تهدید کلیشه

از ویکی‌پدیا، دانشنامهٔ آزاد
پرش به ناوبری پرش به جستجو
فارسیEnglish
تأثیر تهدید کلیشه بر نتیجهٔ امتحان ریاضیات دختران و پسران. اطلاعات برگرفته از اوس‌بورن ۲۰۰۷.[۱]

تهدید کلیشه یا تهدید تفکر قالبی، اضطرابی است که فرد تجربه می‌کند وقتی ممکن است به خاطر تعلقش به یک گروه اجتماعی خاص با کلیشه‌هایی منفی قضاوت شود.[۲] از زمان مطرح شدنش در مطالعات دانشگاهی، این مبحث به صورت گسترده‌ای در حوزه روان‌شناسی اجتماعی مورد مطالعه قرار گرفته‌است.[۳] مطالعات نشان می‌دهد که اضطراب ناشی از تهدید کلیشه باعث کاهش عملکرد افرادی می‌شود که متعلق به گروه‌های کلیشه‌ای منفی هستند.[۴] به این صورت که اگر کلیشه‌های منفی در مورد یک گروه خاص وجود داشته باشد، اعضای آن گروه به احتمال زیاد دچار اضطراب در مورد عملکرد خود خواهند شد، و این ممکن است مانع بروز توانایی آن‌ها برای انجام کار به بهترین شکل خود شود. به عنوان مثال، تهدید کلیشه می‌تواند عملکرد فکری آمریکایی‌های آفریقایی تبار در آزمون استدلال س. ا. ت (امتحانی برای ورودی کالج در ایالات متحده) را کاهش دهد، به این دلیل کلیشه‌ای که آمریکایی‌های آفریقایی تبار از هوش کمتری نسبت به گروه‌های دیگر برخوردارند.[۵] نکته مهم این است که برای اینکه اثرات تهدید کلیشه روی شخصی گذاشته شود نیازی نیست آن شخص حتماً به آن کلیشه باور قلبی داشته باشد. نکته جالب دیگر اینکه، مکانیزم خاصی که توسط آن اضطراب (حاصل از فکر به اثر کلیشه) عملکرد را کاهش می‌دهد به وسیله تخلیه حافظه کاری شخص است، که به ویژه شامل قسمت‌های فونولوژیکال (واجی) حافظه کاری می‌شود.

تهدید کلیشه یکی از عوامل مؤثر بالقوه در شکاف دیرپای جنسیتی و نژادی در عملکرد تحصیلی است. این پدیده می‌تواند زمانی رخ دهد که کاری که فرد انجام می‌دهد در ارتباط نزدیکی است با کلیشه منفی ای که به او نسبت می‌دهند، چرا که اینگونه به نظر می‌رسد که تهدید کلیشه‌ای بیشتر از آنکه تابع ویژگی‌های شخصیتی انسان باشد، زاییده شرایط و موقعیت ایجاد شده‌است. بسیاری از افراد حداقل یک هویت اجتماعی دارند که شامل کلیشه‌ای منفی می‌شود، بنابراین بیشتر مردم نسبت به این پدیده آسیب پذیرند، به خصوص اگر در موقعیتی قرار بگیرند که مرتبط به آن کلیشه باشد. از جمله عواملی که می‌توانند اثر این نوع اضطراب را در افراد افزایش دهند، می‌توان به سخت بودن مسئله مطرح شده، قبول این که هدف این مسئله سنجش توانایی‌های آن‌ها است و همچنین میزان ارتباط مسئله با کلیشه مربوط به آن‌ها اشاره کرد. درجه بالاتری از این تأثیر را می‌توان تحت دو حالت دید: وقتی که فرد تمایل به انجام کاری را به بهترین نحو ممکن دارد یا زمانی که قویا به یک کلیشه منفی ارتباط داده می‌شود. به علاوه، زمانی که افراد انتظار آن را دارند که به دلیل انتساب خود به یک کلیشه منفی دچار تبعیض شوند، اثر این پدیده حتی می‌تواند بیشتر افزایش پیدا کنند.[۶] در صورتی که فرد به‌طور مکرر اضطراب ناشی از این کلیشه بندی‌ها را تجربه کند، می‌تواند وارد یک دور باطل از دست دادن اعتماد به نفس، افت در عملکرد، و در نهایت از دست دادن علاقه در زمینه مربوطه شود.[۲]

بر طرفداران تهدید کلیشه این انتقاد وارد شده‌است که در اهمیت تهدید کلیشه به عنوان توضیح شکاف‌های عملکرد در دنیای واقعی اغراق به خرج داده‌اند[۷][۸] و شواهد را بیشتر و قطعی تر از آنچه که هست نمایش داده‌اند.[۹][۱۰]

مطالعات اولیه[ویرایش]

در سال ۱۹۹۵، کلود استیل و جاشوا آرونسون با انجام اولین آزمایش‌ها نشان دادند که تهدید کلیشه می‌تواند عملکرد ذهنی افراد را تضعیف کند.[۵] برای این کار، آن‌ها از یکسری دانش آموز کالج آمریکایی-اروپایی و آمریکایی-آفریقایی تست یک بخش شفاهی مشکل از آزمون جی-آر-ای را گرفتند. همان‌طور که بر اساس میانگین‌های ملی انتظار می‌رفت، دانشجویان آمریکایی-آفریقایی عملکرد ضعیفتری در آزمون از خود نشان دادند. سپس استیل و آرونسون دانش آموزان را به سه گروه تقسیم کردند: گروه تحت تأثیر تهدید کلیشه (که برای آن‌ها این آزمون به عنوان "تشخیص توانایی فکری" آن‌ها توصیف شده بود)، گروه مستقل از تأثیر تهدید کلیشه (که برای آن‌ها این آزمون به عنوان "یک حل مسئله کلاسی مطرح شده بود که قرار نیست برای تشخیص توانایی افراد به کار برود")، و گروه سوم (که در آن دوباره گفته شد این آزمون برای تشخیص توانایی آن‌ها نیست، ولی از آن‌ها خواسته شد به این آزمون دشوار به عنوان یک چالش نگاه کنند). به هر سه گروه سؤال‌های یکسانی داده شد.

در مقایسه با نمرات قبلی، گروه سوم به‌طور قابل توجهی بهتر از دو گروه اول عمل کردند. در آزمایش اول، اهمیت اثر متقابل نژاد-شرایط به صورت لب مرزی دیده می‌شد. در حالیکه، در آزمایش دوم همان مقاله، اثر متقابل قابل توجهی بین نژاد و شرایط افراد مشاهده شد. این نتایج نشان می‌داد که آمریکایی‌های آفریقایی تبار به‌طور قابل توجهی در مقایسه با اروپایی-آمریکایی‌ها تحت تأثیر شرایط قرار گرفته‌اند، وقتی که احساس کرده‌اند مورد بررسی و مقایسه‌اند.[۷]

استیل و آرونسون به این نتیجه رسیدند که تغییر در نحوه مطرح کردن و گرفتن آزمون می‌تواند باعث کاهش نگرانی دانشجویان آمریکایی آفریقایی تبار در این شود که آن‌ها تأییدی بر کلیشه‌های منفی در مورد گروه خود هستند. مسئله دیگری که این نتیجه‌گیری را تصدیق می‌کرد این بود که آن‌ها دریافتند که دانشجویان آمریکایی آفریقایی تباری که این آزمون را معیاری برای سنجش هوش خود تلقی کرده بودند، بیشتر دچار افکار مربوط به کلیشه‌های منفی گروه خود شده بودند. استیل و آرونسون این نتیجه را از طریق طراحی یک تست تکمیل کلمه به دست آوردند. آن‌ها دریافتند که آمریکایی‌های آفریقایی تبار که این آزمون را سنجش هوش خود تجسم کرده بودند، بیشتر احتمال داشت که برای تکمیل قطعات از کلماتی استفاده کنند که مرتبط با کلیشه‌های منفی آن‌ها بود (به عنوان مثال تکمیل"--مب" با "دامب (کند ذهن) " به جای "نامب (بی‌حس)").[۵]

مطالعات تجربی بیشتر[ویرایش]

تا کنون بیش از ۳۰۰ مقاله در ارتباط با اثرات تهدید کلیشه بر روی عملکرد در زمینه‌های مختلف چاپ شده‌است.[۱۱] به نظر می‌رسد که شدت این اضطراب بستگی به نحوه مطرح کردن مسئله دارد. اگر مسئله به صورتی خنثی مطرح شود، احساس خطر ناشی از کلیشه به احتمال زیاد رخ نمی‌دهد، در صورتی که اگر مسئله تحریک‌کننده و یادآور کلیشه‌های وارد بر شخص باشد، آن شخص به احتمال زیاد عملکرد بدتری در حل مسئله از خود نشان می‌دهد. به عنوان مثال، در یک تحقیق بر روی بازی شطرنج مشاهده شد که زنان شرکت‌کننده عملکردی ضعیف تر از حد انتظار از خود نشان می‌دادند وقتی که به آن‌ها گفته می‌شد که حریف سوی دیگر بازی مرد است. این در حالی بود که زنانی که می‌دانستند در مقابل یک حریف زن بازی می‌کنند، عملکردی از خود نشان می‌داند که مطابق با پیش‌بینی‌های حاصل از رتبه‌بندی گذشته آن‌ها بود.[۱۲] جالب اینکه شرکت کنندگان زنی که این کلیشه با آن‌ها مطرح می‌شد که زنان عملکرد ضعیف تری از مردان در شطرنج دارند، بازی‌های بدتری را از خود ارائه می‌کردند.

حتی فقط حضور افراد دیگر می‌تواند این حس اضطراب را فعال کند. در یک آزمایش، زنانی که در یک امتحان ریاضی همراه با دو زن دیگر شرکت کرده بودند، به ۷۰ ٪ از سؤال‌ها پاسخ درست دادند، در حالی که زنانی که در یک آزمون مشابه در حضور دو مرد شرکت کرده بودند به‌طور متوسط نمره ۵۵ ٪ رسیدند.[۱۳] ویشال گوپتا، دانیل توربان و ناچیکت هاو، این تحقیقات را به زمینه کارآفرینی نیز گسترش دادند، حرفه‌ای که به‌طور سنتی مردانه تلقی می‌شود. مطالعه آن‌ها نشان داد که وجود همین کلیشه‌ها می‌تواند اهداف کارآفرینی زنان را کاسته و در عین حال باعث افزایش علایق و تلاش مردان در این زمینه شود. با این حال، زمانی که برای افراد شرکت‌کننده در تحقیق، کارآفرینی به عنوان حرفه‌ای مطرح می‌شود که مستقل از جنسیت افراد است، مردان و زنان میزان مشابه‌ای از علاقه به کارآفرین بودن از خود نشان می‌دهند.[۱۴] تحقیقی دیگر این مسئله را روی بازی گلف امتحان کرد. این آزمون به دو عنوان مختلف تست " توانایی ورزشی طبیعی" یا تست " هوش ورزشی " شخص مطرح شد. هنگامی که این تست به عنوان تست توانایی ورزشی افراد مطرح می‌شد، دانش آموزان اروپایی-آمریکایی عملکرد بدتری داشتند، و زمانی که به عنوان سنجش هوش، دانشجویان آمریکایی-آفریقایی ضعیف تر عمل می‌کردند.[۱۵]

مطالعات دیگر نشان داده‌اند که چگونه مبحث تهدید کلیشه می‌تواند تأثیر منفی روی عملکرد آمریکایی-اروپایی‌ها در زمینه‌های ورزشی[۱۶] و همچنین عملکرد مردان در زمینه حساسیت‌های اجتماعی بگذارد.[۱۷] اگر چه نحوه مطرح کردن یک مسئله می‌تواند باعث اضطراب ناشی از تهدید کلیشه در اکثر انسان‌ها شود، اما به نظر می‌رسد که اثرش روی برخی افراد بیشتر از دیگران است. افرادی که به طرز قوی تری بیانگر کلیشه‌های مورد نظر هستند به نظر می‌رسد که آسیب‌پذیری بیشتری نسبت به افرادی دارند که خود را خیلی به گروه منتسب به این کلیشه‌ها مرتبط و متعلق نمی‌دانند.

دزرت، پراکس و ژاند در سال ۲۰۰۹ تحقیقی انجام دادند برای بررسی این موضوع که آیا کودکانی که از گروه‌های اجتماعی-اقتصادی پایین‌تری هستند تحت اضطراب‌های ناشی از تهدید کلیشه قرار دارند. این تحقیق کودکان ۷–۶ ساله را با کودکان ۹–۸ ساله از مدارس ابتدایی مختلفی مورد مقایسه قرار می‌داد. به این کودکان تست ماتریس ریون، که یک آزمون توانایی‌های فکری است، داده شد. به یک گروه از کودکان توضیحاتی داده شد مبنی بر اینکه این تست یک روش ارزیابی است و به گروه دیگر این‌طور منتقل شد که این یک تست بدون هدف ارزیابی است. به گروه "ارزیابی شده" دستورالعمل‌ها طوری داده شد که معمولاً برای تست ریون داده می‌شود، در حالیکه برای گروه "غیر ارزیابی شده " راهنمایی‌ها طوری بود که تست را بیشتر شبیه یک بازی ساده جلوه می‌داد. نتایج نشان داد که اولاً دانش آموزان کلاس سوم همان‌طور که انتظار می‌رفت عملکرد بهتری از کلاس اولی‌ها در آزمون داشتند. به علاوه، مشاهده شد که در آزمون‌های "ارزیابی شده" کودکان با شرایط اجتماعی-اقتصادی پایین‌تر عملکرد ضعیفتری نسبت به کودکان با وضعیت اجتماعی-اقتصادی بالاتر دارند. این نتایج نشان می‌دهد که نحوه ارائه مسئله به کودکان می‌تواند تأثیر بیشتری بر عملکرد آن‌ها داشته باشد تا وضعیت اجتماعی-اقتصادی آنها. این نکته با توجه به تفاوت نوع دستورالعمل‌هایی که به دانش آموزان داده می‌شد نشان داده شد. آگاهی داشتن از این اثرات می‌تواند در نحوه تنظیم کلاس درس و کمک به بهبود عملکرد دانش آموزان با وضعیت اجتماعی-اقتصادی پایین‌تر مفید باشد.[۱۸]

مطالعاتی نیز در مورد اثرات تهدید کلیشه در ارتباط با سن افراد انجام شده‌است. یکی از این تحقیقات بر روی ۹۹ فرد سالمند در محدوده سنی ۷۵–۶۰ سال انجام شد. به این سالمندان آزمون‌های متعددی مرتبط با عوامل و مقوله‌هایی مانند حافظه و توانایی‌های فیزیکی داده شد. از آن‌ها همچنین خواسته شد تا ارزیابی ای از باور خود نسبت به تناسب فیزیکی شان ارائه کنند و همچنین مقاله‌هایی را مطالعه کنند که بیانگر دیدگاه‌های مثبت و منفی در مورد سالمندان هستند. به علاوه آن‌ها در شرایطی قرار داده شدند که شخص دیگری را هم در حال خواندن مقاله‌های مشابه ببینند. هدف از این مطالعه، بررسی این مسئله بود که آیا نگرش دادن به شرکت کنندگان قبل از آزمون، در عملکرد آن‌ها تأثیری می‌گذارد. نتایج نشان داد که گروه تحت کنترل (بدون اعمال نگرش) بهتر از دو گروهی که با دیدگاه‌های منفی یا مثبت قبل از آزمون آماده شده بودند عمل کردند. ظاهراً گروه کنترل شده از احساس اعتماد به نفس بیشتری در توانایی‌های خود نسبت به دو گروه دیگر برخوردار بوده‌است.[۱۹]

استفاده برای تقویت و بهبود عملکرد[ویرایش]

مفهوم تهدید کلیشه بیشتر به این مسئله نگاه می‌کند که چگونه کلیشه سازی‌ها به عملکرد افراد ضربه می‌زند. با این حال، به‌کارگیری مؤثر و مثبت کلیشه‌ها می‌تواند در موقعیت‌های خاص به بهبود عملکرد افراد منجر شود (از طریق استفاده از کلیشه برای تقویت و بهبود). به این صورت که مطرح کردن یک کلیشه منفی در مورد گروه اشخاص مقابل می‌تواند عملکرد خود آن‌ها را افزایش دهد.[۲۰]

مکانیزم عملکرد[ویرایش]

اگر چه تاکنون مطالعات متعددی اثرات تهدید کلیشه بر عملکرد را نشان داده‌اند، اما اینکه عوامل شناختی زمینه ساز این اضطراب و اثرات آن‌ها چه هستند سؤالی است که هنوز مورد بررسی است. استیل و آرونسون در ابتدا بر این باور بودند که تلاش برای سرکوب افکار مربوط به کلیشه منجر به اضطراب و محدود شدن توجه شخص می‌شود. این امر می‌تواند باعث نقص عملکردی بوده باشد که در افراد مشاهده شده‌است. در سال ۲۰۰۸، تونی اشمادر، مایکل جان، و چاد فوربس مدلی یکپارچه از تهدید کلیشه ارائه کردند که روی سه عامل به هم وابسته تأکید می‌کرد: ایجاد استرس نظارت بر عملکرد، که باعث محدود شدن توجه می‌شود تلاش برای سرکوب افکار و احساسات منفی.[۳]

اشمادر و همکارانش پیشنهاد می‌دهند که این سه عامل می‌توانند به صورت خلاصه بیانگر الگوی شواهدی باشند که در طی آزمایش‌های گذشته جمع‌آوری شده‌اند. به عنوان مثال، مطالعات نشان می‌دهد که تهدید کلیشه موجب اختلال در حافظه کاری و عملکرد اجرایی،[۲۱][۲۲] افزایش برانگیختگی،[۲۳] بالا بردن حساسیت (خود آگاهی) در مورد عملکرد خود،[۲۴] شده و باعث می‌شود افراد نیاز به سعی برای سرکوب افکار منفی و همچنین احساسات منفی خود مانند اضطراب داشته باشند.[۲۵] انسان از یک مقدار محدود از سورس شناختی (کاگنیتیو) برخوردار است. هنگامی که بخش بزرگی از این منبع را صرف تمرکز بر اضطراب و عملکرد تحت فشار کند، به احتمال زیاد کاری را که مشغول آن است به نحو بدتری انجام می‌دهد.

عواقب دراز مدت و دیگر موارد[ویرایش]

کاهش کیفیت در عملکرد، شناخته شده‌ترین اثر تهدید کلیشه است. علاوه بر این، تحقیقات نشان داده است که تهدید کلیشه‌ها می‌تواند باعث شود افراد خود را برای شکست هایشان سرزنش کنند،[۲۶] به نقص یابی در خود بپردازند،[۵] ارزش و اعتبار وظایف عملکرد خود را خفیف بشمارند،[۲۷] از گروه‌های کلیشه‌ای منفی فاصله بگیرند،[۲۸] و از موقعیت‌هایی که تحت عنوان این تهدید مطرح می‌شود گریزان باشند.[۲۹]

راهکارها[ویرایش]

تا کنون تحقیقات زیادی در راستای پیدا کردن راه‌هایی برای بالا بردن نمرات آزمون و پیشرفت تحصیلی دانش آموزان در گروه‌های کلیشه‌ای منفی شده‌است. در یک تحقیق، تنها آموزش دادن دختران دربارهٔ وجود پدیده تهدید کلیشه و اثرات آن بر عملکرد، توانست شکاف جنسیتی پیش‌بینی شده در یک آزمون ریاضی مشکل را از بین ببرد.[۳۰] آگاه کردن افراد از این واقعیت که آن‌ها لزوماً به خاطر وجود یک کلیشه و باور منفی قرار نیست عملکرد بدی داشته باشند، می‌تواند باعث بهبود عملکرد آن‌ها شود. رویکرد دوم این است که به افراد این آگاهی را داد که هوش شکل پذیر و قابل انعطاف است و می‌تواند از طریق تلاش افزایش پیدا کند. اگر افراد به این باور پیدا کنند که می‌توانند با تلاش عملکرد خود را بهبود بخشند، به احتمال زیاد به این باور می‌رسند که می‌توانند بر کلیشه‌های منفی خود غلبه کرده و عملکرد خوبی از خود نشان دهند.[۳۱][۳۲]

نوع سوم اصلاح این رفتار ترغیب این افراد برای انجام پروسه‌ای به نام خود-تصدیقی است، که در آن شخص در مورد چیزی که برایش ارزش دارد می‌نویسد. در سال ۲۰۰۶، جفری کوهن، خولیو گارسیا، نانسی آپفل، و آلیسون مستر نشان دادند که یک تمرین خود-تصدیقی (به شکل یک نوشته کوتاه در کلاس) به‌طور قابل توجهی توانست نمرات دانش آموزان یک مدرسه راهنمایی آمریکایی‌های آفریقایی تبار را بهبود داده، و شکاف نژادی موجود را بتا حد ۴۰ ٪ کاهش دهد. کوهن و همکارانش پیشنهاد کرده‌اند که استفاده از مداخلات اجتماعی روانی کوتاه و هدفمند می‌تواند شکاف نژادی را تا حدودی بهبود بدهد.[۳۳] یکی از این مداخلات و راه حل‌ها روی دانشجویان پزشکی در بریتانیا انجام شد. به این دانشجویان یک تمرین نوشتن و یک ارزیابی بالینی داده شد. برای نوشتن دانش آموزان سفید عملکرد بدتری در مقابل دانش آموزان اقلیت از خود نشان دادند. در حالی که برای ارزیابی بالینی، هر دو گروه عملکرد خود را بهبود داده و به تفاوت‌های نژادی موجود حایل آمدند.[۳۴] فرصت دادن به شرکت کنندگان برای تفکر مثبت یا برای ارتباط یک ویژگی مثبت به خود پیش از تکمیل کار، به نظر می‌رسید که آن‌ها را کمتر در معرض خطر کلیشه قرار داده است.

راهکار چهارم برای غلبه بر تهدید کلیشه این است که احساس شخص در تعلق اجتماعی به دنیای آکادمی را افزایش داد. گرگ والتون و جفری کوهن قادر به افزایش نمرات دانشجویان آمریکایی آفریقایی تبار، و همچنین از بین بردن شکاف دستاوردهای نژادی در سال اول دانشگاه شدند، با گفتن این نکته به شرکت کنندگان که نگرانی در مورد تعلق اجتماعی به نظر می‌رسد که با گذشت زمان در حال کاهش است.[۳۵] اگر به افراد اجازه داده شود که احساس کنند متعلق و پذیرفته شده در گروه مورد علاقه‌شان هستند، آن‌ها به احتمال زیاد قادر خواهند بود که از کلیشه‌ها چشم پوشی کنند. اگر دانشجویانی که در اقلیت قرار دارند در آکادمیا مورد استقبال بهتری قرار بگیرند، احتمال اینکه کلیشه‌های منفی موجود بر عملکردشان اثر بگذارند کمتر می‌شود.

انتقادات[ویرایش]

بر توضیحی که تهدید کلیشه روی شکاف دستاوردها می‌دهد، انتقاداتی نیز وارد شده‌است. به گفته پل ساکت، چایترا هاردیسون، و مایکل کالن، هم رسانه‌ها و هم ادبیات پژوهشی به اشتباه نتیجه گرفته‌اند که از بین بردن تهدید کلیشه می‌تواند به‌طور کامل تفاوت در عملکرد آزمون موجود بین افراد اروپایی-آمریکایی و آفریقایی-آمریکایی را از بین ببرد.[۸] به عنوان مثال، ساکت و همکاران اشاره کرده‌اند که در مقاله استیل و آرونسون (۱۹۹۵) در آزمایشی که در آن تهدید کلیشه حذف شد، شکاف دستاورد باقی‌مانده همچنان در ابعادی است که به‌طور معمول بین میانگین نمرات آفریقایی-آمریکایی و اروپایی-آمریکایی‌ها در آزمون‌های استاندارد در مقیاس بزرگ گزارش می‌شود (در حدود یک انحراف استاندارد). در مکاتبات بعدی بین ساکت و همکارانش با استیل و آرونسون، ساکت و همکارانش نوشتند که «آنها [استیل و آرونسون] موافق آن هستند که تعبیر نادرستی از نتایج آن‌ها است اگر نتیجه بگیریم که از بین بردن تهدید کلیشه باعث حذف شکاف آزمون نمره بین آمریکایی‌های آفریقایی و سفید می‌شود».[۷]

منابع[ویرایش]

  1. Osborne, Jason W. (2007). "Linking Stereotype Threat and Anxiety". Educational Psychology. 27 (1): 135–154. doi:10.1080/01443410601069929.
  2. ۲٫۰ ۲٫۱ Gilovich, Thomas; Keltner, Dacher; Nisbett, Richard E. (2006). Social psychology. W.W. Norton. pp. 467–468. ISBN 978-0-393-97875-9.
  3. ۳٫۰ ۳٫۱ Schmader, Toni; Johns, Michael; Forbes, Chad (2008). "An integrated process model of stereotype threat effects on performance". Psychological Review 115 (2): 336–356. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.115.2.336. ISSN 1939-1471. PMC 2570773. PMID 18426293.
  4. Steele, Claude M. (1997). "A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance". American Psychologist 52 (6): 613–629. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.52.6.613. ISSN 0003-066X. PMID 9174398.
  5. ۵٫۰ ۵٫۱ ۵٫۲ ۵٫۳ Steele, Claude M. ; Aronson, Joshua (1995). "Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 69 (5): 797–811. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.69.5.797. ISSN 0022-3514. PMID 7473032.
  6. Steele, C. M. ; Spencer, S. J. ; Aronson, J. (2002). "Contending with groupimage: The psychology of stereotype and social identity threat". Advances in Experimental Social Psychology Volume 34. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 34. p. 379. doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(02)80009-0. شابک ‎۹۷۸-۰-۱۲-۰۱۵۲۳۴-۶.
  7. ۷٫۰ ۷٫۱ ۷٫۲ Sackett, Paul R. ; Hardison, Chaitra M. ; Cullen, Michael J. (2004). "On the Value of Correcting Mischaracterizations of Stereotype Threat Research". American Psychologist 59 (1): 48–49. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.59.1.48. ISSN 1935-990X.
  8. ۸٫۰ ۸٫۱ Sackett, Paul R. ; Hardison, Chaitra M. ; Cullen, Michael J. (January 2004). "On interpreting stereotype threat as accounting for African American-White differences on cognitive tests" (PDF). American Psychologist 59 (1): 7–13. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.59.1.7. ISSN 1935-990X. PMID 14736315.
  9. Stoet, G. ; Geary, D. C. (2012). "Can stereotype threat explain the gender gap in mathematics performance and achievement?". Review of General Psychology 16: 93. doi:10.1037/a0026617.
  10. Ganley, Colleen M. ; Mingle, Leigh A. ; Ryan, Allison M. ; Ryan, Katherine; Vasilyeva, Marina; Perry, Michelle (1 January 2013). "An Examination of Stereotype Threat Effects on Girls' Mathematics Performance.". Developmental Psychology. doi:10.1037/a0031412.
  11. Stroessner, Steve; Good, Catherine. "Stereotype Threat: An Overview". dingo.sbs.arizona.edu. Reducing Stereotype Threat.org. Retrieved 6 March 2011.
  12. Maass, Anne; D'Ettole, Claudio; Cadinu, Mara (2008). "Checkmate? The role of gender stereotypes in the ultimate intellectual sport". European Journal of Social Psychology 38 (2): 231–245. doi:10.1002/ejsp.440. ISSN 0046-2772.
  13. Inzlicht, M. ; Ben-Zeev, T. (2000). "A Threatening Intellectual Environment: Why Females Are Susceptible to Experiencing Problem-Solving Deficits in the Presence of Males". Psychological Science 11 (5): 365–371. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00272. ISSN 0956-7976.
  14. Gupta, V. K. ; Bhawe, N. M. (2007). "The Influence of Proactive Personality and Stereotype Threat on Women's Entrepreneurial Intentions". Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 13 (4): 73–85. doi:10.1177/10717919070130040901. ISSN 1071-7919.
  15. Stone, Jeff; Lynch, Christian I. ; Sjomeling, Mike; Darley, John M. (1999). "Stereotype threat effects on Black and White athletic performance.". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 77 (6): 1213–1227. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1213. ISSN 0022-3514.
  16. Stone, Jeff; Perry, W. ; Darley, John (1997). ""White Men Can't Jump": Evidence for the Perceptual Confirmation of Racial Stereotypes Following a Basketball Game". Basic and Applied Social Psychology 19 (3): 291–306. doi:10.1207/s15324834basp1903_2. ISSN 0197-3533.
  17. Koenig, Anne M. ; Eagly, Alice H. (2005). "Stereotype Threat in Men on a Test of Social Sensitivity". Sex Roles 52 (7–8): 489–496. doi:10.1007/s11199-005-3714-x. ISSN 0360-0025.
  18. Desert, Michael; Marie Preaux, Robin Jund (2009). "So young and already victims of stereotype threat: Socio-economic status and performance of 6 to 9 years old children on Raven's progressive matrices.". European Journal of Psychology of Education 24 (2): 207–218. doi:10.1007/BF03173012.
  19. Horton, Sean; Joseph Baker, William Pearce, Janice Deakin (2010). "Immunity to Popular Stereotypes of Aging? Seniors and Stereotype Threat". Educational Gerontology 36 (5): 353–371. doi:10.1080/03601270903323976.
  20. Walton, G. M. ; Cohen, G. L. (2003). "Stereotype lift". Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 39 (5): 456–467. doi:10.1016/S0022-1031(03)00019-2.
  21. Schmader, Toni; Johns, Michael (2003). "Converging Evidence That Stereotype Threat Reduces Working Memory Capacity". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 85 (3): 440–452. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.3.440. ISSN 0022-3514. PMID 14498781.
  22. Inzlicht, Michael; McKay, Linda; Aronson, Joshua (2006). "Stigma as ego-depletion: How being the target of prejudice affects self-control". Psychological Science 17: 262–269.
  23. Ben-Zeev, Talia; Fein, Steven; Inzlicht, Michael. "Stereotype Threat and Arousal". Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 41: 174–181.
  24. Beilock, S. L. ; Jellison, WA; Rydell, RJ; McConnell, AR; Carr, TH (2006). "On the Causal Mechanisms of Stereotype Threat: Can Skills That Don't Rely Heavily on Working Memory Still Be Threatened?". Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 32 (8): 1059–1071. doi:10.1177/0146167206288489. ISSN 0146-1672. PMID 16861310.
  25. Johns, Mike; Inzlicht, Michael; Schmader, Toni (2008). "Stereotype Threat and Executive Resource Depletion: The Influence of Emotion Regulation". Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 137: 691–705.
  26. Koch, S; Muller, S; Sieverding, M (2008). "Women and computers. Effects of stereotype threat on attribution of failure". Computers & Education 51 (4): 1795–1803.
  27. Lesko, Alexandra C. ; Corpus, Jennifer Henderlong (2006). "Discounting the Difficult: How High Math-Identified Women Respond to Stereotype Threat". Sex Roles 54 (1–2): 113–125. doi:10.1007/s11199-005-8873-2. ISSN 0360-0025.
  28. Cohen, Geoffrey L. ; Garcia, Julio (2008). "Identity, Belonging, and Achievement: A Model, Interventions, Implications". Current Directions in Psychological Science 17 (6): 365–369. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8721.2008.00607.x. ISSN 0963-7214.
  29. Major, B. ; Spencer, S. ; Schmader, T. ; Wolfe, C. ; Crocker, J. (1998). "Coping with Negative Stereotypes about Intellectual Performance: The Role of Psychological Disengagement". Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 24 (1): 34–50. doi:10.1177/0146167298241003. ISSN 0146-1672.
  30. Johns M, Schmader T, Martens A (March 2005). "Knowing is half the battle: teaching stereotype threat as a means of improving women's math performance". Psychological Science 16 (3): 175–9. doi:10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.00799.x. PMID 15733195.
  31. Aronson J, Fried CB, Good C (2002). "Reducing the Effects of Stereotype Threat on African American College Students by Shaping Theories of Intelligence". Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 38 (2): 113–125. doi:10.1006/jesp.2001.1491. ISSN 0022-1031.
  32. Good, Catherine; Aronson, Joshua; Inzlicht, Michael (2003). "Improving Adolescents’ Standardized Test Performance: An Intervention to Reduce the Effects of Stereotype Threat". Journal of Applied Developmental Psycholoogy 24: 645–662.
  33. Cohen GL, Garcia J, Apfel N, Master A (September 2006). "Reducing the racial achievement gap: a social-psychological intervention". Science 313 (5791): 1307–10. doi:10.1126/science.1128317. PMID 16946074.
  34. Woolf K, McManus IC, Gill D, Dace J (June 2009). "The effect of a brief social intervention on the examination results of UK medical students: a cluster randomised controlled trial". BMC Medical Education 9: 35. doi:10.1186/1472-6920-9-35. PMC 2717066. PMID 19552810.
  35. Walton, G. M. ; Cohen, G. L. (January 2007). "A question of belonging: race, social fit, and achievement". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 92 (1): 82–96. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.92.1.82. PMID 17201544.

Stereotype threat is a situational predicament in which people are or feel themselves to be at risk of conforming to stereotypes about their social group.[1][2] Stereotype threat is purportedly a contributing factor to long-standing racial and gender gaps in academic performance. It may occur whenever an individual's performance might confirm a negative stereotype because stereotype threat is thought to arise from a particular situation, rather than from an individual's personality traits or characteristics. Since most people have at least one social identity which is negatively stereotyped, most people are vulnerable to stereotype threat if they encounter a situation in which the stereotype is relevant. Situational factors that increase stereotype threat can include the difficulty of the task, the belief that the task measures their abilities, and the relevance of the stereotype to the task. Individuals show higher degrees of stereotype threat on tasks they wish to perform well on and when they identify strongly with the stereotyped group. These effects are also increased when they expect discrimination due to their identification with a negatively stereotyped group.[3] Repeated experiences of stereotype threat can lead to a vicious circle of diminished confidence, poor performance, and loss of interest in the relevant area of achievement.[4]

Since its introduction into the academic literature, stereotype threat has become one of the most widely studied topics in the field of social psychology.[5] Stereotype threat has been argued to show a reduction in the performance of individuals who belong to negatively stereotyped groups.[6][7] Its role in affecting public health disparities has also been suggested.[8]

According to the theory, if negative stereotypes are present regarding a specific group, group members are likely to become anxious about their performance, which may hinder their ability to perform to their full potential. Importantly, the individual does not need to subscribe to the stereotype for it to be activated. It is hypothesized that the mechanism through which anxiety (induced by the activation of the stereotype) decreases performance is by depleting working memory (especially the phonological aspects of the working memory system).[9]

Some researchers have suggested that stereotype threat should not be interpreted as a factor in real-life performance gaps, and have raised the possibility of publication bias.[10][11][12] Other critics have focused on correcting what they claim are misconceptions of early studies showing a large effect.[13] However, meta-analyses and systematic reviews have shown significant evidence for the effects of stereotype threat, though the phenomenon defies over-simplistic characterization.[14][15][16][17][18]

The opposite of stereotype threat is stereotype boost, which is when people perform better than they otherwise would have, because of exposure to positive stereotypes about their social group.[19] A variant of stereotype boost is stereotype lift, which is people achieving better performance because of exposure to negative stereotypes about other social groups.[19]

Empirical studies

As of 2011, more than 300 published papers show the effects of stereotype threat on performance in a variety of domains.[20] The strength of the stereotype threat that occurs depends on how the task is framed. If a task is framed to be neutral, stereotype threat is not likely to occur; however, if tasks are framed in terms of active stereotypes, participants are likely to perform worse on the task. For example, a study on chess players revealed that female players performed more poorly than expected when they were told they would be playing against a male opponent. In contrast, women who were told that their opponent was female performed as would be predicted by past ratings of performance.[21] Female participants who were made aware of the stereotype of females performing worse at chess than males performed worse in their chess games.

Researchers Vishal Gupta, Daniel Turban, and Nachiket Bhawe extended stereotype threat research to entrepreneurship, a traditionally male-stereotyped profession. Their study revealed that stereotype threat can depress women's entrepreneurial intentions while boosting men's intentions. However, when entrepreneurship is presented as a gender-neutral profession, men and women express a similar level of interest in becoming entrepreneurs.[22] Another experiment involved a golf game which was described as a test of "natural athletic ability" or of "sports intelligence". When it was described as a test of athletic ability, European-American students performed worse, but when the description mentioned intelligence, African-American students performed worse.[23]

The effect of stereotype threat (ST) on math test scores for girls and boys. Data from Osborne (2007).[24]

Other studies have demonstrated how stereotype threat can negatively affect the performance of European Americans in athletic situations[25] as well as the performance of men who are being tested on their social sensitivity.[26] Although the framing of a task can produce stereotype threat in most individuals, certain individuals appear to be more likely to experience stereotype threat than others. Individuals who highly identify with a particular group appear to be more vulnerable to experiencing stereotype threat than individuals who do not identify strongly with the stereotyped group.

The mere presence of other people can evoke stereotype threat. In one experiment, women who took a mathematics exam along with two other women got 70% of the answers right, whereas women who took the same exam in the presence of two men got an average score of 55%.[27]

The goal of a study conducted by Desert, Preaux, and Jund in 2009 was to see if children from lower socioeconomic groups are affected by stereotype threat. The study compared children that were 6–7 years old with children that were 8–9 years old from multiple elementary schools. These children were presented with the Raven's Matrices test, which is an intellectual ability test. Separate groups of children were given directions in an evaluative way and other groups were given directions in a non-evaluative way. The "evaluative" group received instructions that are usually given with the Raven Matrices test, while the "non-evaluative" group was given directions which made it seem as if the children were simply playing a game. The results showed that third graders performed better on the test than the first graders did, which was expected. However, the lower socioeconomic status children did worse on the test when they received directions in an evaluative way than the higher socioeconomic status children did when they received directions in an evaluative way. These results suggested that the framing of the directions given to the children may have a greater effect on performance than socioeconomic status. This was shown by the differences in performance based on which type of instructions they received. This information can be useful in classroom settings to help improve the performance of students of lower socioeconomic status.[28]

There have been studies on the effects of stereotype threat based on age. A study was done on 99 senior citizens ranging in age from 60–75 years. These seniors were given multiple tests on certain factors and categories such as memory and physical abilities, and were also asked to evaluate how physically fit they believe themselves to be. Additionally, they were asked to read articles that contained both positive and negative outlooks about seniors, and they watched someone reading the same articles. The goal of this study was to see if priming the participants before the tests would affect performance. The results showed that the control group performed better than those that were primed with either negative or positive words prior to the tests. The control group seemed to feel more confident in their abilities than the other two groups.[29]

Many psychological experiments carried out on Stereotype Threat focus on the physiological effects of negative stereotype threat on performance, looking at both high and low status groups. Scheepers and Ellemers tested the following hypothesis: when assessing a performance situation on the basis of current beliefs the low status group members would show a physiological threat response, and high-status members would also show a physiological threat response when examining a possible alteration of the status quo(Scheepers & Ellemers, 2005).[30] The results of this experiment were in line with expectations. As predicted, participants in the low status condition showed higher blood pressure immediately after the status feedback, while participants in the high-status condition showed a spike in blood pressure while anticipating the second round of the task.

In 2012, Scheepers et al. hypothesized that when high social power is stimulated 'an efficient cardiovascular pattern (challenge)' is produced, whereas, 'an inefficient cardiovascular pattern' or threat is caused by the activation of low social power (Scheepers, de Wit, Ellemers & Sassenberg, 2012). Two experiments were carried out in order to test this hypothesis. The first experiment looked at power priming and the second experiment related to role play. Both results from these two experiments provided evidence in support for the hypothesis.[31]

Cleopatra Abdou and Adam Fingerhut were the first to develop experimental methods to study stereotype threat in a health care context,[32] including the first study indicating that health care stereotype threat is linked with adverse health outcomes and disparities.[33][34]

Several meta-analyses and systematic reviews have shown significant evidence for the effects of stereotype threat.[14][15][16][17][18] However they also point to ways in which the phenomenon defies over-simplistic characterization. For instance, one meta-analysis found that with female subjects "subtle threat-activating cues produced the largest effect, followed by blatant and moderately explicit cues" while with minorities "moderately explicit stereotype threat-activating cues produced the largest effect, followed by blatant and subtle cues".[15]

Mechanisms

Although numerous studies demonstrate the effects of stereotype threat on performance, questions remain as to the specific cognitive factors that underlie these effects. Steele and Aronson originally speculated that attempts to suppress stereotype-related thoughts lead to anxiety and the narrowing of attention. This could contribute to the observed deficits in performance. In 2008, Toni Schmader, Michael Johns, and Chad Forbes published an integrated model of stereotype threat that focused on three interrelated factors:

  1. stress arousal;
  2. performance monitoring, which narrows attention; and,
  3. efforts to suppress negative thoughts and emotions.[5]

Schmader et al. suggest that these three factors summarize the pattern of evidence that has been accumulated by past experiments on stereotype threat. For example, stereotype threat has been shown to disrupt working memory and executive function,[35][36] increase arousal,[37] increase self-consciousness about one's performance,[38] and cause individuals to try to suppress negative thoughts as well as negative emotions such as anxiety.[39] People have a limited amount of cognitive resources available. When a large portion of these resources are spent focusing on anxiety and performance pressure, the individual is likely to perform worse on the task at hand.

A number of studies looking at physiological and neurological responses support Schmader and colleagues' integrated model of the processes that produce stereotype threat. Supporting an explanation in terms of stress arousal, one study found that African Americans under stereotype threat exhibit larger increases in arterial blood pressure.[40] One study found increased cardiovascular activation amongst women who watched a video in which men outnumbered women at a math and science conference.[41] Other studies have similarly found that individuals under stereotype threat display increased heart rates.[42] Stereotype threat may also activate a neuroendocrine stress response, as measured by increased levels of cortisol while under threat.[43] The physiological reactions that are induced by stereotype threat can often be subconscious, and can distract and interrupt cognitive focus from the task.

