Sex Roles

, Volume 53, Issue 9–10, pp 703–716 | Cite as

Effects of Salient Multiple Identities on Women's Performance Under Mathematics Stereotype Threat

  • Dana M. Gresky
  • Laura L. Ten Eyck
  • Charles G. Lord
  • Rusty B. McIntyre
Article

Abstract

Previous research on affective extremity and social identity complexity suggested that women's mathematics stereotype threat might be alleviated by reminding individual women of their multiple roles and identities, most of which would presumably be unrelated and thus impervious to negative stereotypes regarding math performance. To test this hypothesis, we primed the relevant stereotype and then asked men and women college students to draw self-concept maps with many or few nodes. When they drew no maps or maps with few nodes, highly math-identified women scored significantly worse than highly math-identified men on a subsequent Graduate Record Examination-like math test, but when they drew maps with many nodes, they scored as well as those men. Theoretical and practical implications of the results are discussed.

Key Words

stereotype threat social identity self-complexity 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ambady, N., Paik, S. K., Steele, J., Owen-Smith, A., & Mitchell, J. P. (2003). Deflecting negative self-relevant stereotype activation: The effects of individuation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 401–408.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, J. R. (1985). The architecture of cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Aronson, J., Fried, C. B., & 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, 113–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 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
  5. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  6. Blascovich, J., Spencer, S. J., Quinn, D., & Steele, C. (2001). African Americans and high blood pressure: The role of stereotype threat. Psychological Science, 12, 225–229.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brewer, M. B. (1991). The social self: On being the same and different at the same time. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 475–482.Google Scholar
  8. Brissette, I., Scheier, M. F., & Carver C. S. (2002). The role of optimism in social network development, coping, and psychological adjustment during a life transition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 102–111.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 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
  10. Brown, R. P., & Pinel, E. C. (2003). Stigma on my mind: Individual differences in the experience of stereotype threat. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 626–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bussey, K., & Bandura, A. (1999). Social cognitive theory of gender development and differentiation. Psychological Review, 106, 676–713.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cadinu, M., Maass, A., Frigerio, S., Impagliazzo, L., & Latinotti, S. (2003). Stereotype threat: The effect of expectancy on performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33, 267–285.Google Scholar
  13. Cohen, S. (1988). Psychosocial models of the role of social support in the etiology of physical disease. Health Psychology, 7, 269–297.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Conway, M., Carroll, J. M., Pushkar, D., & Arbuckle, T. (1996). Anticipated interaction, individual differences in attentional resources, and elaboration of behavior. Social Cognition, 14, 338–366.Google Scholar
  15. Crocker, J., Luhtanen, R. K., Cooper, M. L., & Bouvrette, A. (2003). Contingencies of self-worth in college students: Theory and measurement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 894–908.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Croizet, J., & Claire, T. (1998). Extending the concept of stereotype threat to social class: The intellectual underperformance of students from low socioeconomic backgrounds. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 6, 588–594.Google Scholar
  17. 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
  18. Ford, T. E., Ferguson, M. A., Brooks, J. L., & Hagadone, K. M. (2004). Coping sense of humor reduces effects of stereotype threat on women's math performance. Personality and Social Psychology, 30, 643–653.Google Scholar
  19. Gonzales, P. M., Blanton, H., & Williams, K. J. (2002). The effects of stereotype threat and double-minority status on the test performance of women. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 659–670.Google Scholar
  20. Gove, W. (1972). The relationship between sex roles, marital status, and mental illness. Social Forces, 51, 34–44.Google Scholar
  21. Holley, C. D., & Dansereau, D. F. (1984). Spatial learning strategies: Techniques, applications, and related issues. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  22. 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, 365–371.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Inzlicht, M., & Ben-Zeev, T. (2003). Do high-achieving females underperform in private? The implications of threatening environments on intellectual processing. Journal of Educational Processing, 95, 796–805.Google Scholar
  24. Keller, J. (2002). Blatant stereotype threat and women's math performance: Self-handicapping as a strategic means to cope with obtrusive negative performance expectations. Sex Roles, 47, 193–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Keller, J., & Dauenheimer, D. (2003). Stereotype threat in the classroom: Dejection mediates the disrupting effect on women's math performance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 371–381.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  27. Leyens, J. Ph., Désert, M., Croizet, J.-C., & Darcis, C. (2000). Stereotype threat: Are lower status and history of stigmatization preconditions for stereotype threat? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1189–1199.Google Scholar
  28. Lickel, B., Hamilton, D. L., Wieczorkowska, G., Lewis, A., Sherman, S. J., & Uhles, A. N. (2000). Varieties of groups and the perception of group entitativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 223–246.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Linville, P. W. (1985). Self-complexity and affective extremity: Don't put all of your eggs into one cognitive basket. Social Cognition, 3, 94–120.Google Scholar
  30. Linville, P. W. (1987). Self-complexity as a cognitive buffer against stress-related illness and depression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 663–676.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Linville, P. W., & Carlston, D. E. (1994). Social cognition of the self. In P. G. Devine & D. L. Hamilton (Eds.), Social cognition: Impact on social psychology (pp. 143–193). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  32. Linville, P. W., & Jones, E. E. (1980). Polarized appraisals of out-group members. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 689–703.Google Scholar
  33. 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, 34–50.Google Scholar
