Mere effort and stereotype threat performance effects.

Abstract

Although the fact that stereotype threat impacts performance is well established, the underlying process(es) is(are) not clear. Recently, T. Schmader and M. Johns (2003) argued for a working memory interference account, which proposes that performance suffers because cognitive resources are expended on processing information associated with negative stereotypes. The antisaccade task provides a vehicle to test this account because optimal performance requires working memory resources to inhibit the tendency to look at an irrelevant, peripheral cue (the prepotent response) and to generate volitional saccades to the target. If stereotype threat occupies working memory resources, then the ability to inhibit the prepotent response and to launch volitional saccades will be impaired, and performance will suffer. In contrast, S. Harkins's (2006) mere effort account argues that stereotype threat participants are motivated to perform well, which potentiates the prepotent response, but also leads to efforts to counter this tendency if participants recognize that the response is incorrect, know the correct response, and have the opportunity to make it. Results from 4 experiments support the mere effort but not the working memory interference account.

An integrated process model of stereotype threat effects on performance.

“…Although we believe that these findings shed light on the component processes involved in working memory impairments, Jamieson and Harkins (2007) interpreted their results as being incompatible with the idea that stereotype threat affects working memory. In their view, stereotype threat motivates mere effort at the task, which then leads to an increased potentiation of a prepotent response.…”

“…Spencer et al, 1999) and more subtle manipulations in which the researcher's expectations for poor performance are less likely to be consciously primed (e.g., Inzlicht & Ben-Zeev, 2000; J. L. Smith & White, 2002;Stone & McWhinnie, in press). Furthermore, recent evidence confirms that such manipulations increase one's motivation to try to disconfirm the negative stereotype, at least for those who are highly identified with the domain (Forbes, Schmader, & Allen, 2007;Jamieson & Harkins, 2007). Some have suggested that stereotype threat has little impact outside of the laboratory (Cullen, Hardison, & Sackett, 2004;Stricker & Ward, 2004).…”

“…By this logic, if one was able to have individuals matched on task engagement who merely differ in terms of working memory efficiency, those with higher baseline working memory should show relatively less susceptibility to stereotype threat. Does Evidence of "Mere Effort" Rule out a Role for Working Memory?- Jamieson and Harkins (2007) recently proposed that stereotype threat harms performance because it motivates mere effort at the task. According to their view, the motivation to do well increases activation of the prepotent response, which is often incorrect on difficult tasks (Zajonc, 1965).…”

An examination of stereotype threat effects on girls’ mathematics performance.

“…Past research with college students has suggested that to be impacted by stereotype threat, women must be identified with mathematics and take a difficult mathematics test in an evaluative situation in which their gender is made salient. Steele (1997) proposed that stereotype threat affects people who identify with the domain in question (in this case, women who are identified with mathematics; Forbes, Schmader, & Allen, 2008;Jamieson & Harkins, 2007;Smith & White, 2001). Mathematics identification involves two components: feeling that you are good at mathematics and feeling that it is important to you to be good at mathematics (Smith & White, 2001).…”

The effects of stereotype threat and contextual cues on alcohol users' inhibitory control

“…Here, research shows that the situational salience of a negative stereotype may deplete working memory efficiency to bring about performance decrements on a given task (Schmader & Johns, 2003). Conversely, other researchers have argue that the experience of stereotype threat may motivate individuals to disprove the negative stereotype, thus influencing goal engagement and enhanced control (Jamieson & Harkins, 2007).…”