European Journal of Psychology of Education

, Volume 30, Issue 3, pp 269–280 | Cite as

Using implicit measures to highlight science teachers’ implicit theories of intelligence

Article

Abstract

Using an innovative method, a Single-Target Implicit Association Test (ST-IAT) was created to explore the implicit theories of intelligence among science and liberal arts teachers and their relationships with their gender. The results showed that for science teachers—especially for male teachers—there was a negative implicit association between “intelligence” and “modifiable” stimuli, whereas liberal arts teachers had no implicit association between these two variables. The results are discussed in comparison with previous explicit measures, and the implications for teacher training are highlighted.

Keywords

Implicit theories of intelligence Single-target implicit association test Teachers Science Mathematics Gender 

References

  1. Banaji, M., & Greenwald, A. G. (1994). Implicit stereotyping and prejudice. In M. P. Zanna & J. M. Olson (Eds.), The Psychology of prejudice: The Ontario symposium (Vol. 7, pp. 55–76). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  2. Banaji, M. R., & Hardin, C. D. (1996). Automatic stereotyping. Psychological Science, 7(3), 136–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Banaji, M. R., Lemm, K. M., & Carpenter, S. J. (2001). The social unconscious. In A. Tesser & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social psychology (Intraindividual processes, Vol. 1, pp. 134–158). Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  4. Beach, D. (2003). Mathematics goes to market. In D. Beach, T. Gordon, & E. Lahelma (Eds.), Democratic education—ethnographic challenges. London: Tufnell Press.Google Scholar
  5. Beach, D., & Dovemark, M. (2007). Education and the commodity problem: ethnographic investigations of creativity and performativity in Swedish schools. London: Tufnell Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bem, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42(2), 155–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bluemke, M., & Friese, M. (2006). Do features of stimuli influence IAT effects? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 163–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bluemke, M., & Friese, M. (2008). Reliability and validity of the Single‐Target IAT (ST‐IAT): assessing automatic affect towards multiple attitude objects. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38(6), 977–997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bråten, I., & Stromso, H. I. (2004). Epistemological beliefs and implicit theories of intelligence as predictors of achievement goals. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29(4), 371–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Butler, R. (2000). Making judgments about ability: the role of implicit theories of ability in moderating inferences from temporal and social comparison information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 965–978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Calderhead, J. (1996). Teachers: beliefs and knowledge. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 709–725). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  12. Carr, P. B., & Dweck, C. S. (2011). Intelligence and motivation. In R. J. Sternberg & S. B. Kaufman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of intelligence (pp. 748–770). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Crosby, F., Bromley, S., & Saxe, L. (1980). Recent unobtrusive studies of black and white discrimination and prejudice: a literature review. Psychological Bulletin, 87, 546–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Crowne, D. P., & Marlowe, D. (1960). A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 24, 349–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cunningham, W. A., Preacher, K. J., & Banaji, M. R. (2001). Implicit attitude measures: consistency, stability, and convergent validity. Psychological Science, 12(2), 163–170.Google Scholar
  16. Cury, F., Elliot, A. J., Da Fonseca, D., & Moller, A. C. (2006). The social-cognitive model of achievement motivation and the 2 × 2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 666–679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cvencek, D., Andrew, N., Meltzoff, A. N., & Greenwald, A. G. (2011). Math–gender stereotypes in elementary school children. Child Development, 82(3), 766–779.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Deemer, S. A. (2004). Classroom goal orientation in high school classrooms: revealing links between teacher beliefs and classroom environments. Educational Research, 46, 73–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dislich, F. X. R., Imhoff, R., Banse, R., Altstötter-Gleich, C., Zinkernagel, A., & Schmitt, M. (2012). Discrepancies between implicit and explicit self-concepts of intelligence predict performance on tests of intelligence. European Journal of Personality, 26, 212–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dweck, C. S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41, 1040–1048.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dweck, C. S. (1999). Self-theories: their role in motivation, personality, and development. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  22. Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95, 256–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dweck, C. S., & Molden, D. C. (2005). Self-theories: their impact on competence motivation and acquisition. In A. Elliot & C. S. Dweck (Eds.), The Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 122–140). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  24. Dweck, C. S., & Sorich, L. (1999). Mastery-oriented thinking. In C. R. Snyder (Ed.), Coping (pp. 232–251). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Else-Quest, N. M., Hyde, J. S., & Linn, M. C. (2010). Cross-national patterns of gender differences in mathematics: a meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 103–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Frome, P. M., & Eccles, J. S. (1998). Parents’ influence on children’s achievement-related perceptions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 435–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Fujii, T., & Uebuchi, H. (2010). Assessment of participants' theories of intelligence: reliability and validity of the implicit association test. Japanese Journal of Educational Psychology, 58(3), 263–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gonida, E., Kosseoglou, G., & Leondari, A. (2006). Implicit theories of intelligence, perceived academic competence, and school achievement: testing alternative models. American Journal of Psychology, 119(2), 223–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Good, C., Aronson, J., & Inzlicht, M. (2003). Improving adolescents’ standardized test performance: an intervention to reduce the effects of stereotype threat. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 24, 645–662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Good, C., Rattan, A., & Dweck, C. S. (2012). Why do women opt out? Sense of belonging and women’s representation in mathematics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(4), 700–717.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (1995). Implicit social cognition: attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Psychological Review, 102, 4–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Greenwald, A. G., & Farnham, S. D. (2000). Using the implicit association test to measure self-esteem and self-concept. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 1022–1038.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Greenwald, A. G., Banaji, M. R., Rudman, L. A., Farnham, S. D., Nosek, B. A., & Mellott, D. S. (2002). A unified theory of implicit attitudes, stereotypes, self-esteem, and self-concept. Psychological Review, 109, 3–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. K. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: the implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1464–1480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Greenwald, A. G., Nosek, B. A., & Banaji, M. R. (2003). Understanding and using the implicit association test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 197–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Greenwald, A. G., Poehlman, T. A., Uhlmann, E. L., & Banaji, M. R. (2009). Understanding and using the implicit association test: III. Meta-analysis of predictive validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(1), 17–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hofmann, W., Gawronski, B., Gschwendner, T., Le, H., & Schmitt, M. (2005). A meta-analysis on the correlation between the implicit association test and explicit self-report measures. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(10), 1369–1385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Jonsson, A. C., & Beach, D. (2010). Reproduction of social class in teacher education: the influence of scientific theories on future teachers' implicit beliefs. Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies, 8(2).Google Scholar
