Advertisement

European Journal of Psychology of Education

, Volume 33, Issue 2, pp 201–214 | Cite as

Stereotype threat among students with disabilities: the importance of the evaluative context on their cognitive performance

  • Caroline DesombreEmail author
  • Souad Anegmar
  • Gérald Delelis
Article

Abstract

This study investigated the hypothesis that cognitive performance of students with physical disabilities may be influenced by the evaluators’ identity. Students with or without a physical disability completed a logic test and were informed that they would be evaluated by students from their own group (ingroup condition) or from an other group (outgroup condition). When they had been informed they would be evaluated by students in the outgroup (i.e., students without disabilities), students with physical disabilities had a worse performance than all other participants. Findings are discussed in relation to stereotype threat and its consequences in academic contexts.

Keywords

Stereotype threat Disability Education Performance 

Notes

References

  1. 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
  2. Beaton, A., Tougas, F., Rinfret, N., Huard, N., & Delisle, M. N. (2007). Strength in numbers? Women and mathematics. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 22, 291–306. doi: 10.1007/BF03173427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beilock, S. L., Jellison, W. A., Rydell, R. J., McConnell, A. R., & Carr, T. H. (2006). On the causal mechanisms of stereotype threat: can skills that don’t rely heavily on working memory still be threatened? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 1059–1071. doi: 10.1177/0146167206288489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beilock, S. L., Rydell, R. J., & McConnell, A. R. (2007). Stereotype threat and working memory: mechanisms, alleviation, and spillover. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136, 256–276. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.136.2.256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ben-Zeev, T., Fein, S., & Inzlicht, M. (2005). Arousal and stereotype threat. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 174–181. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2003.11.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bergeron, D. M., Block, C. J., & Echtenkamp, B. A. (2006). Disabling the able: stereotype threat and women’s work performance. Human Performance, 19, 133–158. doi: 10.1207/s15327043hup1902_3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Berjot, S., Amoura, C., Bensalah, L., & Herbay, A. (2015). Stereotype threat among children attending adapted courses (7-10 years old): a study in a quasi-ordinary classroom. Revue Internationale de Psychologie Sociale/International Review of Social Psychology, 27, 133–159. RIPSO_273_0133.Google Scholar
  8. Bonnot, V., & Croizet, J.-C. (2007). Stereotype internalization and women’s math performance: the role of interference in working memory. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 857–866. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2006.10.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brewer, M. B. (2003). Optimal distinctiveness, social identity, and the self. In M. Leary & J. Tangney (Eds.), Handbook of self and identity (pp. 480–491). New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  10. Brewer, M. B., & Roccas, S. (2001). Individual values, social identity, and optimal distinctiveness. In C. Sedikides & M. Brewer (Eds.), Individual self, relative self, collective self (pp. 219–237). Philadelphia: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  11. Brouwers, S. A., Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Van Hemert, D. A. (2009). Variation in Raven’s Progressive Matrices scores across time and place. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 330–338. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2008.10.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 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. doi: 10.1016/S0022-1031(03)00039-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Carver, C. S., Blaney, P. H., & Scheier, M. F. (1979). Focus of attention, chronic expectancy, and responses to a feared stimulus. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1186–1195. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.37.7.1186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chateignier, C., Dutrévis, M., Nugier, A., & Chekroun, P. (2009). French-Arab students and verbal intellectual performance: do they really suffer from a negative intellectual stereotype? European Pournal of Psychology of Education, 24, 219–234. doi: 10.1007/bf03173013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cota, A. A., & Dion, K. L. (1986). Salience of gender and sex composition of ad-hoc groups: an experimental test of distinctiveness theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 770–776. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.50.4.770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Croizet, J.-C., & 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, 24, 588–594. doi: 10.1177/0146167298246003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cunnah, W. (2015). Disabled students: identity, inclusion and work-based placements. Disability & Society, 30, 213–226. doi: 10.1080/09687599.2014.996282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Désert, M., & Leyens, J.-P. (2002). La menace du stéréotype : universelle ? inéluctable ? [Stereotype threat: universal? Inevitable?]. In J.-L. Beauvois, R.-V. Joule, & J.-M. Monteil (Eds.), Perspectives cognitives et conduites sociales (Vol. 8, pp. 121–134). Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes.Google Scholar
