Losing its expected communal value: how stereotype threat undermines women’s identity as research scientists
- 1.1k Downloads
The worry or concern over confirming negative gender group stereotypes, called stereotype threat, is one explanation for women’s worldwide underrepresentation in undergraduate science classes and majors. But how does stereotype threat translate into fewer women motivated for science? In this quantitative study with a sample from the US, we use Expectancy Value Theory to examine whether and how stereotype threat concerns might influence women’s science identification. To do this, we collected survey data from 388 women enrolled in introductory physics (male-dominated) and biology (female-dominated) undergraduate laboratory classes at three universities. We examined multiple indirect effect paths through which stereotype threat could be associated with science identity and the associated future motivation to engage in scientific research. In addition to replicating established expectancy-value theory motivational findings, results support the novel prediction that one route through which stereotype threat negatively impacts women’s science identity is via effects on perceptions about the communal utility value of science. Especially among women in physics who expressed greater stereotype threat concerns than women in biology, science identification was lower to the extent that stereotype threat reduced how useful science was seen for helping other people and society. Implications for ways to create an inclusive learning context that combats stereotype threat concerns and broadens undergraduate women’s participation in science are discussed.
KeywordsGender Science identification Science education Expectancy value Stereotype threat Motivation
We are grateful to Justin Chase and other members of the Motivation and Diversity Lab for assistance with participant recruitment. This project was supported by a grant (award number HRD-1036767) from the Gender in Science and Engineering Division of the National Science Foundation. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are our own and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
- Bakan, D. (1966). The duality of human existence: An essay on psychology and religion. Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
- Diekman, A. B., Clark, E. K., Johnston, A. M., Brown, E. R., & Steinberg, M. (2011). Malleability in communal goals and beliefs influence attraction to STEM careers: Evidence for a goal congruity perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 902–918. doi: 10.1037/a0025199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Dyer, J., & McWhinnie, S. (2011). A survey of chemistry and physics postdoctoral researchers’ experiences and career intentions. International Journal of Gender, Science, and Technology, 3, 596–619.Google Scholar
- Eagly, A. H., Wood, W., & Diekman, A. B. (2000). Social role theory of sex differences and similarities: A current appraisal. In T. Eckes & H. M. Trautner (Eds.), The developmental social psychology of gender (pp. 123–174). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Eccles, J.S. (1989). Bringing young women to math and science. In M. Crawford & M. Gentry (Eds.) Gender and thought: Psychological perspectives (pp. 36–58). New York: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4612-3588-0_3
- Eccles, J. S. (2005). Subjective task value and the Eccles et al. model of achievement-related choices. In A. J. Elliot & C. S. Dweck (Eds.). Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 105–121) New York, NY: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Eccles, J. S., Barber, B., & Jozefowicz, D. (1999). Linking gender to educational, occupational, and recreational choices: Applying the Eccles et al. model of achievement-related choices. In W. B. Swann, Jr., J. H. Langlois, & L. A. Gilbert (Eds.), Sexism and stereotypes in modern society: The gender science of Janet Taylor spence (pp. 153–192). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi: 10.1037/10277-007
- European Commission. (2012). She figures 2012: Gender in research and innovation. Retrieved November 2014 from http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_library/pdf_06/she-figures-2012_en.pdf.
- Glynn, S. M., & Koballa, T. R. (2006). Motivation to learn in college science. In J. Mintzes & W. H. Leonard (Eds.), Handbook of college science teaching (pp. 25–32). Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association Press.Google Scholar
- Hammond, R. (2009). Chien-Shiung Wu: Pioneering nuclear physicist (makers of modern science). New York, NY: Chelsea House Publications.Google Scholar
- International Union of Pure and Applied Physics. (June, 2000). Women in physics working group. Retrieved November 2014 from http://www.if.ufrgs.br/iupap/report1.html.
- Jacobs, J. E., Davis-Kean, P., Bleeker, M., Eccles, J. S., & Malanchuk, O. (2005). “I can, but I don’t want to”: The impact of parents, interest, and activities on gender differences in math. In A. M. Gallagher & J. C. Kaufman (Eds.), Gender differences in mathematics: An integrative psychological approach (pp. 246–263). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Lent, R. W., Hackett, G., & Brown, S. D. (1996). A social cognitive framework for studying career choice and transition to work. Journal of Vocational Education Research, 21, 3–31.Google Scholar
- McKinsey & Company. (2007). Women matter: Gender diversity, a corporate performance driver. http://www.mckinsey.com/features/women_matter.
- Muthen, L. K., & Muthen, B. O. (2012). Mplus: The comprehensive modeling program for applied researchers [Computer software]. Los Angeles: Author.Google Scholar
- National Science Board. (2012). Science and engineering indicators 2012. NSB 10-01. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.Google Scholar
- National Science Foundation, National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics. (2011). Science & engineering degrees: 1966–2008. Detailed statistical tables NSF 11-136. Arlington, VA. http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf11316/pdf/nsf11316.pdf.
- Pohlmann, K. (2001). Agency- and communion-orientation in life goals: Impacts on goal pursuit strategies and psychological wellbeing. In P. Schmuck & K. M. Sheldon (Eds.), Life goals and well-being: Towards a positive psychology of human striving (pp. 68–84). Seattle, WA: Hogrefe and Huber.Google Scholar
- President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. (2012, February). Report to the president: Engage to excel: Producing one million additional college graduates with degrees in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/pcast-engage-to-excel-final_feb.pdf.
- Seymour, E., & Hewitt, N. M. (1995). Talking about leaving: Why undergraduates leave the sciences. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
- Smith, J. L., Lewis, K. L., Hawthorne, L., & Hodges, S. D. (2013). When trying hard isn’t natural: Women’s belonging with and motivation for male-dominated STEM fields as a function of effort expenditure concerns. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 131–143. doi: 10.1177/0146167212468332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- STEMconnector. (2012). Where are the STEM students? What are their career interests? Where are the STEM jobs? http://www.stemconnector.org/sites/default/files/store/STEM-Students-STEM-Jobs-Executive-Summary.pdf.
- Stout, J. G., Dasgupta, N., Hunsinger, M., & McManus, M. A. (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, 255–272. doi: 10.1037/a0021385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Swann, W. B., Jr, & Bosson, J. K. (2010). Self and Identity. In S. T. Fiske, D. T. Gilbert, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (5th ed., pp. 589–628). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
- Urry, M. (July, 2002). The status of women in physics—an international meeting on what, why, and how to change. American Physical Society. Retrieved November 2014 from http://www.aps.org/units/fps/newsletters/2002/july/urry.pdf.
- Xie, Y., & Shauman, K. A. (2003). Women in science: Career processes and outcomes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar