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.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Baron, R. M. , & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
2.
Blanton, H. , Crocker, J., & Miller, D. T. (2000). The effects of in-group versus out-group social comparison on self-esteem in the context of a negative stereotype. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 36, 519-530.
3.
Boswell, S. J. (1985). The influence of sex-role stereotyping on women’s attitudes and achievement in mathematics. In S. F. Chipman, L. R. Brush, & D. M. Wilson (Eds.), Women and mathematics: Balancing the equation (pp. 175-197). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
4.
Brewer, M. B. , & Weber, J. G. (1994). Self-evaluation effects of interpersonal versus intergroup social comparison. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 268-275.
5.
Bridgeman, B. , & Wendler, C. (1991). Gender differences in predictors of college mathematics performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 275-284.
6.
Brockner, J. , & Elkind, M. (1985). Self-esteem and reactance: Further evidence of attitudinal and motivational consequences. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 21, 346-361.
7.
Brown, R. P. , & Josephs, R. A. (1999). A burden of proof: Stereotype relevance and gender differences in math performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 246-257.
8.
Collins, R. L. (1996). For better or worse: The impact of upward social comparisons on self-evaluation. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 51-69.
9.
Crocker, J. , Major, B., & Steele, C. M. (1998). Social Stigma. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (pp. 504-553). New York: McGraw-Hill.
10.
Dijksterhuis, A. , Spears, R., Postmes, T., Stapel, D., Koomen, W., Knippenberg, A., et al. (1998). Seeing one thing and doing another: Contrast effects in automatic behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 862-871.
11.
Educational Testing Service . (1994). GRE: Practicing to take the general test (9th ed.). Princeton, NJ: Author.
12.
Fisher, B. (1988). Wandering in the wilderness: The search for women role models. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 13, 211-233.
13.
Gallagher, A. M. , De Lisi, R., Holst, P. C., McGillicuddy-De Lisi, A. V., Morely, M., & Cahalan, C. (2000). Gender differences in advanced mathematical problem solving. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 75, 165-190.
14.
Gilbert, L. A. , Gallessich, J. M., & Evans, S. L. (1983). Sex of faculty role model and students’ self-perceptions of competency. Sex Roles, 9, 597-607.
15.
Graduate Record Examinations Board. (1997). Sex, race, ethnicity and performance on the GRE General Test (Tech. Rep.). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
16.
Hackett, G. (1985). Role of mathematics self-efficacy in the choice of math-related majors of college women and men: A path analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 32, 47-56.
17.
Halpern, D. F. (1992). Sex differences in cognitive abilities (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
18.
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.
19.
Hyde, J. S. , Fennema, E., & Lamon, S. J. (1990). Gender differences in mathematics performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 139-155.
20.
Inzlicht, M. , & Ben-Zeev, T. (2000). A threatening intellectual environment: Why females are susceptible to experiencing stereotype problem-solving deficits in the presence of males. Psychological Science, 11, 365-371.
21.
Javidan, M. , Bemmels, B., Devine, K. S., & Dastmalchian, A. (1995). Superior and subordinate gender and the acceptance of superiors as role models. Human Relations, 48, 1271-1284.
22.
Kimball, M. M. (1989). A new perspective on women’s math achievement. Psychology Bulletin, 105, 198-214.
23.
Lockwood, P. , & Kunda, Z. (1997). Superstars and me: Predicting the impact of role models on the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 91-103.
24.
Major, B. , Sciacchitano, A. M., & Crocker, J. (1993). In-group vs. out-group comparisons and self-esteem. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 711-721.
25.
Marx, D. M. , Brown, J. L., & Steele, C. M. (1999). Allport’s legacy and the situational press of stereotypes [Special issue: Prejudice and intergroup relations: Papers in honor of Gordon W. Allport’s centennial]. Journal of Social Issues, 55(3), 491-502.
26.
Marx, D. M. , Urland, G. R., & Overbeck, J. R. (2002). Seeing is believing: Protecting students’ test performance through images of success. Manuscript in preparation.
27.
National Science Foundation . (1996). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering: 1996 (Publication No. 96-311). Arlington, VA: Author.
28.
Pelham, B. W. , & Wachsmuth, J. O. (1995). The waxing and waning of the social self: Assimilation and contrast in social comparison. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 825-838.
29.
Quinn, D. M. , & Spencer, S. J. (2001). The interference of stereotype threat with women’s generation of mathematical problem-solving strategies [Special issue: Stigma: An insider’s perspective]. Journal of Social Issues, 57(1), 55-71.
30.
Schmader, T. (in press). Gender identification moderates stereotype threat effects on women’s math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology.
31.
Schmader, T. , & Major, B. (1999). The impact of ingroup vs. outgroup performance on personal values. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 47-67.
32.
Spencer, S. J. , Steele, C. M., & Quinn, D. (1999). Stereotype threat and women’s math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 4-28.
33.
Steele, C. M. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance. American Psychologist, 52, 613-629.
34.
Taylor, S. E. , & Lobel, M. (1989). Social comparison activity under threat: Downward evaluation and upward contacts. Psychological Review, 96, 569-575.
35.
Tesser, A. (1986). Some effects of self-evaluation maintenance on cognition and action. In R. M. Sorrentino & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition: Foundations of social behavior (pp. 435-464). New York: Guilford.
36.
Word, C. O. , Zanna, M. P., & Cooper, J. (1974). The nonverbal mediation of self-fulfilling prophecies in inter-racial interactions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 10, 109-120.