  39. Jonsson, A. C., Beach, D., Korp, H., & Erlandson, P. (2012). Teacher’s implicit theories of intelligence: influences from different disciplines and scientific theories. European Journal of Teacher Education, 35(4), 387–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Karpinski, A., & Steinman, R. B. (2006). The single category implicit association test (SC-IAT) as a measure of implicit social cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 16–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kiefer, A. K., & Sekaquaptewa, D. (2007). Implicit stereotypes, gender identification, and math-related outcomes: a prospective study of female college students. Psychological Science, 18, 13–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Lepore, L., & Brown, R. (1997). Category and stereotype activation: is prejudice inevitable? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(2), 275.Google Scholar
  43. Leroy, N., Bressoux, P., Sarrazin, P., & Trouilloud, D. (2007). Impact of teachers’ implicit theories and perceived pressures on the establishment of an autonomy supportive climate. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 22(4), 529–545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Li, Q. (1999). Teachers’ beliefs and gender differences in mathematics: a review. Educational Research, 41, 63–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lindberg, S. M., Hyde, J. S., Petersen, J. L., & Linn, M. C. (2010). New trends in gender and mathematics performance: a meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 1123–1135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Liu, M., Hu, W., Jiannong, S., & Adey, P. (2010). Gender stereotyping and affective attitudes towards science in Chinese secondary school students. International Journal of Science Education, 32(3), 379–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Midgley, C., Feldlaufer, H., & Eccles, J. (1988). The transition to junior high school: beliefs of pre-and post-transition teachers. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 17, 543–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Muis, K. R. (2004). Personal epistemology and mathematics: a critical review and synthesis of research. Review of Educational Research, 74(3), 317–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Murrone, J., & Gynther, M. (1991). Teachers’ implicit “theories” of children’s intelligence. Psychological Reports, 69, 1195–1201.Google Scholar
  50. Myers, M. D., Nichols, J. D., & White, J. (2003). Teacher and student incremental and entity views of intelligence. The effects of self-regulation and persistence activities. International Journal of Educational Reform, 12(2), 97–117.Google Scholar
  51. Nosek, B. A., & Banaji, M. R. (2001). The go/no-go association task. Social Cognition, 19, 625–664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Nosek, B. A., Banaji, M. R., & Greenwald, A. G. (2002a). Math = male, me = female, therefore math ≠ me. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(1), 44–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Nosek, B. A., Banaji, M. R., & Greenwald, A. G. (2002b). Harvesting implicit group attitudes and beliefs from a demonstration web site. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 6(1), 101–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Nosek, B. A., Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (2005). Understanding and using the implicit association test: II. Method variables and construct validity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(2), 166–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Nosek, B. A., Smyth, F. L., Sriram, N., Lindner, N. M., Devos, T., Ayala, A., et al. (2009). National differences in gender-science stereotypes predict national sex differences in science and math achievement. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 106, 10593–10597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: a review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1049–1079.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Park, L. E., Cook, K. E., & Greenwald, A. G. (2001). Implicit indicators of women’s persistence in math, science, and engineering. Psi Chi Journal of Undergraduate Research, 6, 145–152.Google Scholar
  59. Plaks, J. E., Stroessner, S. J., Dweck, C. S., & Sherman, J. W. (2001). Person theories and attention allocation: preferences for stereotypic versus counterstereotypic information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 876–893.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Plaut, V. C., & Markus, H. R. (2005). The “inside” story: a cultural-historical analysis of being smart and motivated, American style. In A. J. Elliot & C. S. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 457–488). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  61. Rattan, A., Good, C., & Dweck, C. S. (2012). “It’s ok—Not everyone can be good at math”: instructors with an entity theory comfort (and demotivate) students. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 731–737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Rosenthal, R., & Jacobson, L. (1992). Pygmalion in the classroom. New York: Irvington.Google Scholar
  63. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1989). Explorations of students' mathematical beliefs and behavior. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20, 338–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Shim, S. S., Cho, Y. J., & Cassady, J. (2013). Goal structure: the role of teacher’s achievement goals and theories of intelligence. The Journal of Experimental Education, 81(1), 84–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Stipek, D. J., Givvin, K. B., Salmon, J. M., & MacGyvers, V. L. (2001). Teachers’ beliefs and practices related to mathematics instruction. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(2), 213–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Stipek, D., & Gralinski, H. (1991). Gender differences in children's achievement-related beliefs and emotional responses to success and failure in mathematics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 361–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Trouilloud, D., Sarrazin, P., & Bois, J. (2006). Teacher expectation effects on student perceived competence in physical education classes: autonomy-supportive climate as a moderator. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(1), 75–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Wigboldus, D. H. J., Holland, R. W., & van Knippenberg, A. (2004). Single target implicit associations. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Instituto Superior de Psicologia Aplicada, Lisboa, Portugal and Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nicolas Mascret
    • 1
  • Peggy Roussel
    • 1
  • François Cury
    • 1
  1. 1.Aix Marseille UniversitéMarseilleFrance

Personalised recommendations