  19. Dijksterhuis, A., Aarts, H., Bargh, J. A., & van Knippenberg, A. (2000). On the relation between associative strength and automatic behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 36, 531–544. doi: 10.1006/jesp.2000.1427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Doyle, R. A., & Voyer, D. (2016). Stereotype manipulation effects on math and spatial test performance: a meta-analysis. Learning and Individual Differences, 47, 103–116. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2015.12.018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Duval, T. S., Duval, V. H., & Mulilis, J.-P. (1992). Effects of self-focus, discrepancy between self and standard, and outcome expectancy favorability on the tendency to match self to standard or to withdraw. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 340–348. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.62.2.340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ebersold, S. (2003). Inclusion and mainstream education: an equal cooperation system. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 27, 89–107. doi: 10.1080/0885625032000042339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Enéa-Drapeau, C., Carlier, M., & Huguet, P. (2012). Tracking subtle stereotypes of children with trisomy 21: from facial-feature-based to implicit stereotyping. PloS One, 7(4), e34369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J., Glick, P., & Xu, J. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: competence and warmth respectively follow perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 878–902. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.82.6.878.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Flore, P. C., & Wicherts, J. M. (2015). Does stereotype threat influence performance of girls in stereotyped domains? A meta-analysis. Journal of School Psychology, 53, 25–44. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2014.10.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hornstra, L., Denessen, E., Bakker, J., van den Bergh, L., & Voeten, M. (2010). Teacher attitudes toward dyslexia: effects on teacher expectations and the academic achievement of students with dyslexia. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43, 515–529. doi: 10.1177/0022219409355479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Huguet, P., & Régner, I. (2009). Counter-stereotypic beliefs in math do not protect school girls from stereotype threat. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 1024–1027. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2009.04.029.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ihme, T. A., & Moller, J. (2015). “He who can, he who cannot, teaches?” Stereotype threat and preservice teachers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107, 300–308. doi: 10.1037/a0037373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 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. doi: 10.1111/1467-9280.00272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kanter, R. M. (1977). Some effects of proportions in group life: skewed sex ratios and responses to token women. American Journal of Sociology, 82, 965–990. doi: 10.1086/226425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 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, 825–832. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2006.08.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kuhn, M. H., & McPartland, T. S. (1954). An empirical investigation of self-attitude. American Sociological Review, 19, 68–75. doi: 10.1086/226425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lamont, R. A., Swift, H. J., & Abrams, D. (2015). A review and meta-analysis of age-based stereotype threat: negative stereotypes, not facts, do the damage. Psychology and Aging, 30, 180–193. doi: 10.1037/a0038586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lee, J.-E. R., & Nass, C. (2012). Distinctiveness-based stereotype threat and the moderating role of coaction contexts. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 192–199. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2011.06.018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Leonardelli, G. J., Pickett, C. L., & Brewer, M. B. (2010). Optimal distinctiveness theory: a framework for social identity, social cognition and intergroup relations. In M. Zanna & J. Olson (Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 43, pp. 65–115). New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  36. Leyens, J.