With regard to performance monitoring and vigilance, studies of brain activity have supported the idea that stereotype threat increases both of these processes. Forbes and colleagues recorded electroencephalogram (EEG) signals that measure electrical activity along the scalp, and found that individuals experiencing stereotype threat were more vigilant for performance-related stimuli.[44]

Researchers found that women experiencing stereotype threat while taking a math test showed heightened activation in the ventral stream of the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC).

Another study used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to investigate brain activity associated with stereotype threat. The researchers found that women experiencing stereotype threat while taking a math test showed heightened activation in the ventral stream of the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), a neural region thought to be associated with social and emotional processing.[45] Wraga and colleagues found that women under stereotype threat showed increased activation in the ventral ACC and that the amount of this activation predicted performance decrements on the task.[46] When individuals were made aware of performance-related stimuli, they were more likely to experience stereotype threat.

A study conducted by Boucher, Rydell, Loo, and Rydell has shown that stereotype threat not only affects performance, but can also affect the ability to learn new information. In the study, undergraduate men and women had a session of learning followed by an assessment of what they learned. Some participants were given information intended to induce stereotype threat, and some of these participants were later given "gender fair" information, which it was predicted would reduce or remove stereotype threat. As a result, participants were split into four separate conditions: control group, stereotype threat only, stereotype threat removed before learning, and stereotype threat removed after learning. The results of the study showed that the women who were presented with the "gender fair" information performed better on the math related test than the women who were not presented with this information. This study also showed that it was more beneficial to women for the "gender fair" information to be presented prior to learning rather than after learning. These results suggest that eliminating stereotype threat prior to taking mathematical tests can help women perform better, and that eliminating stereotype threat prior to mathematical learning can help women learn better.[47]

Original study

"The Effects of Stereotype Threat on the Standardized Test Performance of College Students (adjusted for group differences on SAT)". From J. Aronson, C.M. Steele, M.F. Salinas, M.J. Lustina, Readings About the Social Animal, 8th edition, ed. E. Aronson

In 1995, Claude Steele and Joshua Aronson performed the first experiments demonstrating that stereotype threat can undermine intellectual performance.[2][48] Steele and Aronson measured this through a word completion task.[2]

They had African-American and European-American college students take a difficult verbal portion of the Graduate Record Examination test. As would be expected based on national averages, the African-American students did not perform as well on the test. Steele and Aronson split students into three groups: stereotype-threat (in which the test was described as being "diagnostic of intellectual ability"), non-stereotype threat (in which the test was described as "a laboratory problem-solving task that was nondiagnostic of ability"), and a third condition (in which the test was again described as nondiagnostic of ability, but participants were asked to view the difficult test as a challenge). All three groups received the same test.

Steele and Aronson concluded that changing the instructions on the test could reduce African-American students' concern about confirming a negative stereotype about their group. Supporting this conclusion, they found that African-American students who regarded the test as a measure of intelligence had more thoughts related to negative stereotypes of their group. Additionally, they found that African Americans who thought the test measured intelligence were more likely to complete word fragments using words associated with relevant negative stereotypes (e.g., completing "__mb" as "dumb" rather than as "numb").

Adjusted for previous SAT scores, subjects in the non-diagnostic-challenge condition performed significantly better than those in the non-diagnostic-only condition and those in the diagnostic condition. In the first experiment, the race-by-condition interaction was marginally significant. However, the second study reported in the same paper found a significant interaction effect of race and condition. This suggested that placement in the diagnostic condition significantly impacted African Americans compared with European Americans.[2]

Stereotype lift and stereotype boost

Stereotype threat concerns how stereotype cues can harm performance. However, in certain situations, stereotype activation can also lead to performance enhancement through stereotype lift or stereotype boost. Stereotype lift increases performance when people are exposed to negative stereotypes about another group.[49] This enhanced performance has been attributed to increases in self-efficacy and decreases in self-doubt as a result of negative outgroup stereotypes.[49] Stereotype boost suggests that positive stereotypes may enhance performance.[50] Stereotype boost occurs when a positive aspect of an individual's social identity is made salient in an identity-relevant domain. Although stereotype boost is similar to stereotype lift in enhancing performance, stereotype lift is the result of a negative outgroup stereotype, whereas stereotype boost occurs due to activation of a positive ingroup stereotype.[50]

Consistent with the positive racial stereotype concerning their superior quantitative skills, Asian American women performed better on a math test when their Asian identity was primed compared to a control condition where no social identity was primed. Conversely, these participants did worse on the math test when instead their gender identity—which is associated with stereotypes of inferior quantitative skills—was made salient, which is consistent with stereotype threat.[51][52] Two replications of this result have been attempted. In one case, the effect was only reproduced after excluding participants who were unaware of stereotypes about the mathematical abilities of Asians or women,[53] while the other replication failed to reproduce the original results even considering several moderating variables.[53]

Long-term and other consequences

Decreased performance is the most recognized consequence of stereotype threat. However, research has also shown that stereotype threat can cause individuals to blame themselves for perceived failures,[54] self-handicap,[2] discount the value and validity of performance tasks,[55] distance themselves from negatively stereotyped groups,[56] and disengage from situations that are perceived as threatening.[57]

Studies examining stereotype threat in Black Americans have found that when subjects are aware of the stereotype of Black criminality, anxiety about encountering police increases. This, in turn, can lead to self-regulatory efforts, more anxiety, and other behaviors that are commonly perceived as suspicious to police officers.[58] Because police officers tend to perceive Black people as threatening, their reactions to these anxiety-induced behaviors are commonly more harsh than reactions to White people with the same behavior, and influences whether or not they decide to shoot the person.[59][60][61][62][63]

In the long run, the chronic experience of stereotype threat may lead individuals to disidentify with the stereotyped group. For example, a woman may stop seeing herself as "a math person" after experiencing a series of situations in which she experienced stereotype threat. This disidentification is thought to be a psychological coping strategy to maintain self-esteem in the face of failure.[64] Repeated exposure to anxiety and nervousness can lead individuals to choose to distance themselves from the stereotyped group.[65]

Although much of the research on stereotype threat has examined the effects of coping with negative stereotype on academic performance, recently there has been an emphasis on how coping with stereotype threat could "spillover" to dampen self-control and thereby affect a much broader category of behaviors, even in non-stereotyped domains.[66] Research by Michael Inzlicht and colleagues suggest that, when women cope with negative stereotypes about their math ability, they perform worse on math tests, and that, well after completing the math test, women may continue to show deficits even in unrelated domains. For example, women might overeat, be more aggressive, make more risky decisions,[66] and show less endurance during physical exercise.[36]

The perceived discrimination associated with stereotype threat can also have negative long-term consequences on individuals' mental health. Perceived discrimination has been extensively investigated in terms of its effects on mental health, with a particular emphasis on depression.[67] Cross-sectional studies involving diverse minority groups, including those relating to internalized racism, have found that individuals who experience more perceived discrimination are more likely to exhibit depressive symptoms.[67][68][69] Additionally, perceived discrimination has also been found to predict depressive symptoms in children and adolescents.[70][71] Other negative mental health outcomes associated with perceived discrimination include a reduced general well-being, post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, and rebellious behavior.[67] A meta-analysis conducted by Pascoe and Smart Richman has shown that the strong link between perceived discrimination and negative mental health persists even after controlling for factors such as education, socioeconomic status, and employment.[72]

Mitigation

Additional research seeks ways to boost the test scores and academic achievement of students in negatively stereotyped groups. There are many ways to combat the effects of stereotype threat.

  1. In one study, teaching college women about stereotype threat and its effects on performance was sufficient to eliminate the predicted gender gap on a difficult math test.[73] Making people aware of the fact that they will not necessarily perform worse despite the existence of a stereotype can boost their performance. However, other research has found the opposite effect. In one study, women were given a text "summarizing an experiment in which stereotypes, and not biological differences, were shown to be the cause of women's underperformance in math", and then they performed a math exercise. It was found that "women who properly understood the meaning of the information provided, and thus became knowledgeable about stereotype threat, performed significantly worse at a calculus task".[74]
  2. Persuade participants that intelligence is malleable and can be increased through effort. If people believe that they can improve their performance based on effort, they are more likely to believe that they can overcome negative stereotypes and perform well.[75][76]
  3. Have participants engage in self-affirmation, which is a process in which participants write about a value that is important to them. In 2006, researchers Geoffrey L. Cohen, Julio Garcia, Nancy Apfel, and Allison Master found that a self-affirmation exercise (in the form of a brief in-class writing assignment) significantly improved the grades of African-American middle-school students, and reduced the racial achievement gap by 40%. Cohen et al. have suggested that the racial achievement gap could be at least partially ameliorated by brief and targeted social-psychological interventions.[77] One such intervention was attempted with UK medical students, who were given a written assignment and a clinical assessment. For the written assignment group, white students performed worse than minority students. For the clinical assessment, both groups improved their performance maintaining the racial difference.[78] Allowing participants to think about a positive value or attribute about themselves prior to completing the task seemed to make them less susceptible to stereotype threat.
  4. Increase participants' feelings of social belonging within the academic world. Greg Walton and Geoffrey Cohen were able to boost the grades of African-American college students, as well as eliminate the racial achievement gap over the first year of college, by telling participants that concerns about social belonging tend to lessen over time.[79] Allowing individuals to feel as though they are welcomed into a desirable group makes them more likely to ignore stereotypes. If minority college students are welcomed into the world of academia, they are less likely to be influenced by the negative stereotypes of poor minority performance on academic tasks.
  5. Construct environments and have the physical objects in the environment not reflect one majority group. Researchers argued that individuals make decisions about group membership based on the group's environment and proved that altering the physical objects in a room boosted minority participation. In this study, removing stereotypical computer science objects and replacing them with non-stereotypical objects increased female participation in computer science to an equal level as male peers.[80]
  6. Increase the representation of minority groups in that field can also mitigate stereotype threat. In one study, women in the STEM related field were shown a video of a conference with either a balanced or unbalanced ratio of men to women. The women viewing an unbalanced ratio reported a lower sense of belonging and less desire to participate. Decreasing cues that reflect only a majority group and increasing cues of minority groups can create environments that mitigate against stereotype threat.[81]
  7. Directly communicate that diversity is valued. One study revealed that a company's pamphlet stating a direct value of diversity, compared to a color blind approach, caused African Americans to report an increase in trust and comfort towards the company.[82]
  8. Encourage people to reflect on their individual identities. Researchers also proved that encouraging women to think about their multiple roles and identities by creating self-concept map did equally well as men on a math portion of the GRE. Furthermore, women who did not create a self-concept map did significantly worse on the math test than men did.[83]
  9. Promote cross-group relations between people of varying backgrounds. Research indicates that students have a lower sense of belonging at institutions where they are the minority. However, developing friendships with other racial groups alleviated against a sense of not belonging.[84]
  10. Teach students to re-evaluate stress and adopt an incremental theory of intelligence. One study found that having students reexamine their situation or anxiety can help their executive resources (attentional control, working memory, etc.), rather than allowing stress to deplete them, and improve test performance.[85] Research has found that students who are taught an incremental view of intelligence do not attribute academic setbacks to their innate ability, but rather to a situational attribute such as a poor study strategy. As a result, students are more likely to implement alternative study strategies and seek help from others.[86]

Criticism

The stereotype threat explanation of achievement gaps has attracted criticism. Some studies have cautioned that stereotype threat should not be interpreted as a factor in real-world performance gaps.[13][11][10][87] Multiple reviews have raised concerns that the effect has been over-estimated for schoolgirls and that the field likely suffers from publication bias.[12][10][11]

According to Paul R. Sackett, Chaitra M. Hardison, and Michael J. Cullen, both the media and scholarly literature have wrongly concluded that eliminating stereotype threat could completely eliminate differences in test performance between European Americans and African Americans.[13] Sackett et al. have pointed out that, in Steele and Aronson's (1995) experiments where stereotype threat was removed, an achievement gap of approximately one standard deviation remained between the groups, which is very close in size to that routinely reported between African American and European Americans' average scores on large-scale standardized tests such as the SAT. In subsequent correspondence between Sackett et al. and Steele and Aronson, Sackett et al. wrote that "They [Steele and Aronson] agree that it is a misinterpretation of the Steele and Aronson (1995) results to conclude that eliminating stereotype threat eliminates the African American-White test-score gap."[88] However, in that same correspondence, Steele and Aronson point out that "it is the stereotype threat conditions, and not the no-threat conditions, that produce group differences most like those of real-life testing."[89]

Arthur R. Jensen criticised stereotype threat theory on the basis that it invokes an additional mechanism to explain effects which could be, according to him, explained by other, well-known, and well-established theories, such as test anxiety and especially the Yerkes–Dodson law.[90] In Jensen's view, the effects which are attributed to stereotype threat may simply reflect "the interaction of ability level with test anxiety as a function of test complexity".[91] However, Diamond et al state "that one problem with the Yerkes-Dodson law is that it invokes an ill-defined distinction between 'simple' versus 'complex' tasks." They further articulate that, "Yerkes and Dodson may have the dubious distinction to be the most highly cited, but largely unread, paper in the history of science."[92]

In 2009,[93] Wei examined real-world testing over a broad population (rather than lab assessments with questionable external validity), and found a reverse stereotype threat: a randomly assigned question actually raised female students' scores by 0.05 standard deviations. An earlier experiment with Advanced Placement exams found no effects that were 'practically significant,' but does show 'statistically significant' effect.[94]

Gijsbert Stoet and David C. Geary reviewed the evidence for the stereotype threat explanation of the achievement gap in mathematics between men and women. They concluded that the relevant stereotype threat research has many methodological problems, such as not having a control group, and that some literature on this topic misrepresents stereotype threat as more well established than it is. Still, they did find evidence for a marginally significant (d=0.17) effect of stereotype-threat.[11][95]

In an article published on Psychology Today in 2015, psychologist Lee Jussim pointed out that, in their study, Steele and Aronson controlled for prior SAT scores using analysis of covariance, which caused the difference between black and white students' test scores in the "non-diagnostic" test group to nearly disappear. Jussim demonstrated that, using the same technique to control for prior temperatures, he could cause Nome, Alaska and Tampa, Florida to appear to have nearly the same average temperature.[96] However, as Steele and Aronson point out, the larger literature beyond their 1995 paper "shows the effect of stereotype threat on an array of tests—SATs, IQ tests, and French language tests to list only a few—sometimes with a co-variance adjustment, but many times without."[89]

Publication bias

Meta-analysis of stereotype threat on girls showing asymmetry typical of publication bias. From Flore, P. C., & Wicherts, J. M. (2014)[12]

The strength and type of the effect has also been questioned. Flore and Wicherts concluded the reported effect is small, but also that the field is inflated by publication bias. They argue that, correcting for this, the most likely true effect size is near zero (see meta-analytic plot, highlighting both the restriction of large effect to low-powered studies, and the plot asymmetry which occurs when publication bias is active).[12]

Earlier meta-analyses reached similar conclusions. For instance, Ganley et al. (2013)[10] examined math stereotype threat in a well-powered (total N ~ 1000) multi-experiment study. This allowed examination of potential moderators such as age and implicit vs explicit methods. Significant gender differences in math were found, but "no evidence that the mathematics performance of school-age girls was impacted by stereotype threat" was found. Further, they found that evidence for stereotype threat in children reflects publication bias: large, well-controlled studies find smaller or non-significant effects, while among the many underpowered studies run, researchers selectively published those in which false-positive effects reached significance:[10]

nonsignificant findings were almost always reported in an article along with some significant stereotype threat effects found either at another age (Ambady et al., 2001; Muzzatti & Agnoli, 2007), only with certain students (Keller, 2007), on certain items (Keller, 2007; Neuville & Croizet, 2007), or in certain contexts (Huguet & Regner, 2007, Study 2; Picho & Stephens, 2012; Tomasetto et al., 2011). Importantly, none of the three unpublished dissertations showed a stereotype threat effect. This observation suggests the possibility that publication bias is occurring. Publication bias refers to the fact that studies with null results are often not written up for publication or accepted for publication (Begg, 1994). This bias is a serious concern, especially if these results are being used to make recommendations for interventions.

The single largest experimental test of stereotype threat (N = 2064), conducted on Dutch high school students, found no effect.[97] However, as David Nussbaum points out, the same experimental procedures for testing stereotype threat's effects may produce radically differing results in differing cultural contexts, and while this may prove an ongoing challenge for researchers it in no way disproves the existence of the phenomenon.[98] As he goes on to argue:[98]

Seeing a large literature such as that of cognitive dissonance—and if we dare add, ST—as corrupted beyond interpretability simply because the motive for corruption exists (to publish) and the means exists (e.g., p-hacking) is to disregard the impact of other investigator motives and to embrace, in our view, an unlikely possibility.

See also

References

  1. ^ "Stereotype threat widens achievement gap". American Psychological Association. July 15, 2006. Retrieved 2019-10-12.
  2. ^ a b c d e Steele CM, Aronson J (November 1995). "Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 69 (5): 797–811. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.69.5.797. PMID 7473032. Pdf.
  3. ^ Steele CM, Spencer SJ, Aronson J (2002). Contending with group image: the psychology of stereotype and social identity threat. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. 34. pp. 379–440. doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(02)80009-0. ISBN 9780120152346.
  4. ^ Gilovich T, Keltner D, Nisbett RE (2006), "Being a member of a stigmatized group: stereotype threat", in Gilovich T, Keltner D, Nisbett RE (eds.), Social psychology, New York: W.W. Norton, pp. 467–468, ISBN 9780393978759
  5. ^ a b Schmader T, Johns M, Forbes C (April 2008). "An integrated process model of stereotype threat effects on performance". Psychological Review. 115 (2): 336–56. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.115.2.336. PMC 2570773. PMID 18426293.
  6. ^ Steele CM, Spencer SJ, Aronson J (1964), "Contending with group image: the psychology of stereotype and social identity threat", in Zanna MP (ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, volume 34, Amsterdam: Academic Press, pp. 379–440, ISBN 9780120152346.
  7. ^ Steele CM (June 1997). "A threat in the air. How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance". The American Psychologist. 52 (6): 613–29. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.318.9608. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.52.6.613. PMID 9174398.
  8. ^ Aronson J, Burgess D, Phelan SM, Juarez L (January 2013). "Unhealthy interactions: the role of stereotype threat in health disparities". American Journal of Public Health. 103 (1): 50–6. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2012.300828. PMC 3518353. PMID 23153125.
  9. ^ Beilock SL, Rydell RJ, McConnell AR (May 2007). "Stereotype threat and working memory: mechanisms, alleviation, and spillover". Journal of Experimental Psychology. General. 136 (2): 256–76. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.669.9881. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.136.2.256. PMID 17500650.
  10. ^ a b c d e Ganley CM, Mingle LA, Ryan AM, Ryan K, Vasilyeva M, Perry M (October 2013). "An examination of stereotype threat effects on girls' mathematics performance" (PDF). Developmental Psychology. 49 (10): 1886–97. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.353.4436. doi:10.1037/a0031412. PMID 23356523. Archived from the original (PDF) on 19 July 2014.
  11. ^ a b c d Stoet G, Geary DC (2012). "Can stereotype threat explain the gender gap in mathematics performance and achievement?". Review of General Psychology. 16: 93–102. doi:10.1037/a0026617. Pdf. Archived 2016-01-12 at the Wayback Machine
  12. ^ a b c d Flore PC, Wicherts JM (February 2015). "Does stereotype threat influence performance of girls in stereotyped domains? A meta-analysis". Journal of School Psychology. 53 (1): 25–44. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2014.10.002. PMID 25636259.
  13. ^ a b c Sackett PR, Hardison CM, Cullen MJ (January 2004). "On interpreting stereotype threat as accounting for African American-White differences on cognitive tests" (PDF). The American Psychologist. 59 (1): 7–13. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.59.1.7. PMID 14736315. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2013-04-04.
  14. ^ a b Pennington CR, Heim D, Levy AR, Larkin DT (2016-01-11). "Twenty Years of Stereotype Threat Research: A Review of Psychological Mediators". PLOS ONE. 11 (1): e0146487. Bibcode:2016PLoSO..1146487P. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0146487. PMC 4713435. PMID 26752551.
  15. ^ a b c Nguyen HH, Ryan AM (November 2008). "Does stereotype threat affect test performance of minorities and women? A meta-analysis of experimental evidence". The Journal of Applied Psychology. 93 (6): 1314–34. doi:10.1037/a0012702. PMID 19025250.
  16. ^ a b Walton, Gregory M.; Spencer, Steven J. (2009-09-01). "Latent Ability: Grades and Test Scores Systematically Underestimate the Intellectual Ability of Negatively Stereotyped Students". Psychological Science. 20 (9): 1132–1139. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02417.x. ISSN 0956-7976. PMID 19656335.
  17. ^ a b Gentile, Ambra; Boca, Stefano; Giammusso, Isabella (2018-11-01). "'You play like a Woman!' Effects of gender stereotype threat on Women's performance in physical and sport activities: A meta-analysis". Psychology of Sport and Exercise. 39: 95–103. doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2018.07.013. ISSN 1469-0292.
  18. ^ a b Lamont, Ruth A.; Swift, Hannah J.; Abrams, Dominic (2015). "A Review and Meta-Analysis of Age-Based Stereotype Threat: Negative Stereotypes, Not Facts, Do the Damage". Psychology and Aging. 30 (1): 180–193. doi:10.1037/a0038586. ISSN 1939-1498. PMC 4360754. PMID 25621742.
  19. ^ a b Shih MJ, Pittinsky TL, Ho GC (2011), "Stereotype boost: positive outcomes from the activation of positive stereotypes", in Inzlicht M, Schmader T (eds.), Stereotype threat: theory, process, and application, New York, New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 5–6, 141–143, ISBN 9780199732449 Preview 1. Preview 2.
  20. ^ Stroessner S, Good C. "Stereotype Threat: An Overview" (PDF). diversity.arizona.edu. Reducing Stereotype Threat.org. Retrieved 6 March 2011.
  21. ^ Maass A, D'Ettole C, Cadinu M (2008). "Checkmate? The role of gender stereotypes in the ultimate intellectual sport". European Journal of Social Psychology. 38 (2): 231–245. doi:10.1002/ejsp.440. ISSN 0046-2772.
  22. ^ Gupta VK, Bhawe NM (2007). "The Influence of Proactive Personality and Stereotype Threat on Women's Entrepreneurial Intentions". Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies. 13 (4): 73–85. doi:10.1177/10717919070130040901. ISSN 1071-7919.
  23. ^ Stone J, Lynch CI, Sjomeling M, Darley JM (1999). "Stereotype threat effects on Black and White athletic performance". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 77 (6): 1213–1227. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.687.5039. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1213. ISSN 0022-3514.
  24. ^ Osborne, Jason W. (2007). "Linking Stereotype Threat and Anxiety". Educational Psychology. 27 (1): 135–154. doi:10.1080/01443410601069929. ISSN 0144-3410.
  25. ^ Stone J, Perry W, Darley J (1997). ""White Men Can't Jump": Evidence for the Perceptual Confirmation of Racial Stereotypes Following a Basketball Game". Basic and Applied Social Psychology. 19 (3): 291–306. doi:10.1207/s15324834basp1903_2. ISSN 0197-3533.
  26. ^ Koenig AM, Eagly AH (2005). "Stereotype Threat in Men on a Test of Social Sensitivity". Sex Roles. 52 (7–8): 489–496. doi:10.1007/s11199-005-3714-x. ISSN 0360-0025.
  27. ^ Inzlicht M, Ben-Zeev T (September 2000). "A threatening intellectual environment: why females are susceptible to experiencing problem-solving deficits in the presence of males". Psychological Science. 11 (5): 365–71. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.24.1847. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00272. PMID 11228906.
  28. ^ Desert M, Preaux M, Jund R (2009). "So young and already victims of stereotype threat: Socio-economic status and performance of 6 to 9 years old children on Raven's progressive matrices". European Journal of Psychology of Education. 24 (2): 207–218. doi:10.1007/BF03173012.
  29. ^ Horton S, Baker J, Pearce W, Deakin J (2010). "Immunity to Popular Stereotypes of Aging? Seniors and Stereotype Threat". Educational Gerontology. 36 (5): 353–371. doi:10.1080/03601270903323976.
  30. ^ Scheepers D, Ellemers N (March 2005). "When the pressure is up: The assessment of social identity threat in low and high status groups". Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 41 (2): 192–200. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2004.06.002.
  31. ^ Scheepers D, de Wit F, Ellemers N, Sassenberg K (January 2012). "Social power makes the heart work more efficiently: Evidence from cardiovascular markers of challenge and threat". Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 48 (1): 371–374. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2011.06.014.
  32. ^ Abdou CM, Fingerhut AW (July 2014). "Stereotype threat among black and white women in health care settings". Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology. 20 (3): 316–23. doi:10.1037/a0036946. PMC 5449200. PMID 25045944.
  33. ^ Abdou CM, Fingerhut AW, Jackson JS, Wheaton F (February 2016). "Healthcare Stereotype Threat in Older Adults in the Health and Retirement Study". American Journal of Preventive Medicine. 50 (2): 191–8. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2015.07.034. PMC 4755717. PMID 26497263.
  34. ^ Preidt R. "Stereotypes Can Hurt a Patient's Care". U.S. News and World Report. Retrieved September 29, 2016.
  35. ^ Schmader T, Johns M (September 2003). "Converging evidence that stereotype threat reduces working memory capacity". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 85 (3): 440–52. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.3.440. PMID 14498781.
  36. ^ a b Inzlicht M, McKay L, Aronson J (March 2006). "Stigma as ego depletion: how being the target of prejudice affects self-control" (PDF). Psychological Science. 17 (3): 262–9. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01695.x. PMID 16507068. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2012-03-06.
  37. ^ Ben-Zeev T, Fein S, Inzlicht M (2005). "Stereotype Threat and Arousal" (PDF). Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 41 (2): 174–181. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2003.11.007. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2012-03-06.
  38. ^ Beilock SL, Jellison WA, Rydell RJ, McConnell AR, Carr TH (August 2006). "On the causal mechanisms of stereotype threat: can skills that don't rely heavily on working memory still be threatened?". Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin. 32 (8): 1059–71. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.472.7033. doi:10.1177/0146167206288489. PMID 16861310.
  39. ^ Johns M, Inzlicht M, Schmader T (November 2008). "Stereotype threat and executive resource depletion: examining the influence of emotion regulation" (PDF). Journal of Experimental Psychology. General. 137 (4): 691–705. doi:10.1037/a0013834. PMC 2976617. PMID 18999361. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2012-03-06.
  40. ^ Blascovich J, Spencer SJ, Quinn D, Steele C (May 2001). "African Americans and high blood pressure: the role of stereotype threat". Psychological Science. 12 (3): 225–9. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00340. PMID 11437305.
  41. ^ Murphy MC, Steele CM, Gross JJ (October 2007). "Signaling threat: how situational cues affect women in math, science, and engineering settings". Psychological Science. 18 (10): 879–85. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01995.x. PMID 17894605.
  42. ^ Croizet JC, Després G, Gauzins ME, Huguet P, Leyens JP, Méot A (June 2004). "Stereotype threat undermines intellectual performance by triggering a disruptive mental load". Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin. 30 (6): 721–31. doi:10.1177/0146167204263961. PMID 15155036.
  43. ^ Townsend SS, Major B, Gangi CE, Mendes WB (February 2011). "From "in the air" to "under the skin": cortisol responses to social identity threat". Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin. 37 (2): 151–64. doi:10.1177/0146167210392384. PMC 3538844. PMID 21239591.
  44. ^ Forbes CE, Schmader T, Allen JJ (September 2008). "The role of devaluing and discounting in performance monitoring: a neurophysiological study of minorities under threat". Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience. 3 (3): 253–61. doi:10.1093/scan/nsn012. PMC 2566773. PMID 19015117.
  45. ^ Krendl AC, Richeson JA, Kelley WM, Heatherton TF (February 2008). "The negative consequences of threat: a functional magnetic resonance imaging investigation of the neural mechanisms underlying women's underperformance in math". Psychological Science. 19 (2): 168–75. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02063.x. PMID 18271865.
  46. ^ Wraga M, Helt M, Jacobs E, Sullivan K (March 2007). "Neural basis of stereotype-induced shifts in women's mental rotation performance". Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience. 2 (1): 12–9. doi:10.1093/scan/nsl041. PMC 2555429. PMID 18985116.
  47. ^ Boucher KL, Rydell R, Van Loo K, Rydell M (2012). "Reducing Stereotype threat in order to facilitate learning". European Journal of Social Psychology. 42 (2): 174–179. doi:10.1002/ejsp.871.
  48. ^ Paul, Annie Murphy (2012-10-06). "Intelligence and the Stereotype Threat". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2019-10-13.
  49. ^ a b Walton GM, Cohen GL (2003). "Stereotype lift". Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 39 (5): 456–467. doi:10.1016/S0022-1031(03)00019-2.
  50. ^ a b Shih MJ, Pittinsky TL, Ho GC (2012). "Stereotype boost: Positive outcomes from the activation of positive stereotypes". In Inzlicht M, Schmader T (eds.). Stereotype Threat: Theory, Process, and Application. Oxford University Press. pp. 141–156. ISBN 978-0199732449.
