1. Class 16: Stereotype Threat

2. Who Is That Silver Tongued Devil?
[Ann Richards’ opponent] was eloquent. He spoke quickly and easily. He rattled off complicated sentences and thought them to the right grammatical conclusion.
Who was this gifted speaker?

3. (= Identity Threat = Reputation Threat)
Stereotype Threat
(= Identity Threat = Reputation Threat)
Aronson & McGlone, 2009
Stereotype Threat (ST) defined: A state of psychological discomfort that people experience when confronted by an unflattering group or individual reputation in situations where that reputation can be confirmed.
Group
Stereotype
Threat
African Americans
Poor language skills
Verbal skills test
Women
Poor quantitative skills
Math skills test
Engineering Majors
Poor social skills
Dinner Party
Middle Class Whites
Prejudiced toward Minorities
Interracial Conversation

4. How Stereotype Threat Operates
Person is member of group with stereotyped reputation
(woman: women bad at math)
Person is situation where stereotype applies
(math exam)
Person can confirm stereotype (do poorly on math test)
Threat of confirming stereotype undermines performance
Stereotype is confirmed
Stereotype threat is related to “Self Fulfilling Prophesy” e.g., “Pygmalion in the Classroom”
Robt. Rosenthal

5. Demonstrations of Stereotype Threat
Steele & Aronson, 1995:
* Black and White students given difficult GRE verbal problems
* Told test is IQ diagnostic, or told test is not diagnostic
* Black students’ performance declines in “diagnostic test”
Steele & Aronson, 1995:
* Black and White students given difficult GRE verbal problems
* Asked / Not asked to indicate their race before taking test
* Blacks students’ performance declines if asked to first indicate race
Claude Steele
Spencer, Steele, & Quinn, 1999:
* Female and male students given difficult GRE math problems
* Told / Not told that “This test does not show gender differences
* Female students’ performance poor in control condition, but perform as well as men when given “no gender diff” message.
Joshua Aronson

6. Stereotype Threat Demonstrated with Wide Range of Populations
* Latinos
* Native Americans
* Poor whites
* Elderly (memory skills)
* White males on math (when compared to Asians)
* Psych students on science test compared to “hard science” students
Nearly any group when placed in situation of negative comparison with other group.

7. Individual Differences in Vulnerability to Stereotype Threat
High
Low
Sensitivity to prejudice, history of prejudice X
Highly identified with performance domain (e.g., women science majors, Black lit majors) X
Attribute performance to stereotype rather than to own ability.
Self esteem if skill attributed to prejudice
Self efficacy if skill attributed to prejudice X X X

8. Anxiety Mediates Stereotype Threat
Self report data on anxiety and ST:
Mixed results, not conclusive
Blacovich et al., psychophysiological measures:
BP rises for Blacks in ST condition
Stereotype Threat  improved / worsened performance on simple tasks.
Stereotype Threat  improved / worsened performance on complex tasks.

9. Cognitive Impairments and Stereotype Threat
ST related to Wegner’s research on suppression (e.g. don’t think of a white bear) studies. How so?
Under ST, people try to suppress thoughts about stereotype, and about confirming stereotype.
Mental work of suppression  reduced attention for task at hand
Reduced attention  weakened performance
Weakened performance  increased efforts to suppress

10. Long Term Consequences of Stereotype Threat
Avoidance of challenge: Why?
Challenges can confirm stereotype, threaten self-esteem
Effect of avoiding challenge on ST-relevant domain?
ST domains not mastered, Stereotype reinforced
Disidentification:
Avoid domains where esteem is imperiled
ST most acute for those identified with ST domains
ST causes redefinition of self: “I’m not the math type”

11. Ascribed Identity vs. Achieved Identity and Stereotype Threat
Ascribed identity = Identity you were “born with”: gender, race, religion, nationality
Achieved identity = Identity you selected: grad student, socialist, vegan
Which kind of identity would most affect Stereotype Threat: ascribed or achieved?
McGlone and Aronson (2006) test moderating effect of ascribed vs. achieved ID
Female Ss indicate either: Gender (ascribed, stereotype relevant)
Being a private college student (achieved, ST irrelevant)
Being a Northeasterner (ascribed, stereotype irrelevant)
Ss complete difficult math test