-P., Paladino, M. P., Rodriguez, R. T., Vaes, J., Demoulin, S., Rodriguez, A. P., & Gaunt, R. (2000). The emotional side of prejudice: the attribution of secondary emotions to ingroups and outgroups. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 186–197. doi: 10.1207/S15327957PSPR0402_06.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Logel, C., Walton, G. M., Spencer, S. J., Iserman, E. C., von Hippel, W., & Bell, A. E. (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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lord, C. G., & Saenz, D. S. (1985). Memory deficits and memory surfeits: differential cognitive consequences of tokenism for tokens and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 918–926. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.49.4.918.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Louvet, E., & Rohmer, O. (2010). Les travailleurs handicapés sont-ils perçus comme des travailleurs compétents ? [Are workers with disability perceived as competent?]. Psychologie du Travail et des Organisations, 16, 47–62. doi: 10.1016/S1420-2530(16)30160-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Louvet, E., Rohmer, O., & Dubois, N. (2009). Social judgment of people with a disability in the workplace. How to make a good impression on employers. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 68, 153–159. doi: 10.1024/1421-0185.68.3.153.Google Scholar
  41. Markova, M., Pit-Ten Cate, I., Krolak-Schwerdt, S., & Glock, S. (2016). Preservice teachers’ attitudes toward inclusion and toward students with special educational needs from different ethnic backgrounds. The Journal of Experimental Education, 84, 554–578. doi: 10.1080/00220973.2015.1055317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Nguyen, H.-H. D., & Ryan, A. M. (2008). Does stereotype threat affect test performance of minorities and women? A meta-analysis of experimental evidence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 1314–1334. doi: 10.1037/a0012702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Osborne, J. (2001). Promoting argument in the science classroom: a rhetorical perspective. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 1, 271–290. doi: 10.1080/14926150109556470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Pennington, C. R., Heim, D., Levy, A. R., & Larkin, D. T. (2016). Twenty years of stereotype threat research: a review of psychological mediators. PloS One, 11, e0146487. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0146487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Picho, K., Rodriguez, A., & Finnie, L. (2013). Exploring the moderating role of context on the mathematics performance of females under stereotype threat: a meta-analysis. Journal of Social Psychology, 153, 299–333. doi: 10.1080/00224545.2012.737380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Ponticelli, J. E., & Russ-Eft, D. (2009). Community college students with disabilities and transfer to a four-year college. Exceptionality: A Special Education Journal, 17, 164–176. doi: 10.1080/09362830903028473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Popovich, P. M., Scherbaum, C. A., Scherbaum, K. L., & Polinko, N. (2003). The assessment of attitudes toward individuals with disabilities in the workplace. Journal of Psychology, 137, 163–177. doi: 10.1080/00223980309600606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Psaltis, C. (2012). Social representations of gender in peer interaction and cognitive development. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 6, 840–851. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-9004.2012.00466.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Psaltis, C., & Duveen, G. (2006). Social relations and cognitive development: the influence of conversation type and representations of gender. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36, 407–430. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Quick, D., Lehmann, J., & Deniston, T. (2003). Opening doors for students with disabilities on community college campuses: what have we learned? What do we still need to know? Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 27, 815–827. doi: 10.1080/713838274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Raven, J., Raven, J. C., & Court, J. H. (1998/2003). Manual for Raven’s progressive matrices and vocabulary scales. San Antonio, TX: Harcourt Assessment.Google Scholar
  52. Régner, I., Steele, J. R., Ambady, N., Thinus-Blanc, C., & Huguet, P. (2015). Our future scientists: a review of stereotype threat in girls from early elementary school to middle school. Revue Internationale de Psychologie Sociale/International Review of Social Psychology, 27, 13–51. RIPS_3-4_2014.indd 13.Google Scholar
