Sex Roles

, Volume 66, Issue 3–4, pp 220–234 | Cite as

Implicit Science Stereotypes Mediate the Relationship between Gender and Academic Participation

  • Kristin A. LaneEmail author
  • Jin X. Goh
  • Erin Driver-Linn
Original Article


While the gender gap in mathematics and science has narrowed, men pursue these fields at a higher rate than women. In this study, 165 men and women at a university in the northeastern United States completed implicit and explicit measures of science stereotypes (association between male and science, relative to female and humanities), and gender identity (association between the concept “self” and one’s own gender, relative to the concept “other” and the other gender), and reported plans to pursue science-oriented and humanities-oriented academic programs and careers. Although men were more likely than women to plan to pursue science, this gap in students’ intentions was completely accounted for by implicit stereotypes. Moreover, implicit gender identity moderated the relationship between women’s stereotypes and their academic plans, such that implicit stereotypes only predicted plans for women who strongly implicitly identified as female. These findings illustrate how an understanding of implicit cognitions can illuminate between-group disparities as well as within-group variability in science pursuit.


Gender stereotypes Science and mathematics Implicit stereotypes 



This research was generously supported and facilitated by the Derek Bok Center for Teaching and Learning at Harvard University during the first author’s post-doctoral fellowship there. We thank the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues for financial support in the form of a Grant-in-Aid award. We are also grateful to Alex Farias for his assistance with data collection and analysis, to Project Implicit at the University of Virginia for technical support, and to Nicholas Chan for assistance with manuscript preparation.


  1. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  2. Allport, G. W. (1979). The nature of prejudice (25th ed.). Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books.Google Scholar
  3. Ambady, N., Shih, M., Kim, A., & Pittinsky, T. L. (2001). Stereotype susceptibility in children: Effects of identity activation on quantitative performance. Psychological Science, 12, 385–390. doi: 10.1111/1467-9280.00371.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arcuri, L., Castelli, L., Galdi, S., Zogmaister, C., & Amadori, A. (2008). Predicting the vote: Implicit attitudes as predictors of the future behavior of decided and undecided voters. Political Psychology, 29, 369–387. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2008.00635.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 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. doi: 10.1006/jesp.1998.1371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blair, I. V. (2002). The malleability of automatic stereotypes and prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6, 242–261. doi: 10.1207/S15327957PSPR0603_8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bleeker, M. M., & Jacobs, J. E. (2004). Achievement in math and science: Do mothers’ beliefs matter 12 years later? Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 97–109. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.96.1.97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cheryan, S., Plaut, V. C., Davies, P., & Steele, C. M. (2009). Ambient belonging: How stereotypical cues impact gender participation in computer science. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 1045–1060. doi: 10.1037/a0016239.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cohen, G. L., Garcia, J., Apfel, N., & Master, A. (2006). Reducing the racial achievement gap: A social-psychological intervention. Science, 313, 1307–1310. doi: 10.1126/science.1128317.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cunningham, W. A., Nezlek, J. B., & Banaji, M. R. (2004). Implicit and explicit ethnocentrism: Revisiting the ideologies of prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 1332–1346. doi: 10.1177/0146167204264654.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cunningham, W. A., Preacher, K. J., & Banaji, M. R. (2001). Implicit attitude measures: Consistency, stability, and convergent validity. Psychological Science, 12, 163–170. doi: 10.1111/1467-9280.00328.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cvencek, D., Meltzoff, A. N., & Greenwald, A. G. (2011). Math-gender stereotypes in elementary-school children. Child Development, 82, 766–779. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01529.x.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dasgupta, N., & Asgari, S. (2004). Seeing is believing: Exposure to counterstereotypic women leaders and its effect on automatic gender stereotyping. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 642–658. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.02.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dasgupta, N., & Rivera, L. M. (2006). From automatic antigay prejudice to behavior: The moderating role of conscious beliefs about gender and behavioral control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 268–280. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.91.2.268.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 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. doi: 10.1177/014616702237644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 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. doi: 10.1037/a0018053.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Eriksson, K., & Lindholm, T. (2007). Making gender matter: The role of gender-based expectancies and gender identification on women’s and men’s math performance in Sweden. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 48, 329–338. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9450.2007.00588.x.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Galdi, S., Arcuri, L., & Gawronski, B. (2008). Automatic mental associations predict future choices of undecided decision-makers. Science, 321, 1100–1102. doi: 10.1126/science.1160769.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gawronski, B., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2006). Associative and propositional processes in evaluation: An integrative review of implicit and explicit attitude change. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 692–731. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.132.5.692.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Glaser, J., & Knowles, E. D. (2008). Implicit motivation to control prejudice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 164–172. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2007.01.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Glashouwer, K. A., & de Jong, P. J. (2010). Disorder-specific automatic self-associations in depression and anxiety: Results of The Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety. Psychological Medicine: A Journal of Research in Psychiatry and the Allied Sciences, 40, 1101–1111. doi: 10.1017/S0033291709991371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (1995). Implicit social cognition: Attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Psychological Review, 102, 4–27. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.102.1.4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 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. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.109.1.3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. K. L. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The Implicit Association Test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1464–1480. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.74.6.1464.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 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. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.197.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Greenwald, A. G., Poehlman, T. A., Uhlmann, E., & Banaji, M. R. (2009). Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: III. Meta-analysis of predictive validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 17–41. doi: 10.1037/a0015575.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gregg, A. P., Seibt, B., & Banaji, M. R. (2006). Easier done than undone: Asymmetry in the malleability of implicit preferences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 1–20. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.90.1.1.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Halpern, D. F., Benbow, C. P., Geary, D. C., Gur, R. C., Hyde, J. S., & Gernsbacher, M. A. (2007). The science of sex differences in science and mathematics. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 8, 51. doi: 10.1111/j.1529-1006.2007.00032.x.Google Scholar
  31. Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hill, C., Corbett, C., & St. Rose, A. (2010). Why so few? Women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Washington, DC: American Association of University Women.Google Scholar
  33. Hofmann, W., Gawronski, B., Gschwender, 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, 1369–1385. doi: 10.1177/0146167205275613.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hofmann, W., Gschwender, T., Friese, M., Wiers, R. W., & Schmitt, M. (2008). Working memory capacity and self-regulatory behavior: Toward an individual differences perspective on behavior determination by automatic versus controlled processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 962–977. doi: 10.1037/a0012705.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hyde, J. S., & Mertz, J. E. (2009). Gender, culture, and mathematics performance. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106, 8801–8807. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0901265106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Jacobs, J. E., & Eccles, J. S. (1985). Gender differences in math ability: The impact of media reports on parents. Education Researcher, 14, 20–25. doi: 10.3102/0013189X014003020.Google Scholar
  37. Keller, J., & Dauenheimer, D. (2003). Stereotype threat in the classroom: Dejection mediates the disrupting threat effect on women’s math performance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 371–381. doi: 10.1177/0146167202250218.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 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. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01841.x.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lane, K. A., Banaji, M. R., Nosek, B. A., & Greenwald, A. G. (2007). Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: IV: What we know (so far) about the method. In B. Wittenbrink & N. S. Schwarz (Eds.), Implicit measures of attitudes: Procedures and controversies (pp. 59–102). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  40. Lane, K. A., & Driver-Linn, E. (2008). Change in implicit cognitions predicts change in behavioral intentions. Poster presented at Society of Personality and Social Psychology Annual Conference, Albuquerque, NM.Google Scholar
  41. Lenton, A. P., Bruder, M., & Sedikides, C. (2009). A meta-analysis on the malleability of automatic gender stereotypes. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 33, 183–196. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2009.01488.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Lewin, T. (2010). The female factor: After Harvard controversy, conditions change but reputation lingers. New York Times. Retrieved from
  43. Logel, C., Walton, G. M., Spencer, S. J., Iserman, E. C., & von Hippel, W. (2009). Interacting with sexist men triggers social identity threat among female engineers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 1089–1103. doi: 10.1037/a0015703.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Luhtanen, R., & Crocker, J. (1992). A collective self-esteem scale: Self-evaluation of one’s social identity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 302–318. doi: 10.1177/0146167292183006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Marx, D. M., Stapel, D. A., & Muller, D. (2005). We can do it: The interplay of construal orientation and social comparisons under threat. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 432–446. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.88.3.432.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Marx, D. M., & Stapel, D. A. (2006). Distinguishing stereotype threat from priming effects: On the role of the social self and threat-based concerns. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 243–254. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.91.2.243.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Mitchell, C. J., Anderson, N. E., & Lovibond, P. F. (2003). Measuring evaluative conditioning using the Implicit Association Test. Learning and Motivation, 34, 203–217. doi: 10.1016/S0023-9690(03)00003-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Miyake, A., Kost-Smith, L. E., Finkelstein, N. D., Pollock, S. J., Cohen, G. L., & Ito, T. A. (2010). Reducing the gender achievement gap in college science: A classroom study of values affirmation. Science, 330, 1234–123. doi: 10.1126/science.1195996.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Molesworth, B. C., & Chang, B. (2009). Predicting pilots’ risk-taking behavior through an Implicit Association Test. Human Factors, 51, 845–857. doi: 10.1177/0018720809357756.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Murphy, M. C., Steele, C. M., & Gross, J. J. (2007). Signaling threat: How situational cues affect women in math, science, and engineering settings. Psychological Science, 18, 879–885. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01995.x.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. National Science Foundation. (2008a). Thirty-three years of women in S&E faculty positions. Retrieved from
  52. National Science Foundation. (2008b). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering. Retrieved from
  53. Nosek, B. A., Banaji, M. R., & Greenwald, A. G. (2002). Math = Male, Me = Female, therefore Math ≠ Me. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 44–59. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.83.1.44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Nosek, B. A., Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (2007). The Implicit Association Test at age 7: A methodological and conceptual review. In J. A. Bargh (Ed.), Automatic processes in social thinking and behavior (pp. 265–292). Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  55. Nosek, B. A., & Smyth, F. L. (2007). A multitrait-multimethod validation of the Implicit Association Test: Implicit and explicit attitudes are related but distinct constructs. Experimental Psychology, 54, 14–29. doi: 10.1027/1618-3169.54.1.14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Nosek, B. A., & Smyth, F. L. (2011). Implicit social cognitions predict sex differences in math engagement and achievement. American Educational Research Journal. doi: 10.3102/0002831211410683. Advance online publication.
  57. Nosek, B. A., Smyth, F. L., Hansen, J. J., Devos, T., Lindner, N. M., Ranganath, K. A., et al. (2007). Pervasiveness and correlates of implicit attitudes and stereotypes. European Review of Social Psychology, 18, 36–88. doi: 10.1080/10463280701489053.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 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. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0809921106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Olson, M. A., & Fazio, R. H. (2001). Implicit attitude formation through classical conditioning. Psychological Science, 12, 413–147. doi: 10.1111/1467-9280.00376.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Olson, M. A., & Fazio, R. H. (2004). Trait inferences as a function of automatically-activated racial attitudes and motivation to control prejudiced reactions. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 26, 1–11. doi: 10.1207/s15324834basp2601_1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 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. doi: 10.1016/S0022-1031(03)00088-X.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Rooth, D. (2010). Automatic associations and discrimination in hiring: Real world evidence. Labour Economics., 17, 523–534. doi: 10.1016/j.labeco.2009.04.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Schmader, T. (2002). Gender identification moderates the effects of stereotype threat on women’s math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 194–201. doi: 10.1006/jesp.2001.1500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 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. doi: 10.1023/B:SERS.0000029101.74557.a0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 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. doi: 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00508-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Shih, M., Pittinsky, T. L., & Ambady, N. (1999). Stereotype susceptibility: Identity salience and shifts in quantitative performance. Psychological Science, 10, 80–83. doi: 10.1111/1467-9280.00111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Snyder, T. D., Dillow, S. S., & Hoffman, C. M. (2009). Digest of education statistics, 2008 (NCES 2009–020). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences.Google Scholar
  68. 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. doi: 10.1006/jesp.1998.1373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Steffens, M. C., Jelenec, P., & Noack, P. (2010). On the leaky math pipeline: Comparing implicit math-gender stereotypes and math withdrawal in female and male children and adolescents. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 947–963. doi: 10.1037/a0019920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Stout, J. G., Dasgupta, N., Hunsinger, M., & McManus, M. (2011). STEMing the tide: Using ingroup experts to inoculate women’s self-concept in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 255–270. doi: 10.1037/a0021385.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Summers, L. (2005). Remarks at NBER conference on diversifying the science and engineering workforce. Retrieved from
  72. Thush, C., Wiers, R. W., Ames, S. L., Grenard, J. L., Sussman, S., & Stacy, A. W. (2007). Apples and oranges? Comparing indirect measures of alcohol-related cognition predicting alcohol use in at-risk adolescents. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 21, 587–591. doi: 10.1037/0893-164X.21.4.587.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. von Hippel, W., Brener, L., & von Hippel, C. (2008). Implicit prejudice toward injecting drug users predicts intentions to change jobs among drug and alcohol nurses. Psychological Science, 19, 7–11. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02037.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Walton, G. M., & Cohen, G. L. (2007). A question of belonging: Race, social fit, and achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 82–96. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.92.1.82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Wiers, R. W., Beckers, L., Houben, K., & Hofmann, W. (2009). A short fuse after alcohol: Implicit power associations predict aggressiveness after alcohol consumption in young heavy drinkers with limited executive control. Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior, 93, 300–305. doi: 10.1016/j.pbb.2009.02.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Wilson, T. D., Lindsey, S., & Schooler, T. (2000). A model of dual attitudes. Psychological Review, 107, 101–126. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.107.1.101.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Wout, D., Danso, H., Jackson, J., & Spencer, S. (2008). The many faces of stereotype threat: Group- and self-threat. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 792–799. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2007.07.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kristin A. Lane
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jin X. Goh
    • 1
  • Erin Driver-Linn
    • 2
  1. 1.Bard CollegeAnnandale-on-HudsonUSA
  2. 2.Harvard UniversityCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations