Soc Psychol Educ (2008) 11:243–257

DOI 10.1007/s11218-008-9053-3

Stereotype threat: effects on education

Cary Stacy Smith · Li-Ching Hung

Received: 24 June 2006 / Accepted: 14 March 2008 / Published online: 9 April 2008
© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Abstract Numerous stereotypes exist regarding race and gender, and while all are
difficult to eradicate, one still regnant throughout society is the notion that females
are not as capable as males within the fields of math and science. In order to expose
this belief as faulty, an in depth literature review was initiated, with special attention
being placed on interventions considered helpful in eliminating stereotype threat. The
paper’s primary purpose centered on how, and to what extent, stereotype threats affect
the mathematics scores of females and minorities. In addition, case studies and a crit-
ical perspective regarding the research, as well as suggestions for future research, are
discussed.

Keywords Stereotype threat · Gender · Minorities · Group performance ·

Role model

Claude Steele and Joshua Aronson brought the term “stereotype threat” to popular
usage with their seminal article on the resulting poor performance of Black students
taking the Graduate Record Examination after being informed that the test measured
their intelligence (1995). Since then, the field has broadened to include gender and
other minorities. One particularly difficult stereotype to eliminate is the belief that
women are inferior to men in “masculine” fields like math and science. Numerous
articles dealing with this topic exist (Marx and Roman 2002; McIntyre et al. 2003;
Schmader 2002; Spencer et al. 1999; Steele 1997) and although universities enjoy
a diverse student body, something unheard of as little as 50 years ago, stereotypes

C. S. Smith (B) · L.-C. Hung

Mississippi State University, Starkville, MS, USA
e-mail: ssmith5026@aol.com
L.-C. Hung
e-mail: lh210@msstate.edu

123
244 C. S. Smith, L.-C. Hung

regarding race and gender still prevail. Brown and Josephs (1999) wrote that gender
differences in math ability are still extant within the academy, while Ernest (1976)
pointed out that 63% of teachers believed that males had superior math skills when
compared to their female classmates.
While women represent 50% of the population, around 22% receive B.S. degrees,
with only 13% holding Ph.D.s (Oswald and Harvey 2001). According to Nadya (1995),
Blacks and Hispanics represent only a fraction of the students in colleges at all levels,
but the disparity widens within math and science majors. Furthermore, females hold
approximately 10% of the jobs in the fields of math, physics, and engineering.
However, these beliefs affect children differently, especially in diverse areas like
play (Bussey and Bandura 1992), memory (Liben and Signorella 1980), and pref-
erences (Huston 1983). Once children differentiate between the sexes, they begin
forming gender stereotypes, resulting in behavior influenced by gender-associated
expectations (Martin and Little 1990). McKown and Weinstein (2003) wrote that chil-
dren’s stereotype consciousness in middle childhood (age 6–10) changes dramatically,
and that children from all ethnic groups, especially those academically stigmatized,
show stereotype awareness at an early age.
Two studies (Levy and Dweck 1999) were conducted that investigated how 122 6th
graders developed stereotypes. For the first study, the students judged a school charac-
terized by mostly negative behaviors, whereas for the second, they judged two schools
(characterized by either mostly negative or positive behaviors). Their results indicated
that children with a fixed view of personality (relative to those with a more mallea-
ble attitude) made more extreme trait ratings of both the “positive” and “negative”
schools, generalized their trait judgments to an unknown student, perceived greater
within-school similarity and between-school differences, and showed less desire to
interact with students in the “negative” school.
When the members of a group can be negatively stereotyped in a social situation,
they carry an extra burden: their performance, good or bad, might well be interpreted
in terms of the prevailing racial or gender stereotype (Spencer et al. 1999). Should
the performance be consistent with the stereotype (e.g., a woman scoring poorly on a
math test, an upper class White man being clumsy on the dance floor, etc.), the behav-
ior serves to confirm the stereotype in the eyes of the beholders; this phenomenon
has been labeled stereotype threat (1999). These stereotype threat effects, induced by
academic performance, become salient for a large number of children by third grade
and continue into high school and college—where significant gender differences in
mathematical achievement become more noticeable (Hall and Davis 1999).
In the United States, the belief that males are somehow more adept in mathematics
is common. Once a young girl becomes cognizant of this, expectancy effects could
result, causing her performance on math-based tests to become affected. Gender based
stereotype threats for women occur when a female believes she is at risk of being judged
by the stereotype that women’s mathematical ability is weaker than men’s; hence, her
fear causes underperformance (Spencer et al. 1999). The idea of stereotype threat neg-
atively affecting performance is well documented, and many studies have examined
this phenomenon (Brown and Josephs 1999; Inzlicht and Ben-Zeev 2003; O’Brien
and Crandall 2003; Osborne 2001; Spencer et al. 1999).

