The costs of accepting gender differences: The role of stereotype endorsement in women's experience in the math domain

Sex Roles

Volumn 50, Issue 11-12, 2004, Pages 835-850

  Schmader, Toni ^a,b   Johns, Michael ^a   Barquissau, Marchelle ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

^b University of Arizona   (United States)

Author keywords

Career choice; Gender stereotypes; Legitimizing ideologies; Math performance; Stereotype threat

Indexed keywords

EID: 3843051137     PISSN: 03600025     EISSN: 15732762     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/b:sers.0000029101.74557.a0     Document Type: Review

References (51)

1. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
2. Beyer, S. (1998). Gender differences in self-perception and negative recall biases. Sex Roles, 38, 103-133.
3. Beyer, S. (1999). Gender differences in the accuracy of grade expectations and evaluations. Sex Roles, 41, 279-296.
4. Beyer, S., Rynes, K., Perrault, J., Hay, K., & Haller, S. (2003, February). Gender differences in computer science students. Paper presented at the 34th SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, Reno, NV.
5. Bielinski, J., & Davison, M. L. (1998). Gender differences by item difficulty interactions in multiple-choice mathematics items. American Educational Research Journal, 35, 455-476.
6. Blanton, H., Christie, C., & Dye, M. (2002). Social identity versus reference frame comparisons: The moderating role of stereotype endorsement. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 253-267.
7. Cohen, G. L., Steele, C. M., & Ross, L. D. (1999). The mentor's dilemma: Providing critical feedback across the racial divide. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 1302-1318.
8. Davies, P. G., Spencer, S. J., Quinn, D. M., & Gerhardstein, R. (2002). Consuming images: How television commercials that elicit stereotype threat can restrain women academically and professionally. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1615-1628.
9. Eccles, J. S., Jacobs, J. E., & Harold, R. D. (1990). Gender role stereotypes, expectancy effects, and parents' socialization of gender differences. Journal of Social Issues, 46, 183-201.
10. Ellemers, N., Wilke, H., & Van Knippenberg, A. (1993). Effects of the legitimacy of low group or individual status on individual and collective status-enhancement strategies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 766-778.
11. Heatherton, T. F., & Polivy, J. (1991). Development and validation of a scale measuring state self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 895-910.
12. Hong, Y., Chui, C., & Dweck, C. S. (1999). Implicit theories, attributions, and coping: A meaning system approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 588-599.
13. Hyde, J. S., Fennema, E., & Ryan, M. (1990). Gender comparisons of mathematics attitudes and affect: A meta-analysis. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 14, 299-324.
14. 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.
15. Inzlicht, M., & Ben-Zeev, T. (2003). Do high-achieving female students underperform in private? The implications of threatening environments on intellectual processing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 796-805.
16. Jacobs, J. E., & Weisz, V. (1994). Gender stereotypes: Implications for gifted education. Roeper Review, 16, 152-155.
17. Jost, J. T., & Banaji, M. R. (1994). The role of stereotyping in system-justification and the production of false consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 1-27.
18. Jost, J. T., Pelham, B. W., & Sheldon, O. (2003). Social inequality and the reduction of ideological dissonance on behalf of the system: Evidence of enhanced system justification among the disadvantaged. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 13-36.
19. Keller, J. (2002). Blatant stereotype threat and women's math performance: Self-handicapping as a strategic means to cope with obtrusive negative performance expectations. Sex Roles, 47, 193-198.
20. Kluegel, J. R., & Smith, E. R. (1986). Beliefs about inequality: Americans' views of what is and what ought to be. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
21. Landau, M. J., Johns, M., Greenberg, J., Pyszczynski, T., Martens, A., Goldenberg, J., et al. (in press). A Function of Form: Effects of mortality salience on structuring the social world. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
22. Lerner, M. (1980). The belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion. New York: Plenum Press.
23. Levin, S., Sidanius, J., Robinowitz, J., & Federico, C. (1998). Ethnic identity, legitimizing ideologies, and social status: A matter of ideological asymmetry. Political Psychology, 19, 373-404.
24. Luhtanen, R., & Crocker, J. (1992). A Collective Self-Esteem Scale: Self-evaluation of one's social identity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 302-318.
25. Major, B. (1994). From social inequality to personal entitlement: The role of social comparisons, legitimacy appraisals, and group membership. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 26, pp. 293-355). New York: Academic Press.
