they felt vicariously ashamed or guilty for another’s wrongdoing and rated their appraisals of the event and resulting motivations. The study tested aspects of social association that uniquely predict vicarious shame and guilt. Results suggest that the experience of vicarious shame and vicarious guilt are distinguishable. Vicarious guilt was predicted by one’s perceived interdependence with the wrongdoer (e.g. high interpersonal interaction), an appraisal of control over the event, and a motivation to repair the other person’s wrongdoing. Vicarious shame was predicted by the relevance of the event to a shared social identity with the wrongdoer, an appraisal of self-image threat, and a motivation to distance from the event. Implications for intergroup behavior and emotion are discussed.

Vicarious Retribution: The Role of Collective Blame in Intergroup Aggression

We provide a new framework for understanding 1 aspect of aggressive conflict between groups, which we refer to as vicarious retribution. Vicarious retribution occurs when a member of a group commits an act of aggression toward the members of an outgroup for an assault or provocation that had no personal consequences for him or her but which did harm afellow ingroup member. Furthermore, retribution is often directed at outgroup members who, themselves, were not the direct causal agents in the original attack against the persons ingroup. Thus, retribution is vicarious in that neither the agent of retaliation nor the target of retribution were directly involved in the original event that precipitated the intergroup conflict. We describe how ingroup identification, outgroup entitativity, and other variables, such as group power, influence vicarious retribution. We conclude by considering a variety of conflict reduction strategies in light of this new theoretical framework.