Strength in numbers? Women and mathematics

  • Ann Beaton
  • Francine Tougas
  • Natalie Rinfret
  • Nathalie Huard
  • Marie-Noëlle Delisle
Article

Abstract

Two studies were conducted to test the link between numerical distinctiveness, stereotype threat and mathematical performance among women. In the first study, stereotype threat was measured with a stereotype activation task. Women in a solo, non-solo or control condition completed word fragments and a mathematical activity. Solo women, rather than their non-solo counterparts showed mathematical performance deficits. Evidence did not support the mediating role of stereotype activation. In the second study, stereotype anxiety was assessed. According to analyses, solo women reported greater stereotype-related anxiety than non-solo women. A link between stereotype anxiety and mathematical performance deficits was also uncovered. Finally, mathematical underperformance was associated with greater interest in feminine activities. Strategies to buffer the effects of stereotype threat are discussed.

Key words

Gender stereotypes Stereotype threat Women and mathematics 

Résumé

Deux études ont été menées dans le but d’évaluer le lien entre la force numérique, la menace du stéréotype et le rendement à une tâche de mathématiques chez les femmes. Dans la première étude, la menace du stéréotype a été mesurée en fonction d’une tâche d’activation des stéréotypes. Les femmes dans les conditions “solo”, “non-solo” et contrôle ont complété des mots et une tâche de mathématiques. En comparaison aux femmes des autres groupes, celles dans la condition “solo” ont moins bien réussi la tâche en mathématiques. L’hypothèse de l’effet médiateur de la menace du stéréotype n’a pas été appuyée. Dans la deuxième étude, l’anxiété associée au stéréotype a été évaluée. Selon les analyses, les femmes dans la condition “solo” ont éprouvé davantage d’anxiété associée au stéréotype que celles assignées à la condition “non-solo”. Un lien a été obtenu entre l’anxiété associée au stéréotype et la contre-performance à la tâche de mathématiques. Enfin, la contre-performance en mathématiques est associée à l’intérêt dirigé vers des activités féminines. Les stratégies visant à réduire les effets de la menace du stéréotype sont discutées.

