Advertisement

Can we encourage girls’ mobility towards science-related careers? Disconfirming stereotype belief through expert influence

  • Leila Selimbegovic
  • Armand Chatard
  • Gabriel Mugny
Article

Abstract

A study was conducted to explore expert influence as a possible way to encourage girls’ mobility towards math- and science-related careers. High school students were exposed to an expert source presenting “scientific evidence” that contrary to stereotype, girls are better than boys in all subject domains. Beliefs related to stereotype content, self-evaluations and intentions to engage in math- and science-related careers were assessed before and after exposure to influence. While most participants were influenced at the level of stereotype content, only girls who did not personally believe the stereotype prior to influence, and boys who did, increased their intentions to engage in math/science-related careers. Implications of the findings are discussed, with an emphasis on the possible ways to influence girls who firmly believe in the stereotype.

Key words

Change and resistance Expert influence Stereotype belief Vocational choice 

Résumé

Une étude explore l’influence d’une source experte en tant que moyen susceptible d’encourager la mobilité des filles vers les carrières liées aux mathématiques et aux sciences. Des collégiens ont été exposés à un argumentaire scientifique défendu par une source experte et stipulant que, contrairement au stéréotype, les filles sont meilleures que les garçons dans toutes les matières scolaires. Les croyances reliées au stéréotype, les auto-évaluations et l’intention de s’engager dans des carrières liées aux mathématiques et aux sciences ont été mesurées avant et après l’exposition à l’influence. Alors que la plupart des sujets sont influencés au niveau du contenu du stéréotype, seules les filles qui ne croyaient pas au stéréotype et les garçons qui y croyaient avant l’exposition à l’influence ont augmenté leur intention de s’engager dans des carrières liées aux mathématiques et aux sciences. Les implications de ces résultats sont discutées, en mettant l’accent sur les manières possibles d’influencer les filles qui croient fermement au stéréotype.

References

  1. Allport, G.W., & Postman, L. (1947).The psychology of rumor. Oxford, England: Henry Holt.Google Scholar
  2. Chatard, A. (2005).La régulation des differences entre les femmes et les hommes: Approche de psychologie sociale. Universités de Genève et de Clermont-Ferrand: Thèse de doctorat n°360.Google Scholar
  3. Chatard, A., Guimond, S., & Martinot, D. (2005). Impact de la féminisation lexicale des professions sur l’auto-efficacité des élèves: Une remise en cause de l’universalisme masculin?L’Année Psychologique, 105, 249–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chatard, A., Guimond, S., & Selimbegovic, L. (2007). “How good are you in math at school?” The effect of gender stereotypes on students’ recollection of their school marks.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. Manuscript in press.Google Scholar
  5. Cohen, G.L., Steele, C.M., & Ross, L.D. (1999). The mentor’s dilemma: Providing critical feedback across the racial divide.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 1302–1318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cohen, G.L., Garcia, J., Apfel, N., & Master, A. (2006). Reducing the racial achievement gap: A social-psychological intervention.Science, 313, 1307–1310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Croizet, J.-C., & Levens, J.-P. (Eds.). (2003).Mauvaises réputations. Les réalités et les enjeux de la stigmatisation sociale. Paris: Colin.Google Scholar
  8. Davies, P.G., Spencer, S.J., Quinn, D.M., & Gerhardstein, R. (2002). Consuming images: How television commercials that elicit stereotype threat can restrain women academically and professionally.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1615–1628.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Deutsch, M., & Gerard, H.B. (1955). A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgment.Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, 51, 629–636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Désert, M., Croizet, J.-C., & Leyens, J.-P. (2002). La menace du stéréotype: Une interaction entre situation et identité.L’année Psychologique, 102, 555–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Duru-Bellat, M. (1991). La raison des filles: Choix d’orientation ou stratégies de compromis?Orientation scolaire et professionnelle, 3, 257–267.Google Scholar
  12. Ehrlinger, J., & Dunning, D. (2003). How chronic self-views influence (and potentially mislead) estimates of performance.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 5–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Falomir, J.M., & Mugny, G. (2004).Société contre fumeur. Une analyse psychosociale de l’influence des experts. Grenoble: Presses Universitaires.Google Scholar
  14. Falomir, J.M., Chatard, A., Mugny, G., & Quiamzade, A. (2007). Coping with stigmatization: smokers’ reactions to antismoking campaigns. In F. Butera & J. Levine (Eds.),Coping with minority status: Responses to exclusion and inclusion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Manuscript in press.Google Scholar
  15. Guimond, S., & Roussel, L. (2001). Bragging about one’s school grades: Gender stereotyping and students’ perception of their abilities in science, mathematics, and language.Social Psychology of Education, 4, 275–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Guimond, S., & Roussel, L. (2002). L’activation des stéréotypes de genre, l’évaluation de soi et l’orientation scolaire. In J.-L. Beauvois, R.-V. Joule & J.-M. Monteil (Eds.),Perspectives cognitives et conduites sociales (vol. 8, pp. 163–179). Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes.Google Scholar
  17. Higgins, E.T., Rholes, W.S., & Jones, C.R. (1977). Category accessibility and impression formation.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 141–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hyde, J.S., Fennema, E., & Lamon, S.J. (1990). Gender differences in mathematics performance: A meta-analysis.Psychological Bulletin, 107, 139–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. INSEE (2003).Institut National de la Statistique et des Etudes Economiques. Available at http://www.insee.fr/fr/home/home_page.aspGoogle Scholar
  20. Inzlicht, M. (2005).Stereotype threat and arousal. Paper presented at the 14th general meeting of the European association of experimental social psychology, Würzburg, 19–23.7.05.Google Scholar
  21. Jost, J.T., & Banaji, M.R. (1994). The role of stereotyping in system-justification and the production of false consciousness.British Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 1–27.Google Scholar
  22. Jost, J.T., & Kay, A.C. (2005). Exposure to benevolent sexism and complementary gender stereotypes: Consequences for specific and diffuse forms of system justification.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 498–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jost, J.T., Pelham, B.W., & Carvallo, M.R. (2002). Non-conscious forms of system justification: Implicit and behavioral preferences for higher status groups.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 586–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jost, J.T., Pelham, B.W., Sheldon, O., & Sullivan, B.N. (2003). Social inequality and the reduction of ideological dissonance on behalf of the system: Evidence of enhanced system justification among the disadvantaged.European Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 13–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kay, A.C., & Jost, J.T. (2003). Complementary justice: Effects of “Poor but happy” and “Poor but honest” stereotype exemplars on system justification and implicit activation of the justice motive.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 823–837.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Keller, J. (2005). In genes we trust: The biological component of psychological essentialism and its relationship to mechanisms of motivated social cognition.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(4), 686–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kelman, H.C. (1958). Compliance, identification and internalisation: Three processes of opinion change.Journal of Conflict Resolution, 2, 51–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kunda, Z., & Oleson, K.C. (1995). Maintaining stereotypes in the face of disconfirmation: Constructing grounds for subtyping deviants.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 565–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Latane, B. (1981). The psychology of social impact.American Psychologist, 36, 343–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Marx, D.M., & Roman, J.S. (2002). Female role models: Protecting women’s math test performance.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1183–1193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Merton, R.K. (1948). The bearing of empirical research upon the development of social theory.American Sociological Review, 13, 505–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral study of obedience.Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 371–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Monteil, J.-M., & Huguet, P. (1999). Social context and cognitive performance: Towards a social psychology of cognition.European monographs in social psychology. Hove, England: Psychology Press/Taylor & Francis (UK).Google Scholar
  34. Moscovici, S. (1980). Toward a theory of conversion behaviour. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.),Advances in experimental social psychology (vol. 13). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  35. Mugny, G., Moliner, P., & Flament, C. (1997). De la pertinence des processus d’influence sociale dans la dynamique des représentations sociales.Revue Internationale de Psychologie Sociale, 10, 31–49.Google Scholar
  36. Mussweiler, T. (2003). Comparison processes in social judgment: Mechanisms and consequences.Psychological Review, 110, 472–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Nelson, T.D. (2002).The psychology of prejudice. Needham Heights, MA, US: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  38. Nosek, B.A., Banaji, M.R., & Greenwald, A.J. (2002). Math=male, me=female, therefore math not-equal-to me.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 44–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Quiamzade, A., Mugny, G., Dragulescu, A., & Buchs, C. (2003). Interaction styles and expert social influence.European Journal of Psychology of Education, 18, 389–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rasinski, K.A., Tyler, T.R., & Fridkin, K. (1985). Exploring the function of legitimacy: Mediating effects of personal and institutional legitimacy on leadership endorsement and system support.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 386–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Régner, I., & Loose, F. (2006). Relationship of socio-cultural factors and academic self-esteem to school grades and school disengagement in North African French adolescents.British Journal of Social Psychology, 45, 777–797.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rosenthal, H.E.S., & Crisp, R.J. (2006). Reducing stereotype threat by blurring intergroup boundaries.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 501–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rosenthal, R., & Jacobson, J.L. (1968).Pygmalion in the classroom: Teacher expectation and pupils’ intellectual development. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, Inc.Google Scholar
  44. Rosenwald, F. (2006). Filles et garçons dans le système éducatif depuis vingt ans.INSEE, Données sociales — Société française. Available at http://www.insee.fr/fr/home/home_page.aspGoogle Scholar
  45. Schachter, S., & Singer, J. (1962). Cognitive, social, and physiological determinants of emotional state.Psychological Review, 69, 379–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Schmader, T., Johns, M., & Barquissau, M. (2004). The costs of accepting gender differences: The role of stereotype endorsement in women’s experience in the math domain.Sex Roles, 50, 835–850.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999).Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Sinclair, S., Hardin, C.D., & Lowery, B.S. (2006). Self-stereotyping in the context of multiple social identities.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 529–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Steele, C.M. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance.American Psychologist, 52, 613–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Steele, C.M., & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 797–811.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Steele, C.M., Spencer, S.J., & Aronson, J. (2002). Contending with group image: The psychology of stereotype and social identity threat. In M.P. Zanna (Ed.),Advances in experimental social psychology (vol. 34, pp. 379–440). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  52. Steinberg, L. (1996).Beyond the classroom. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  53. Wilson, E.J., & Sherrell, D.L. (1993). Source effects in communication and persuasion research: A meta-analysis of effect size.Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 21, 101–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Word, C.O., Zanna, M.P., & Cooper, J. (1974). The nonverbal mediation of self-fulfilling prophecies in interracial interaction.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 10, 109–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Instituto Superior de Psicologia Aplicada, Lisbon, Portugal/ Springer Netherlands 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Leila Selimbegovic
    • 1
  • Armand Chatard
    • 2
  • Gabriel Mugny
    • 2
  1. 1.University of Paris 5France
  2. 2.F.P.S.E.University of GenevaGenèveSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations