Using SAT-Grade and Ability-Job Performance Relationships to Test Predictions Derived From Stereotype Threat Theory.

Abstract

To examine the generalizability of stereotype threat theory findings from laboratory to applied settings, the authors developed models of the pattern of relationships between cognitive test scores and outcome criteria that would be expected if the test scores of women and minority group members were affected by stereotype threat. Two large data sets were used to test these models, one in an education setting examining SAT-grade relationships by race and gender and the other in a military job setting examining Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery-job performance relationships by race. Findings were not supportive of the predictions arising from stereotype threat theory, suggesting caution in positing threat as a key determinant of subgroup mean test score differences in applied settings.

STEREOTYPE THREAT SPILLOVER AND SAT® SCORES

“…Thus, like other studies using data from high-stakes operational settings (e.g., Cullen et al, 2004Cullen et al, , 2006Stricker and Ward, 2004), this study showed little evidence consistent with a stereotype threat hypothesis. This does not mean that such effects do not exist in operational settings.…”

“…It does mean that effects that appear to be ubiquitous in the laboratory may be much more difficult to demonstrate with real-world test administrations. As Cullen et al (2004) stated clearly, laboratory results should be generalized beyond the laboratory with caution.…”

“…In one study, Cullen, Hardison, and Sackett (2004) tested predictions from stereotype threat theory about the relationship between test scores and academic and job performance and the role of the individual's identification with the domain in this relationship. They reasoned (following Steele, 1997) that more able students would be more likely to identify with the domain in question.…”

Stereotype Threat and Educational Tracking: A Field Experiment in Chinese Vocational High Schools

“…Despite or perhaps because of long-standing scholarly interest in stereotype threat, there is competing evidence regarding whether stereotype threat explains real-world differences in group outcomes. Although some work suggests that stereotype threat explains real-world differences in achievement (Good, Aronson, and Inzlicht 2003;Huguet and Régner 2007;Walton and Spencer 2009), other work has raised questions about the straightforward application of stereotype threat explanations outside the laboratory setting (Cullen, Hardison, and Sackett 2004;Morgan, Mehta, and Research Library Core 2004;Müller and Rothermund 2014;Stricker and Ward 2004;Wax 2009;Wei 2012). At the very least, recent work has emphasized that the effects of stereotype threat by race depend on contextual moderators such as the racial composition of a given school (Hanselman et al 2014) or local understandings of race (Herman 2009).…”

Stereotype Threat and Group Differences in Test Performance: A Question of Measurement Invariance.

“…Of more practical importance is the fact that tests for measurement invariance with respect to groups can shed light on the degree to which stereotype threat plays a role in real-life and high-stakes settings. This provides a means to study the effects of stereotype threat in settings in which it is ethically and pragmatically difficult to manipulate the debilitating effects of stereotype threat on test performance (Cullen, Hardison, & Sackett, 2004;Sackett, 2003;Steele & Davies, 2003;Steele, Spencer, & Aronson, 2002).…”