Sex Roles

, Volume 47, Issue 3–4, pp 193–198 | Cite as

Blatant Stereotype Threat and Women's Math Performance: Self-Handicapping as a Strategic Means to Cope with Obtrusive Negative Performance Expectations

  • Johannes Keller


Research on the effect of stereotype threat has consistently shown that a reduction of stereotype threat due to decreased salience of negative stereotypic expectations in testing situations results in a performance boost. This article reports on an experiment (n = 75 high school students) designed to test the impact of increased salience of negative stereotypic expectations on math performance. As expected, female participants in the condition of heightened salience of negative stereotypic expectations underperformed in comparison to their control group counterparts. Moreover, it was found that the effect of blatant stereotype threat resulted in increased self-handicapping tendencies in women, which in turn led to significantly impaired math performance.

gender differences math performance self-handicapping stereotype threat 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Baenninger, M., & Newcombe, N. (1995). Environmental input to the development of sex-related differences in spatial and mathematical abilitiy. Learning and Individual Differences, 7, 363-379.Google Scholar
  2. Bock, R. D., & Kolakowski, D. (1973). Further evidence of sex-linked major-gene influence on human spatial visualizing ability. American Journal of Human Genetics, 25, 1-14.Google Scholar
  3. Broverman, D. M., Klaiber, E. L., Kobayashi, Y., & Vogel, W. (1968). Roles of activation and inhibition in sex differences in cognitive abilities. Psychological Review, 75, 23-50.Google Scholar
  4. Casey, M. B. (1996). Understanding individual differences in spatial ability within females: A nature/nurture interactionist framework. Developmental Review, 16, 241-260.Google Scholar
  5. Cheryan, S., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2000). When positive stereo-types threaten intellectual performance: The psychological hazards of “model minority” status. Psychological Science, 11, 399-402.Google Scholar
  6. Clogg, C. C., Petkova, E., & Haritou, A. (1995). Statistical methods for comparing regression coefficients between models. Amer-ican Journal of Sociology, 100, 1261-1293.Google Scholar
  7. Croizet, J.-C., & Claire, T. (1998). Extending the concept of stereo-type threat to social class: The intellectual underperformance of students from low socioeconomic backgrounds. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 588-594.Google Scholar
  8. Dweck, C. S., & Licht, B. G. (1980). Learned helplessness and intel-lectual achievement. In J. Garber & M. E. P. Seligman (Eds.), Human helplessness: Theory and applications (pp. 197-221). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  9. Eccles, J., Adler, T. F., Futterman, R., Goff, S. B., Kaczala, C. M., Meece, J. I., et al. (1983). Expectations, values, and academic behaviors. In J. T. Spence (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motives (pp. 75-145). San Francisco, CA: Freeman.Google Scholar
  10. Fennema E., & Peterson, P. (1985). Autonomous learning behavior: A possible explanation of gender-related differences in mathematics. In L. C. Wilkinson & C. B. Marrett (Eds.), Gender influences and classroom interaction (pp. 17-35). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  11. Geary, D. C. (1996). Sexual selection and sex differences in math-ematical abilities. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 19, 229-284.Google Scholar
  12. Halpern, D. F. (2000). Sex differences in cognitive abilities (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  13. Higgins, R. L., Snyder, C. R., & Berglas, S. (Eds.). (1990). Self-handicapping: The paradox that isn't. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  14. Hyde, J. S., Fennema, E., & Lamon, S. J. (1990). Gender differences in mathematics performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 139-155.Google Scholar
  15. Jones, E. E., & Berglas, S. C. (1978). Control of attributions about the self through self-handicapping strategies: The appeal of alcohol and the role of underachievement. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 4, 200-206.Google Scholar
  16. Keller, J. (2002). Stereotype threat and women's math performance in an everyday setting: The effect of stereotype threat reduction in high school classrooms. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  17. Keller, J., & Dauenheimer, D. (in press). Stereotype threat in the classroom: Dejection mediates the disrupting threat effect on women's math performance.Google Scholar
  18. Keller, J., & Liebhauser, S. (2002). Stereotype threat and women's math performance: A test of mediating and moderating mechanisms. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  19. Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Bolger, N. (1998). Data analysis in social psychology. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (pp. 233-265). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  20. Levy, J. (1976). Cerebral lateralization and spatial ability. Behavior Genetics, 6, 171-188.Google Scholar
  21. Martin, O. M., & Kelly, D. L. (Eds.). (1996). Third International Mathematics and Science Study: Technical report. Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College.Google Scholar
  22. Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Beaton, A. E., Gonzales, E. J., Kelly, D. L., & Smith, T. (1998). Mathematics and science achievement in the final year of secondary school: IEA's Third International Mathematics and Science Study. Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College.Google Scholar
  23. Paglin, M., & Rufolo, A. M. (1990). Heterogeneous human capital, occupational choice, and male-female earnings differences. Journal of Labor Economics, 8, 123-144.Google Scholar
  24. 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.Google Scholar
  25. Shih, M., Pittinsky, T. L., & Ambady, N. (1999). Stereotype susceptibility: Identity salience and shifts in quantitative performance. Psychological Science, 10, 80-83.Google Scholar
  26. 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.Google Scholar
  27. Steele, C. M. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance. American Psychologist, 52, 613-629.Google Scholar
  28. 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.Google Scholar
  29. 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.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Johannes Keller
    • 1
  1. 1.Mikrosoziologie und SozialpsychologieUniversität MennheimMannheimGermany

Personalised recommendations