26. Major, B., Gramzow, R. H., McCoy, S., Levin, S., Schmader, T., Sidanius, J., et al. (2002). Perceiving personal discrimination: The role of group status and legitimizing ideology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 269-282.
27. Major, B., & Schmader, T. (1998). Coping with stigma through psychological disengagement. In J. Swim & C. Stangor (Eds.), Prejudice: The target's perspective (pp. 93-111). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
28. Major, B., & Schmader, T. (2001). Legitimacy and construal of social disadvantage. In J. Jost & B. Major (Eds.), Psychology of legitimacy: Emerging perspectives on ideology, justice, and intergroup relations (pp. 176-204). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
29. National Center for Education Statistics. (1997). Findings from the condition of education 1997: Women in mathematics and science (NCES Publication No. 97-982). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
30. National Center for Education Statistics. (2003). Postsecondary Institutions in the United States. Fall 2002 and Degrees and Other Awards Conferred: 2001-02 (NCES Publication No. 2004154). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
31. Nosek, B. A., Banaji, M. R., & Greenwald, A. G. (2002). Math = male, me = female, therefore math ≠ me. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 44-59.
32. Oswald, D. L., & Harvey, R. D. (2003). A Q-methodological study of women's subjective perspectives on mathematics. Sex Roles, 49, 133-142.
33. Quinn, D. M., & Crocker, J. (1999). When ideology hurts: Effects of belief in the Protestant ethic and feeling overweight on the psychological well-being of women. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 402-414.
34. 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.
35. Sachdev, I., & Bourhis, R. Y. (1991). Power and status differentials in minority and majority group relations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 21, 1-24.
36. Schmader, T. (2002). Gender identification moderates the effects of stereotype threat on women's math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 194-201.
37. Schmader, T., & Johns, M. (2003). Converging evidence that stereotype threat reduces working memory capacity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 440-452.
38. Schmader, T., Major, B., Eccleston, C. P., & McCoy, S. K. (2001). Devaluing domains in response to threatening intergroup comparisons: Perceived legitimacy and the status value asymmetry. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 782-796.
39. Shih, M., Pittinsky, T. L., & Ambady, N. (1999). Stereotype susceptibility: Identity salience and shifts in quantitative performance. Psychological Science, 10, 80-83.
40. Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1993). The inevitability of oppression and the dynamics of social dominance. In P. M. Sniderman, P. E. Tetlock, & E. G. Carmines (Eds.), Prejudice, politics, and the American dilemma (pp. 173-211). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
41. Sidanius, J., Pratto, F., & Mitchell, M. (1994). In-group identification, social dominance orientation, and differential intergroup social allocation. Journal of Social Psychology, 134, 151-167.
42. Smith, J. L., & White, P. H. (2002). An examination of implicitly activated, explicitly activated, and nullified stereotypes on mathematical performance: It's not just a woman's issue. Sex Roles, 47, 179-191.
43. 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.
44. Steele, C. M. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape the intellectual identities and performance. American Psychologist, 52, 613-629.
45. Steele, C. M., & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and intellectual test performance of African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 797-811.
46. Steele, C. M., Spencer, S. J., & Aronson, J. (2002). Contending with group image: The psychology of stereotype and social identity threat. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 34, pp. 379-440). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
47. Steele, J., James, J., & Barnett, R. C. (2002). Learning in a man's world: Examining the perceptions of undergraduate women in male-dominated academic areas. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26, 46-50.
48. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). Social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In W. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (2nd ed., pp. 7-24). Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
49. Tiedemann, J. (2000). Parents' gender stereotypes and teachers' beliefs as predictors of children's concept of their mathematical ability in elementary school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 144-151.
50. Turner, J., & Brown, R. (1978). Social status, cognitive alternatives, and intergroup relations. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 201-234). New York: Academic Press.
51. Walsh, M., Hickey, C., & Duffy, J. (1999). Influence of item content and stereotype situation on gender differences in mathematical problem solving. Sex Roles, 41, 219-240.