12. How to Combat Stereotype Threat
Forewarning: Telling ST targets about ST (Aronson & Williams, 2006)
1. Black students get pamphlet describing: ST, test anxiety, unrelated topic
2. Complete classic ST experiment
Result: ST pamphlet and test anxiety pamphlet Ss show no ST effect; unrelated pamphlet Ss do show ST effect
Reframing Ability: Tell students abilities are malleable rather than fixed
* Aronson, Fried, & Good (2002): Black students do better on GRE verbal test if told test measures malleable ability rather than fixed ability. Also report
less anxiety.
* Good, Aronson, & Inzlicht (2003): Stereotype-vulnerable students told that:
1) Intelligence is malleable; 2) School difficulties are normal; 2) No info. Control group
Results: Latino students in conds 1 & 2 do better on statewide reading test
Female students in conds 1 & 2 = boys in math, but control < boys

13. How to Combat Stereotype Threat (continued)
Role Models: Counter-stereotypical exemplars weaken stereotype  less ST
* Marx & Roman (2002): Female experimenter, introduced as math expert, 
improved math performance by female students.
Self-Affirmation: Affirming self-concept bolsters resistance to ST
MORE ON THIS IN “SELF AFFIRMATION” CLASS

14. Terror Management Theory
Greenberg, Landau, Kosloff, & Solomon

15. Terror Management Theory: Basic Formulation
Animals “wired” to avoid lethal threats
Humans are animals, and share threat-avoidance instinct with other animals
Humans, unlike other animals, know they are mortal
Humans face existential threat dilemma; know they face inescapable lethal threat, yet wired to escape lethal threat.
Humans seek “death transcendence” as defense against existential terror.

16. Mortality Salience Hypothesis:
Connecting Existential Threat, Cultural Buffers, and Intergroup/Interpersonal Conflict
Awareness of own mortality
Seek death transcendence
Embrace
cultural Institutions
Existential terror
People who threaten our cultural buffers weaken our world views
Efforts to defend/restore defenses
Animosity, hostility to world view attackers
Affection, loyalty to world view advocates

17. Priming Mortality Salience (MS)
Mortality Salience Prime:
Please describe the emotions that the thought of your own death arouses in you. AND
Write down as specifically as you can what do you think will happen to you physically when you die.
Control Condition Salience Prime:
Please describe the emotions that the thought of [your next important exam] [painful dental exam] arouses in you. AND
Write down as specifically as you can what do you think will happen to you physically as you [take your next important exam] [undergo your painful dental exam].
Note: Control conditions are designed to arouse negative images and anxiety, but not mortality-based anxiety.

18. TMT: Prejudice, Stereotyping, and Discrimination
Anti-Semitism (Greenberg, et al. 1990): MS  Christians to favor fellow Christians, and to disfavor Jews. Also, Cohen, Jussim, Harber, & Bhasin, 2005.
Nationalism:
Castano et al., 2002: MS  Italians to favor other Italians and to
disfavor Germans.
Jonas et al., 2005: MS  Germans favor German-made products over foreign-made products. MS induced by standing near graveyard vs.
shopping center.
Florian & Mikulincer (1998): MS  Israeli kids favor native-born Israelis over Russian immigrants. Note: MS works on 11 yr. olds, not 7 yr olds. Why?
Political Orientation: MS  Liberals and conservatives to
serve more painful hot-sauce to person who criticized
liberals/conservatives respectively (McGregor et al, 1998).

19. TMT and Stereotyping
Following MS, which image of African Americans will Whites prefer?
(Schimel et al., 1999)
Control condition (No MS)
MS condition
Why does MS  favoring stereotypic minority?
MS  reliance on traditional world view. Stereotypes part of world view.
Stereotype consistent minority supports world view, buffers threat.
Stereotype inconsistent minority challenges world view, amplifies threat.

20. TMT and Support for Demagogues
Demagogue: A political leader who seeks support by appealing to popular desires and prejudices rather than by using rational argument
MS  support for politician who promised to lead the people to greatness (Cohen et al, 2004)
2004 Presidential campaign, Bush vs. Kerry
Control condition: Prefer Kerry
TM condition/Terrorism condition: Prefer Bush

21. TMT and Response to Stereotyped In-Group
MS will cause members of stereotyped groups to like or dislike
members of their group?
MS Women anticipating difficult math test to dis-identify with other women.
MS + reading about Hispanic drug dealer  Hispanics to criticize paintings attributed to
Hispanic artist but not White artist.
MS may induce Stereotype Threat: MS  women to underperform on easy academic test