References

  1. Aronson, J. (2002). Stereotype threat: Contending and coping with unnerving expectations. In J. Aronson (Ed.),Improving academic achievement: Impact of psychological factors on education (pp. 279–301). New York: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aronson, J., Quinn, D.M., & Spencer, S.J. (1998). Stereotype threat and the academic underperformance of minorities and women. In J.K. Swim & C. Stangor (Eds.),Prejudice: The target’s perspective (pp. 83–103). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  3. Aronson, J., Lustina, M.J., Good, C., Keough, K., Steele, C.M., & Brown, J. (1999). When white men can’t do math: Necessary and sufficient factors in stereotype threat.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 29–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baudot, J. (1992).Fréquence d’utilisation des mots en français écrit contemporain. Montréal: Presses de l’Université de Montréal.Google Scholar
  5. Beaton, A.M., & McKay, K. (2006).Naviguer dans les torrents: Résilience professionnelle et réactions à la discrimination en emploi. In S. Guérard & P. Pailot (Eds.),La gestion des ressources humaines (GRH) publique en questions: Une perspective internationale (sous presse).Google Scholar
  6. Ben-Zeev, T., Fein, S., & Inzlicht, M. (2005). Arousal and stereotype threat.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 174–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brown, R.P., & Josephs, R.A. (1999). A burden of proof: Stereotype relevance and gender differences in math performance.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 246–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Canadian Association of University Teachers (2005).CAUT almanac of post-secondary education in Canada 2005. Ottawa, Ontario.Google Scholar
  9. Canadian Coalition of Women in Engineering, Science, Trades and Technology (2004).Women in SETT (Science, Engineering, Trades and Technology) building communities (Phase 1 final report). (online) Retrieved March 15, 2006, from http://www.ccwestt.org/sett.asp#objectivesGoogle Scholar
  10. Cejka, M.A., & Eagly, A.H. (1999). Gender stereotypic images of occupations correspond to the sex segregation of employment.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 413–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cohen, L.L., & Swim, J.K. (1995). The differential impact of gender ratios on women and men: Tokenism, self-confidence, and expectations.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 876–884.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dambrun, M., & Taylor, D.M. (2005). “Race”, sex and social class differences in cognitive ability; Towards a contextual rather than genetic explanation.Current Research in Social Psychology, 10, 188–202.Google Scholar
  13. Davies, P.G., & Spencer, S.J. (2005). The gender-gap artefact. Women’s underperformance in quantitative domains through the lens of stereotype threat. In A.M. Gallagher & J.C. Kaufman (Eds.),Gender differences in mathematics: An integrative psychological approach (pp. 172–188). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  14. 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
  15. Department for Education and Skills (2004).GCSE/GNVQ and Key Stage 3 to GCSE/GNVQ value added measures for young people in England, 2002/03 (SFR 24/2004). London. (online) Retrieved August 15, 2006 from: http:/www.dfes.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000671/index.shtmlGoogle Scholar
  16. Désert, M., Croizet, J.-C., & Leyens, J.-Ph. (2002). La menace du stéréotype: Une interaction entre situation et identité.L’Année Psychologique, 102, 555–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fuegen, K., & Biernat, M. (2002). Reexamining the effects of solo status for women and men.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 913–925.Google Scholar
  18. Gilbert, D.T., & Hixon, J.G. (1991). The trouble of thinking: Activation and application of stereotypic beliefs.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 509–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Government of Canada (2002).Knowledge matters: Skills and learning for Canadians. (online). Retrieved March 15, 2006 from http://www.carl-abrc.ca/projects/innovation_strategy/innovation_strategy-e.htmlGoogle Scholar
  20. 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
  21. Inzlicht, M., & Ben-Zeev, T. (2000). A threatening intellectual environment: Why females are susceptible to experiencing problem-solving deficits in the presence of males.Psychologycal Science, 11, 365–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Inzlicht, M., & Ben-Zeev, T. (2003). Do high-achieving female underperform in private? The implications of threatening environments on intellectual processing.Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 796–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Inzlicht, M., & Good, C. (2006). How environments can threaten academic performance, self-knowledge, and sense of belonging. In S. Levin & C. van Laar (Eds.),Stigma and group inequality: Social Psychological perspectives (pp. 129–150). Mahway, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  24. Inzlicht, M., Aronson, J., Good, C., & McKay, L. (2006). A particular resiliency to threatening environments.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 323–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kanter, R.M. (1977).Men and women of the corporation. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  26. Lord, C.G., & Saenz, D.S. (1985). Memory deficits and memory surfeits: Differential cognitive consequences of tokenism for tokens and abservers.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 918–926.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. O’Brien, L.T., & Hummert, M.L. (2006). Memory performance of late middle-aged adults: Contrasting self-stereotyping and stereotype threat accounts of assimilation to age stereotypes.Social Cognition, 24, 338–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Organisation de coopération et de développement économiques (2004).Science, technologie et industrie: Perspectives de l’OCDE (online) Retrieved March 15, 2006 from: http://www.oecd.org/document/60/0,2340,fr_2649 33703_34003516_1_1_1_1,00.htmlGoogle Scholar
  29. Panteli, N., Stack, J., & Ramsay, H. (2001). Gendered patterns in computing work in the late 1990s.New Technology, Work and Employment, 16, 3–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pronin, E., Steele, C.M., & Ross, L. (2004). Identity bifurcation in response to stereotype threat: Women and mathematics.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 152–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Quinn, D.M., & Spencer, S.J. (2001). The interference of stereotype threat with women’s generation of mathematical problem-solving strategies.Journal of Social Issues, 57, 55–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 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
  33. Saenz, D.S. (1994). Token status and problem-solving deficits: Detrimental effects of distinctiveness and performance monitoring.Social Cognition, 12, 61–74.Google Scholar
  34. Sekaquaptewa, D., & Thompson, M. (2002). The differential effects of solo status on members of high- and low-status groups.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 694–707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sekaquaptewa, D., & Thompson, M. (2003). Solo status, stereotype threat, and performance expectancies: Their effects on women’s performance.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 68–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Simpkins, S.D., Davis-Kean, P.E., & Eccles, J.S. (2006). Math and science motivation: A longitudinal examination of the links between choices and beliefs.Developmental Psychology, 42, 70–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Spelke, E.S. (2005). Sex differences in intrinsic aptitude for mathematics and science? A critical review.American Psychologist, 60, 950–958.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Stangor, C., Carr, C., & Kiang, L. (1998). Activating stereotypes undermines task performance expectations.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 1191–1197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Statistics Canada (2001).Education in Canada 2000. (Catalogue no. 81-229-XPB). Ottawa, ON: Minister of Industry.Google Scholar
  40. Steele, C.M. (1997). A threat in the air. How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance.American Psychologist, 52, 613–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 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
  42. Steele, J., James, J.B., & Barnett, R.C. (2002). Learning in a man’s world: Examining the perceptions of undergraduate women in male-dominated academic areas.Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26, 46–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Steele, C.M., Spencer, S., & Aronson, J. (2002). Contending with images of one’s group: The psychology of stereotype and social identity threat. In M. Zanna (Ed.).Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (vol. 34, pp. 379–440). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  44. Taylor, S.E. (1981). A categorization approach to stereoytpinig. In D.L. Hamilton (Ed.),Cognitive processes in stereotyping and intergroup behaviour (pp. 83–114). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  45. Taylor, S.E., Fiske, S.T., Etcoff, N.L., & Ruderman, A.J. (1978). Categorical and contextual bases of person memory and stereotyping.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 778–793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. U.S. Department of Education (2005).Digest of education statistics tables and figures. (online) Retrieved August 15, 2006 from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d05/tables/dt05_176.aspGoogle Scholar
  47. Vallerand, R.J. (1989). Vers une méthodologie de validation transculturelle de questionnaires psychologiques: Implications pour la recherche en langue française.Psychologie Canadienne, 30, 662–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wheeler, S.C., & Petty, R.E. (2001). The effects of stereotype activation on behaviour: A review of possible mechanisms.Psychological Bulletin, 127, 797–826.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Williams, J.E., & Best, D.L. (1982).Measuring sex stereotypes: A thirty-nation study. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  50. Yoder, J.D. (2002). Context matters: Understanding tokenism processes and their impact on women’s work.Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

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

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ann Beaton
    • 1
  • Francine Tougas
    • 2
  • Natalie Rinfret
    • 3
  • Nathalie Huard
    • 4
  • Marie-Noëlle Delisle
    • 5
  1. 1.School of psychologyUniversité de MonctonMonctonCanada
  2. 2.School of PsychologyUniversity of OttawaOttawaCanada
  3. 3.Département de l’enseignement et de la rechercheÉcole nationale d’administration publiqueQuébecCanada
  4. 4.M.A.Ps. École de psychologieUniversité de MonctonMonctonCanada
  5. 5.École de psychologieUniversité LavalSte-Foy

Personalised recommendations