New York Times on Stereotype Threat

The New York Times has an article on the most recent stereotype threat research: Women perform worse on math tests when they are first told that men are better at math. When they are told that men and women are equal, they perform equally. Unfortunately, the report in Science on which the article is based is locked behind a paywall. Fortunately, you can find some of Heine's research materials, including the essays used to remind women of stereotype threat here.

Also, Cognitive Daily has reported on similar research:

The first study has essentially the same conclusion as the Dar-Nimrod and Heine research cited in the NYT article. What Dar-Nimrod and Heine add to this research is a study design that incorporates reminders of stereotypes into the study itself: Instead of being "instructed" about stereotype differences, women are told they are taking a "reading comprehension" test followed by a math test. In the reading comprehension section, women read essays either reminding them of stereotypes about women's math performance or arguing that men and women are equal. So even when not overtly reminded about stereotypes by the test administrator, an effect of stereotypes is still present.

(Thanks to CogDaily reader Hypercycloid for the link)


More like this

On 14 January 2005, Lawrence Summers (right), president of Harvard University spoke of the reasons behind the disproportionate lack of women in top-end science and engineering jobs. Avoiding suggestions of discrimination, he offered two explanations - unwillingness to commit to the 80-hour…
By now you've probably heard about the Dar-Nimrod and Heine study on stereotype threat and math performance in women. If you're interested in learning more about that study, check out Hugo's post at Alpha Psy. Since Hugo did such a nice job describing the study, and since I'm lazy, I'm not going to…
Regular commenter Blair was kind enough to bring to my attention an article from The Globe and Mail, reporting research done at the University of British Columbia, that illustrates how what we think we know can have a real impact on what we can do: Over three years, researchers gave 135 women tests…
A great post at eduwonkette looks at gender and stereotype threat in math performance. Stereotype threat has been well-documented in "laboratory" settings, but eduwonkette reports on a study in a real-life setting: These men and women were, by all accounts, in the pipeline for math and science…

Some interesting observations of the study are the differences in performance observed when genetic explanation and stereotypes were invoked vis-a-vis when experiential explanations were provided. These cannot be explained by stereotype threat theory alone and need to take into account the differences in performance caused by different underlying conceptualization of Math ability.

I have attempted such an interpretation and would love comments on the same.

Is it just me, or is the headline given to the NYT article almost a stereotype threat of its own?

"Experts: Some Women Perform Well in Math".

No kidding! Now how about coming up with a headline that doesn't sound surprised that women can do math well, and that actually expresses something useful about the article?

From a sociological perspective, women could be showing a will to conform to gender roles, if a passion for math is indicated as unfeminine.

I'd be interested in stereotype threat in young males, with general academic performance. It's a well known stereotype that "nerds" are socially disadvantaged(no dates), I wonder what exposure to an essay telling(lying?) of intellectuals being overtly successful in desirable social outcomes, vs. an essay on the common socially dysfunctional nerd stereotype, would do to a young male's test scores, maybe with material tested being from several disciplines even. This could reveal very profound things for issues of national competitiveness, and legitimize a sanctioned response to anti-intellectualism in the national interest.