Social Psychology of Education

, Volume 14, Issue 3, pp 377–387 | Cite as

Changing stereotypes, changing grades: a longitudinal study of stereotyping during a college math course

Article

Abstract

Previous research has illuminated an important connection between stereotypes and the performance of those targeted by a stereotype. This body of work suggests that even implicit (i.e., nonconscious and unintended) math-gender stereotyping is related to poor math performance among women. Our longitudinal study sought to measure students’ math-gender stereotyping during a college math course and examine the relationship between changes in implicit stereotyping and course performance. Results showed that, for both male and female students, stereotypes increased during the course. Importantly, there was a significant interaction between gender and changes in implicit stereotyping when predicting course performance. Female students showed a negative relationship between changes in implicit stereotypes and course performance, while male students showed no relationship between changes in implicit stereotyping and course performance. This suggests that only for women, who are stereotyped as poor math performers, did the observed increases in stereotyping over time predict poorer math performance.

Keywords

Gender stereotypes Mathematics Academic performance College students 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aronson J., Lustina M. J., Good C., Keough K., Steele C., Brown J. (1999) When white men can’t do math: Necessary and sufficient factors in stereotype threat. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 49: 29–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Biernat M., Vescio T. K., Green M. L. (1996) Selective self-stereotyping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 71(6): 1194–2109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blair I., Ma J., Lenton A. (2001) Imagining stereotypes away: The moderation of implicit stereotypes through mental imagery. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 81(5): 828–841CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brewer M. B. (1988) A dual process model of impression formation. In: Srull T. K., Wyer R. S. (eds) A dual process model of impression formation. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, pp 1–36Google Scholar
  5. Cohn S. (2000) Race and gender discrimination at work. Westview Press, Boulder, COGoogle Scholar
  6. Dasgupta N., Asgari S. (2004) Seeing is believing: Exposure to counterstereotypic leaders and its effect on the malleability of automatic gender stereotyping. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 40: 642–658CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dasgupta N., Greenwald A. G. (2001) On the malleability of automatic attitudes: Combating automatic prejudice with images of admired and disliked individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 81: 800–814CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fazio R., Jackson J., Dunton B., Williams C. (1995) Variability in automatic activation as an unobstrusive measure of racial attitudes: A bona fide pipeline. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 69(6): 1013–1027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fazio R. H., Olson M. A. (2003) Implicit measures in social cognition research: Their meaning and use. Annual Review of Psychology 54: 297–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fiske S. T. (1998) Stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination. In: Gilbert D. T., Fiske S. T., Lindzey G. (eds) Handbook of social psychology. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 357–411Google Scholar
  11. Garcia-Marques L., Santos A., Mackie D. (2006) Stereotypes: Static abstractions or dynamic knowledge structures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 91(5): 814–831CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gawronski B., Bodenhausen G. V. (2006) Associative and propositional processes in evaluation: An intergrative review of implicit and explicit attitude change. Psychological Bulletin 132: 692–731CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gawronski B., Bodenhausen G. V. (2007) Unraveling the processes underlying evaluation: Attitudes from the perspective of the APE model. Social Cognition 25: 687–717CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gawronski B., LeBel E. P., Peters K. R. (2007) What do implicit measures tell us? Scrutinizing the validity of three common assumptions. Perspectives on Psychological Science 2: 181–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Greenwald A. G., Banaji M. (1995) Implicit social cognition: Attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Psychological Review 102: 4–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 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 79: 1022–1038CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 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: 197–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hess T. M., Auman C., Colcombe S. J., Rahhal T. A. (2003) The impact of stereotype threat on age differences in memory performance. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences 58: 3–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Karpinski A., Hilton J. L. (2001) Attitudes and the implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 81: 774–788CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Keller J. (2007) Stereotype threat in classroom settings: The interactive effect of domain identification, task difficulty and stereotype threat on female students’ math performance. British Journal of Educational Psychology 77(2): 323–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kiefer A. K., Sekaquaptewa D. (2007) Implicit stereotypes and women’s math performance: How implicit gender-math stereotypes influence women’s susceptibility to stereotype threat. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 43: 825–832CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kiefer A. K., Sekaquaptewa D. (2007) Implicit stereotypes, gender identification, and math-related outcomes: A prospective study of female college students. Psychological Science 18: 13–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Maume D. J. (2006) Gender differences in restricting work efforts because of family responsibilities. Journal of Marriage and Family 68: 859–869CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. National Science Foundation. (2009). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering. Arlington, VAGoogle Scholar
  25. Neuberg S. L., Fiske S. T. (1987) Motivational influences on impression formation: Outcome dependency, accuracy-driven attention, and individuating processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 53: 431–444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nosek B. A. (2005) Moderators of the relationship between implicit and explicit evaluation. Journal of Experimental Psychology 134: 565–584Google Scholar
  27. Nosek B. A., Banaji M. R., Greenwald A. G. (2002) Math = male, me = female, therefore math ≠  me. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 83: 44–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. O’Brien L. T., Crandall C. S. (2003) Stereotype threat and arousal: Effects on women’s math performance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 29: 782–789CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rudman L. A., Phelan J. E., Heppen J. B. (2007) Developmental sources of implicit attitudes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 33: 1700–1713CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Schmader T. (2002) Gender identification moderates stereotype threat effects on women’s math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 38: 194–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Schmader T., Johns M. (2003) Converging evidence that stereotype threat reduces working memory capacity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 85: 440–452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 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(11): 835–850CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Shih M., Ambady N., Richeson J. A., Fujita K., Gray H. M. (2002) Stereotype performance boosts: The impact of self-relevance and the manner of stereotype activation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 83(3): 638–647CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sinclair L., Kunda Z. (1999) Reactions to a black professional: Motivated inhibition and activation of conflicting stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 77: 885–904CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sinclair L., Kunda Z. (2000) Motivated stereotyping of women: She’s fine if she praised me but incompetent if she criticized me. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 26: 1329–1342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Spencer S. J., Steele C. M., Quinn D. M. (1999) Stereotype threat and women’s math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 35: 4–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Steele C. M. (1997) A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape the intellectual identities and performance of women and African Americans. American Psychologist 52: 613–629CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Steele, C. M., Spencer, S. J., & Aronson, J. (2002). Contending with group image: The psychology of stereotype and social identity threat. In Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 379–440). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  39. Swanson J. E., Rudman L. A., Greenwald A. G. (2001) Using the implicit association test to investigate attitude-behaviour consistency for stigmatised behaviour. Cognition & Emotion 15: 207–230Google Scholar
  40. Walton G. M., Cohen G. L. (2003) Stereotype lift. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 39(5): 456–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Wilson T. D., Lindsey S., Schooler T. (2000) A model of dual attitudes. Psychological Review 107: 101–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA

Personalised recommendations