Recent theory and research suggest that certain situational factors can harm women's math test performance. The three studies presented here indicate that female role models can buffer women's math test performance from the debilitating effects of these situational factors. In Study 1, women's math test performance was protected when a competent female experimenter (i.e., a female role model) administered the test. Study 2 showed that it was the perception of the female experimenter's math competence, not her physical presence, that safeguarded the math test performance of women. Study 3 revealed that learning about a competent female experimenter buffered women's self-appraised math ability, which in turn led to successful performance on a challenging math test. Fewpeoplewoulddisagreewiththeideathatrolemodels can have a profoundly positive impact on a person's life. Role models may differ in terms of their age, race, and/or sex, yet there is one feature that they share: They are all perceived to be competent in their respective areas (Lockwood & Kunda, 1997). For instance, female role models in math-related domains might be particularly helpful for math-talented women because they represent stereotype-disconfirming evidence about women's inferior math ability, so that women's math test performance is protected after encountering or learning about a female role model. In addition, if a low score on a standardized math test is one of the reasons why women are seriously underrepresented in math and engineering, then the benefits of having female role models for female students in those academic domains may be considerable. GENDER DIFFERENCES IN MATH Over the years, a vast amount of research has been devoted to investigating gender differences in math. Even though much of this work shows that such differences are relatively scarce (Hyde, Fennema, & Lamon, 1990; Kimball, 1989), there is a general pattern to the differences that do exist. Women, for instance, perform as well as men on less advanced math problems, but when the math problems become more advanced, women do not perform as well as men (Gallagher et al., 2000; Halpern, 1992; Kimball, 1989). This difference often does not emerge until high school (Hyde et al., 1990), precisely when performance on standardized math tests-tests that contain more advanced math problems-may matter the most. But perhaps the most far-reaching gender difference is the fact that female students, unlike male students, routinely encounter negative stereotypes about their math ability

The authors investigated how a collective self-construal orientation in combination with positive social comparisons "turns off" the negative effects of stereotype threat. Specifically, Experiment 1 demonstrated that stereotype threat led to increased accessibility of participants' collective self ("we"). Experiment 2 showed that this feeling of "we-ness" in the stereotype threat condition centered on the participants' stereotyped group membership and not on other important social groups (e.g., students). Experiment 3 indicated that in threat situations, when participants' collective self is accessible, positive social comparison information led to improved math test performance and less concern, whereas in nonthreat situations, when the collective self is less accessible, positive comparison information led to worse test performance and more concern. Our final experiment revealed that under stereotype threat, only those comparison targets who are competent in the relevant domain (math), rather than in domains unrelated to math (athletics), enhanced participants' math test performance.

According to stereotype threat theory (Steele, 1997), stereotyped targets under-perform on challenging tests, in part because they are worried about being viewed in terms of the negative stereotype that they are intellectually inferior. How then are the negative effects of stereotype threat reduced for stereotyped targets? To examine this issue, a study was conducted to investigate whether stereotype threat's adverse effects are reduced when a Black experimenter administers a verbal test to Black participants. We further examined the question of whether Black participants have a subjective awareness of stereotype threat. Results showed that when a Black experimenter gave a verbal test to Black participants, they did not suffer the typical performance decrements associated with stereotype threat. Additionally, results supported the hypothesis that Black participants have conscious access to the experience of stereotype threat and that this effect is partially mediated by their endorsement of the stereotype.

No abstract

Rates of human migration are steadily rising and have resulted in significant sociopolitical debates over how to best respond to increasing cultural diversity and changing migration patterns. Research on prejudicial attitudes toward immigrants has focused on the attitudes and beliefs that individuals in the receiving country hold about immigrants. The current study enhances this literature by examining how young adults view authorized and unauthorized immigrants and refugees. Using a between-groups design of 191 undergraduates, we found that participants consistently reported more prejudicial attitudes, greater perceived realistic threats, and greater intergroup anxiety when responding to questions about unauthorized compared with authorized immigrants. Additionally, there were differences in attitudes depending on participants' generational status, with older-generation participants reporting greater perceived realistic and symbolic threat, prejudice, and anxiety than newer-generation students. In some instances, these effects were moderated by participant race/ethnicity and whether they were evaluating authorized or unauthorized immigrants. Lastly, perceived realistic threat, symbolic threat, and intergroup anxiety were significant predictors of prejudicial attitudes. Overall, participants reported positive attitudes toward refugees and resettlement programs in the United States. These findings have implications for future research and interventions focused on immigration and prejudice toward migrant groups.

Past work has shown that in‐group role models buffer stereotyped targets from stereotype threat. What is less clear is what makes an effective in‐group role model. Accordingly, we conducted a study to examine whether increasing the similarity of in‐group role models will enhance their effectiveness in stereotype threat situations. Female participants in this study were either exposed to a more or less similar (on the basis of school affiliation, life experiences, and interests) female job candidate who was either high or low in math competence. Afterwards, participants took a math exam under stereotype threat conditions. Results revealed that similarity moderated the effect of job candidate math competence: Female participants' math performance improved more after exposure to a more similar compared with a less similar, high math‐competent candidate. No effects of similarity occurred for the low math‐competent candidates. We further found that feelings of intimidation partially mediated the performance effects. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Studies have shown that allowing people to answer questionnaires completely anonymously yields more reports of socially inappropriate attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors, and researchers have often assumed that this is evidence of increased honesty. But such evidence does not demonstrate that reports gathered under completely anonymous conditions are more accurate.Although complete anonymity may decrease a person's motivation to distort reports in socially desirable directions, complete anonymity may also decrease accountability, thereby decreasing motivation to answer thoughtfully and precisely. Three studies reported in this paper demonstrate

It has been argued that priming negative stereotypic traits is sufficient to cause stereotype threat. The present research challenges this assumption by highlighting the role of the social self and targets' concerns about confirming a negative group-based stereotype. Specifically, in 3 experiments the authors demonstrate that stereotype threat adversely affects the test performance and threat-based concerns of targets (but not nontargets) because only targets' social self is linked to the negative group stereotype. Trait priming, however, harms the test performance of both targets and nontargets but has no effect on their threat-based concerns because trait priming does not require such a link between the social self and the group stereotype. Moreover, the authors show that merely increasing the accessibility of the social self in nonthreatening situations leads to the underperformance of targets but has no meaningful effect on nontargets' test performance.