  34. Marx, D. M., & Roman, J. S. (2002). Female role models: Protecting women's math test performance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1183–1193.Google Scholar
  35. McGuire, W. J., & McGuire, C. V. (1988). Content and process in the experience of the self. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 21, pp. 97–144). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  36. McIntyre, R. B., Paulson, R. M., & Lord, C. G. (2003). Alleviating women's mathematics stereotype threat through salience of group achievements. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 83–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mickelson, K. D. (2001). Perceived stigma, social support, and depression. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1046–1056.Google Scholar
  38. O'Brien, L. T., & Crandall, C. S. (2003). Stereotype threat and arousal: Effects on women's math performance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 782–789.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 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
  40. 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
  41. Radloff, L. (1975). Sex differences in depression. Sex Roles, 1, 249–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rafaeli-Mor, E., & Steinberg, J. (2002). Self-complexity and well-being: A review and research synthesis. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6, 31–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Reevy, G. M., & Maslach, C. (2001). Use of social support: Gender and personality differences. Sex Roles, 44, 437–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Roccas, S. (2001). The effects of identification with multiple groups. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 351–366.Google Scholar
  45. Roccas, S. (2003). Identification and status revisited: The moderating role of self-enhancement and self-transcendence values. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 726–736.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Roccas, S., & Brewer, M. B. (2002). Social identity complexity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6, 88–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Rothgerber, H. (1997). External intergroup threat as an antecedent to perceptions in in-group and out-group homogeneity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1206–1212.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Sanna, L. J., & Pusecker, P. A. (1994). Self-efficacy, valence of self-evaluation, and performance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 82–92.Google Scholar
  49. Sarason, B. R., Sarason, I. G., & Gurung, R. A. R. (1997). Close personal relationships and health outcomes: A key to the role of social support. In B. R. Sarason, & S. W. Duck (Eds.), Personal relationships: Implications for clinical and community psychology (pp. 15–41). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  50. Schmader, T. (2002). Gender identification moderates stereotype threat effects on women's math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 194–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Schmader, T., & Johns, M. (2003). Converging evidence that stereotype threat reduces working memory capacity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 440–452.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 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
  53. Seeman, T. E. (1996). Social ties and health: The benefits of social integration. Annals of Epidemiology, 6, 442–451.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Shih, M., Pittinsky, T. L., & Ambady, N. (1999). Stereotype susceptibility: Identity salience and shifts in quantitative performance. Psychological Science, 10, 80–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Smith, J. L., & White, P. H. (2001). Development of the domain identification measure: A tool for investigating stereotype threat effects. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 61, 1040–1057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Smith, J. L., & White, P. H. (2002). An examination of implicitly activated, explicitly activated, and nullified stereotypes on mathematical performance: It's not just a woman's issue. Sex Roles, 47, 179–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Spencer, S. J., Steele, C. M., & Quinn, D. M. (1999). Stereotype threat and women's math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 4–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Steele, C. A., & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 797–811.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Steele, C. M. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance. American Psychologist, 52, 613–629.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Steele, C. M. (1998). Stereotyping and its threat are real. American Psychologist, 53, 680–681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Steele, C. M., Spencer, S. J., & Aronson, J. (2002). Contending with group image: 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
  62. Stone, J., Lynch, C. I., Sjomeling, M., & Darley, J. M. (1999). Stereotype threat effects on Black and White athletic performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1213–1227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Stricker, L. J., & Ward, W. C. (2004). Stereotype threat, inquiring about test takers' ethnicity and gender, and standardized test performance. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34, 665–693.Google Scholar
  64. Stryker, S., & Statham, A. (1985). Symbolic interaction and role theory. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (pp. 311–378). New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  65. Tajfel, H. (1978). Interindividual behavior and intergroup behavior. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of group relations (pp. 27–60). London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  66. Taylor, S. E., Sherman, D. K., Kim, H. S., Jareho, J., Takagi, K., & Dunagan M. S. (2004). Culture and social support: Who seeks it and why? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 354–362.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Thoits, P. A. (1983). Multiple identities and psychological well-being: A reformulation and test of the social isolation hypothesis. American Sociological Review, 48, 174–187.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. Turner, J. C. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  69. Walsh, M., Hickey, C., & Duffy, J. (1999). Influence of item content and stereotype situation on gender differences in mathematical problem solving. Sex Roles, 41, 219–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Wegner, D. M., & Wenzlaff, R. M. (1996). Mental control. In E. T. Higgins & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 466–492). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dana M. Gresky
    • 1
  • Laura L. Ten Eyck
    • 1
  • Charles G. Lord
    • 1
    • 3
  • Rusty B. McIntyre
    • 2
  1. 1.Texas Christian UniversityFort Worth
  2. 2.Amherst CollegeAmherst
  3. 3.Department of PsychologyTexas Christian UniversityFort Worth

Personalised recommendations