  53. Rohmer, O., & Louvet, E. (2006). Etre handicapé : quel impact sur l’évaluation de candidats à l’embauche ? [Disability: repercussions on the recruitment process?]. Le Travail Humain, 69, 49–65. doi: 10.3917/th.691.0049.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rohmer, O., & Louvet, E. (2009). Describing persons with disability: salience of disability, gender, and ethnicity. Rehabilitation Psychology, 54, 76–82. doi: 10.1037/a0014445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Rohmer, O., & Louvet, E. (2011). Le stéréotype des personnes handicapées en fonction de la nature de la déficience. Une application des modèles de la bi-dimensionnalité du jugement social [Stereotype content of disability subgroups—testing predictions of the fundamental dimensions of social judgment]. L’Année Psychologique, 111, 69–86. doi: 10.4074/S0003503311001035.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Rohmer, O., & Louvet, E. (2013). Utilité sociale et réussite universitaire d’étudiants avec et sans handicap : rôles respectifs de la compétence et de l’effort [Social utility and academic success of students with or without disability: the impact of competence and effort]. Développement Humain, Handicap et Changement Social, 21, 65–76. http://www.ripph.qc.ca/revue/journal-20-03-2012-05.Google Scholar
  57. Schmader, T., & Johns, M. (2003). Converging evidence that stereotype threat reduces working memory capacity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 440–452. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.85.3.440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 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
  59. Schmader, T., Johns, M., & Forbes, C. (2008). An integrated process model of stereotype threat effects on performance. Psychological Review, 115, 336–356. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.115.2.336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Sekaquaptewa, D., & Thompson, M. (2002). The differential effects of solo status on members of high and low status groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 694–707. doi: 10.1177/0146167202288013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Sekaquaptewa, D., & Thompson, M. (2003). Solo status, stereotypes 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
  62. Shapiro, J. R., & Neuberg, S. L. (2007). From stereotype threat to stereotype threats: implications of a multi-threat framework for causes, moderators, mediators, consequences, and interventions. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11, 107–130. doi: 10.1177/1088868306294790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Shapiro, J. R., & Williams, A. M. (2012). The role of stereotype threats in undermining girls’ and women’s performance and interest in STEM fields. Sex Roles, 66, 175–183. doi: 10.1007/s11199-011-0051-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Shih, M., Pitinski, T. L., & Ambady, N. (1999). Shifts in women’s quantitative performance in response to implicit sociocultural identification. Psychological Science, 10, 80–90. doi: 10.1111/1467-9280.00111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Spencer, S. J., Steele, C., & Quinn, D. (1999). Stereotype threat and women’s math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 4–28. doi: 10.1006/jesp.1998.1373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Steele, C. M. (1997). A threat in the air: how stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance. American Psychologist, 52, 613–629. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.52.6.613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 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. 0022-3514/95/$3.00.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Stoet, G., & Geary, D. C. (2012). Can stereotype threat explain the gender gap in mathematics performance and achievement? Review of General Psychology, 16, 93–102. doi: 10.1037/a0026617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Thaver, T., & Lim, L. (2014). Attitudes of pre-service mainstream teachers in Singapore towards people with disabilities and inclusive education. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 18, 1038–1052. doi: 10.1080/13603116.2012.693399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Thomas, A. K., & Dubois, S. J. (2011). Reducing the burden of stereotype threat eliminates age differences in memory distortion. Psychological Science, 22, 1515–1517. doi: 10.1177/0956797611425932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Weinberg, N. (1976). Social stereotyping of the physically handicapped. Rehabilitation Psychology, 23, 115–124. doi: 10.1037/h0090911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 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
  73. Zhang, S., Schmader, T., & Hall, W. M. (2013). L’eggo my ego: reducing the gender gap in math by unlinking the self from performance. Self and Identity, 12(4), 400–412. doi: 10.1080/15298868.2012.687012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Instituto Superior de Psicologia Aplicada, Lisboa, Portugal and Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Caroline Desombre
    • 1
    Email author
  • Souad Anegmar
    • 2
  • Gérald Delelis
    • 3
  1. 1.ESPE Lille Nord de France and Univ. Lille, EA 4072 - PSITEC - Psychologie : Interactions, Temps, Émotions, CognitionF-59000 LilleFrance
  2. 2.Univ. Lille, EA 4072 - PSITEC - Psychologie : Interactions, Temps, Émotions, CognitionF-59000 LilleFrance
  3. 3.Univ. Lille, SCALAB, UMR 9193 (CNRS, Univ Lille)Villeneuve-d’AscqFrance

Personalised recommendations