  51. ^ Shih M, Pittinsky TL, Trahan A (2006). "Domain-specific effects of stereotypes on performance". Self and Identity. 5 (1): 1–14. doi:10.1080/15298860500338534.
  52. ^ Steen LA (July 1987). "Mathematics education: a predictor of scientific competitiveness" (PDF). Science. 237 (4812): 251–302. Bibcode:1987Sci...237..251S. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.367.4122. doi:10.1126/science.237.4812.251. PMID 17772052. Archived from the original (PDF) on 3 December 2013.
  53. ^ a b Gibson CE, Losee J, Vitiello C (2014). "A Replication Attempt of Stereotype Susceptibility (Shih, Pittinsky, & Ambady, 1999)" (PDF). Social Psychology. 45 (3): 194–198. doi:10.1027/1864-9335/a000184.
  54. ^ Koch S, Muller S, Sieverding M (2008). "Women and computers. Effects of stereotype threat on attribution of failure" (PDF). Computers & Education. 51 (4): 1795–1803. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2008.05.007. ISSN 0360-1315.
  55. ^ Lesko AC, Corpus JH (2006). "Discounting the Difficult: How High Math-Identified Women Respond to Stereotype Threat". Sex Roles. 54 (1–2): 113–125. doi:10.1007/s11199-005-8873-2. ISSN 0360-0025.
  56. ^ Cohen GL, Garcia J (2008). "Identity, Belonging, and Achievement: A Model, Interventions, Implications". Current Directions in Psychological Science. 17 (6): 365–369. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8721.2008.00607.x. ISSN 0963-7214.
  57. ^ Major B, Spencer S, Schmader T, Wolfe C, Crocker J (1998). "Coping with Negative Stereotypes about Intellectual Performance: The Role of Psychological Disengagement" (PDF). Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 24 (1): 34–50. doi:10.1177/0146167298241003. hdl:2027.42/68558. ISSN 0146-1672.
  58. ^ Najdowski CJ, Bottoms BL, Goff PA (October 2015). "Stereotype threat and racial differences in citizens' experiences of police encounters" (PDF). Law and Human Behavior. 39 (5): 463–77. doi:10.1037/lhb0000140. PMID 26030449.
  59. ^ Eberhardt JL, Goff PA, Purdie VJ, Davies PG (December 2004). "Seeing black: race, crime, and visual processing". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 87 (6): 876–93. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.486.8434. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.87.6.876. PMID 15598112.
  60. ^ Graham S, Lowery BS (October 2004). "Priming unconscious racial stereotypes about adolescent offenders". Law and Human Behavior. 28 (5): 483–504. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.595.3436. doi:10.1023/B:LAHU.0000046430.65485.1f. PMID 15638206.
  61. ^ Correll J, Park B, Judd CM, Wittenbrink B (December 2002). "The police officer's dilemma: using ethnicity to disambiguate potentially threatening individuals". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 83 (6): 1314–29. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.83.6.1314. PMID 12500813.
  62. ^ Correll J, Park B, Judd CM, Wittenbrink B (3 July 2007). "The influence of stereotypes on decisions to shoot" (PDF). European Journal of Social Psychology. 37 (6): 1102–1117. doi:10.1002/ejsp.450.
  63. ^ Correll J, Park B, Judd CM, Wittenbrink B, Sadler MS, Keesee T (June 2007). "Across the thin blue line: police officers and racial bias in the decision to shoot" (PDF). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 92 (6): 1006–23. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.92.6.1006. PMID 17547485.
  64. ^ Steele J, James JB, Barnett RC (2002). "Learning in a Man's World: Examining the Perceptions of Undergraduate Women in Male-Dominated Academic Areas". Psychology of Women Quarterly. 26 (1): 46–50. doi:10.1111/1471-6402.00042. ISSN 0361-6843.
  65. ^ Desikan, Shubashree (2016-08-23). "Math is awesome, math culture is terrible". The Hindu. ISSN 0971-751X. Retrieved 2019-10-13.
  66. ^ a b Inzlicht M, Kang SK (September 2010). "Stereotype threat spillover: how coping with threats to social identity affects aggression, eating, decision making, and attention" (PDF). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 99 (3): 467–81. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.600.1063. doi:10.1037/a0018951. PMID 20649368. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2012-03-06.
  67. ^ a b c Inzlicht M, Tullett AM, Gutsell JN (2012). "Stereotype threat spillover: The short- and long-term effects of coping with threats to social identity". In Inzlicht M, Schmader T (eds.). Stereotype threat: theory, process, and application. New York, New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 107–123. ISBN 9780199732449.
  68. ^ Williams DR, Mohammed SA (February 2009). "Discrimination and racial disparities in health: evidence and needed research". Journal of Behavioral Medicine. 32 (1): 20–47. doi:10.1007/s10865-008-9185-0. PMC 2821669. PMID 19030981.
  69. ^ Mouzon DM, McLean JS (February 2017). "Internalized racism and mental health among African-Americans, US-born Caribbean Blacks, and foreign-born Caribbean Blacks". Ethnicity & Health. 22 (1): 36–48. doi:10.1080/13557858.2016.1196652. PMID 27354264.
  70. ^ Brody GH, Chen YF, Murry VM, Ge X, Simons RL, Gibbons FX, et al. (2006). "Perceived discrimination and the adjustment of African American youths: a five-year longitudinal analysis with contextual moderation effects". Child Development. 77 (5): 1170–89. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2006.00927.x. PMID 16999791.
  71. ^ Greene ML, Way N, Pahl K (March 2006). "Trajectories of perceived adult and peer discrimination among Black, Latino, and Asian American adolescents: patterns and psychological correlates". Developmental Psychology. 42 (2): 218–36. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.42.2.218. PMID 16569162.
  72. ^ Pascoe EA, Smart Richman L (July 2009). "Perceived discrimination and health: a meta-analytic review". Psychological Bulletin. 135 (4): 531–54. doi:10.1037/a0016059. hdl:10161/11809. PMC 2747726. PMID 19586161.
  73. ^ Johns M, Schmader T, Martens A (March 2005). "Knowing is half the battle: teaching stereotype threat as a means of improving women's math performance" (PDF). Psychological Science. 16 (3): 175–9. doi:10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.00799.x. PMID 15733195.
  74. ^ Tomasetto C, Appoloni A (June 2013). "A lesson not to be learned? Understanding stereotype threat does not protect women from stereotype threat". Social Psychology of Education. 16 (2): 199–213. doi:10.1007/s11218-012-9210-6.
  75. ^ Aronson J, Fried CB, Good C (2002). "Reducing the Effects of Stereotype Threat on African American College Students by Shaping Theories of Intelligence". Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 38 (2): 113–125. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.411.6221. doi:10.1006/jesp.2001.1491. ISSN 0022-1031.
  76. ^ Good C, Aronson J, Inzlicht M (2003). "Improving Adolescents' Standardized Test Performance: An Intervention to Reduce the Effects of Stereotype Threat" (PDF). Journal of Applied Developmental Psycholoogy. 24 (6): 645–662. doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2003.09.002. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2012-04-26.
  77. ^ Cohen GL, Garcia J, Apfel N, Master A (September 2006). "Reducing the racial achievement gap: a social-psychological intervention". Science. 313 (5791): 1307–10. Bibcode:2006Sci...313.1307C. doi:10.1126/science.1128317. PMID 16946074.
  78. ^ Woolf K, McManus IC, Gill D, Dacre J (June 2009). "The effect of a brief social intervention on the examination results of UK medical students: a cluster randomised controlled trial". BMC Medical Education. 9: 35. doi:10.1186/1472-6920-9-35. PMC 2717066. PMID 19552810.
  79. ^ Walton GM, Cohen GL (January 2007). "A question of belonging: race, social fit, and achievement". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 92 (1): 82–96. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.320.7960. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.92.1.82. PMID 17201544.
  80. ^ Cheryan S, Plaut VC, Davies PG, Steele CM (December 2009). "Ambient belonging: how stereotypical cues impact gender participation in computer science". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 97 (6): 1045–60. doi:10.1037/a0016239. PMID 19968418.
  81. ^ Murphy M (2007). "Signaling Threat: How Situational Cues affect women in math, science and engineering settings". Psychological Science. 19: 879–885.
  82. ^ Purdie-Vaughns V, Steele CM, Davies PG, Ditlmann R, Crosby JR (April 2008). "Social identity contingencies: how diversity cues signal threat or safety for African Americans in mainstream institutions". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 94 (4): 615–30. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.468.8070. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.94.4.615. PMID 18361675.
  83. ^ Gresky D (2005). "Effects of Salient Multiple Identities on women's performance under mathematics stereotype threat". Sex Roles. 53 (9–10): 703–716. doi:10.1007/s11199-005-7735-2.
  84. ^ Mendoza-Denton R, Page-Gould E (September 2008). "Can cross-group friendships influence minority students' well-being at historically white universities?". Psychological Science. 19 (9): 933–9. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02179.x. PMID 18947360.
  85. ^ Johns M, Inzlicht M, Schmader T (November 2008). "Stereotype threat and executive resource depletion: examining the influence of emotion regulation". Journal of Experimental Psychology. General. 137 (4): 691–705. doi:10.1037/a0013834. PMC 2976617. PMID 18999361.
  86. ^ Yeager D (2011). "Social-Psychological interventions in education: They're not magic". Review of Educational Research. 81 (2): 267–301. doi:10.3102/0034654311405999.
  87. ^ L. Whaley, Arthur (2017). "Advances in stereotype threat research on African Americans: continuing challenges to the validity of its role in the achievement gap". Social Psychology of Education. 21 (1): 111–137. doi:10.1007/s11218-017-9415-9.
  88. ^ Sackett PR, Hardison CM, Cullen MJ (2004). "On the Value of Correcting Mischaracterizations of Stereotype Threat Research" (PDF). American Psychologist. 59 (1): 48–49. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.59.1.48. ISSN 1935-990X. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2016-03-04.
  89. ^ a b Steele, Claude M.; Aronson, Joshua A. (January 2004). "Stereotype threat does not live by Steele and Aronson (1995) alone". The American Psychologist. 59 (1): 47–48, discussion 48–49. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.59.1.47. ISSN 0003-066X. PMID 14736323.
  90. ^ Yerkes RM, Dodson JD (November 1908). "The relation of strength of stimulus to rapidity of habit-formation". Journal of Comparative Neurology and Psychology. 18 (5): 459–482. doi:10.1002/cne.920180503.
  91. ^ Jensen AR (1998), "Population differences in g: causal hypotheses", in Jensen AR (ed.), The g factor: the science of mental ability, Westport, Connecticut: Praeger, pp. 513–515, ISBN 9780275961039, the phenomenon of stereotype threat can be explained in terms of a more general construct, test anxiety, which has been studied since the early days of psychometrics. Test anxiety tends to lower performance levels on tests in proportion to the degree of complexity and the amount of mental effort they require of the subject. The relatively greater effect of test anxiety in the black samples, who had somewhat lower SAT scores, than the white subjects in the Stanford experiments constitutes an example of the Yerkes-Dodson law ... by conducting the same type of experiment using exclusively white (or black) subjects, divided into lower- and higher-ability groups, it might be shown that the phenomenon attributed to stereotype threat has nothing to do with race as such, but results from the interaction of ability level with test anxiety as a function of test complexity.
  92. ^ Diamond DM, Campbell AM, Park CR, Halonen J, Zoladz PR (2007). "The temporal dynamics model of emotional memory processing: a synthesis on the neurobiological basis of stress-induced amnesia, flashbulb and traumatic memories, and the Yerkes-Dodson law". Neural Plasticity. 2007: 60803. doi:10.1155/2007/60803. PMC 1906714. PMID 17641736. 60803.
  93. ^ Wei TE (October 2009). Stereotype threat, gender, and math performance: evidence from the national assessment of educational progress (web). Harvard University.
  94. ^ Stricker LJ, Ward WC (April 2004). "Stereotype threat, inquiring about test takers' ethnicity and gender, and standardized test performance". Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 34 (4): 665–693. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2004.tb02564.x.
  95. ^ Spencer, Steven J.; Logel, Christine; Davies, Paul G. (2016). "Stereotype Threat". Annual Review of Psychology. 67: 415–437. doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-073115-103235. ISSN 1545-2085. PMID 26361054.
  96. ^ "Is Stereotype Threat Overcooked, Overstated, and Oversold?". Psychology Today. Retrieved 2019-06-03.
  97. ^ Flore P, Mulder J, Wicherts J (2018). "The influence of gender stereotype threat on mathematics test scores of Dutch high school students: a registered report" (PDF). Comprehensive Results in Social Psychology. 3 (2): 140–174. doi:10.1080/23743603.2018.1559647.
  98. ^ a b Nussbaum, Dave (2018-02-01). "The replicability issue and stereotype threat research". Medium. Retrieved 2019-10-14.

Further reading

External links