123
Stereotype threat 245

Catsambis (1994) studied the existing information regarding group membership

and success in college, and concluded that women were expected to have inferior
math skills when compared with their male counterparts. Moreover, it was considered
commonplace for females to experience insecurity because of their poor mathematical
ability. Interestingly, this phenomenon is not just for girls with low socioeconomic sta-
tus, but has been witnessed among females considered intellectually gifted (Eccles and
Harold 1992). This results in females often having poorer scholastic results (though
they have the ability), especially when their academic environment and parents sup-
port stereotyped beliefs. The gender-minority academic gap continues into adulthood,
adversely influencing career choice. The largest dichotomy concerning this phenom-
enon may be seen in the highly prominent fields of math, physics, and engineering—
professions where females hold approximately 10% of the total positions (Hyde et al.
1990; Sleeter 1997). Thus, females are taught to believe from an early age that they
are not the equal of males, especially in mathematics and science.

1 Possible causes

Bolick (1996) reported, “The Supreme Court’s decision on affirmative action leaves
unsolved a racial gap in academic performance that leads to huge disparities in post-
secondary education.” The statistics Clint used show that women and minorities are
vastly underrepresented in the fields of math and science, but one question has been
(and continues to be) “Why?” Another pertinent issue coalesces around the concept
of amelioration. Stereotype threat may be defined as the fear of confirming a neg-
ative stereotype concerning one’s own group. According to the theory, whenever a
woman engages in a math task she faces the possibility of confirming the stereotype
of women’s low math abilities if she fails to perform the task well (Spencer et al.
1999).
In an attempt to answer the question of “Why” so few women enter occupations
commonly seen as male dominated or “scientific,” Jacquelynne Eccles and her col-
leagues designed a model emphasizing achievement-related choices (1994). The gist
of their model stressed that educational, vocational, and other achievement-related
choices link, leading to two primary beliefs: (1) that one’s expectations for future suc-
cess and (2) the relative importance one places upon the options perceived as available,
directly influence (for better or worse) one’s career path. Eccles then joined achieve-
ment-related beliefs, outcomes, and goals (i.e., how they interact with one another) in
order to understand how women interpret various systems.
For instance, causal attributions, the input received from others (especially parents
and teachers), one’s gender role conceptions, and one’s self-perceptions linked with
one’s self-concept, are studied for insight into how they interact and influence career
choice (Eccles 1994; Oswald and Harvey 2003). A woman with low expectations for
success in math, coupled with the misperception that her success in science related
fields is limited, faces the possibility of confirming the stereotype if she fails to per-
form well on activities like taking an advanced calculus test or doing well in a rigorous
physics course.

123
246 C. S. Smith, L.-C. Hung

Aptitude is an important factor concerning gender differences and success in math

(Eccles 1987, 1994). Concerning the divergences in male and female ability, a meta-
analysis was run showing that the disparity between women and men, in terms of
math ability (relatively speaking), is slight, d = .20 (Hyde et al. 1990), though men are
favored. Girls often outperform boys during grades 1–6, though the effect is minor.
Once they reach high school, the gender gap has widened considerably, with boys and
men outperforming girls and women—a gap that continues through life. The dissim-
ilarities are most distinct in complex problem solving, rather than in computational
abilities or conceptual understanding. Mau and Lynn (2000), in a study comparing boys
and girls scores in grades 10 and 12, wrote that gender differences were pronounced,
with boys outscoring girls in math and science.
For years, stereotype threat was dominated by both biological and psychosocial
models. The former stated that natural influences (hormones, genetics, etc.) play a big
part in the development of stereotype threat. The latter proposed that stereotype threat
was directly influenced by learned helplessness, cultural norms and values, auton-
omous learning behavior, etc. (Eccles 1994). Other models integrate biological and
psychosocial factors (Halpern 2000). Some researchers see stereotype threat as social
psychological states created by situational cues in susceptible individuals (Contrada
et al. 2000). Another possible causation centers on academic achievement and reten-
tion rates found between White and Black Americans at all academic levels (Steele
and Aronson 1995).
In addition, Blacks may suffer performance differences due to socioeconomic
advantages, segregation, and discrimination. Stereotype threats are transmitted through
culture in a variety of ways: mass media, environment, peers, and teachers are just a
few examples (Quinn and Spencer 2001). Likewise, children are affected in a number
of ways, for example, through the toys they play with, the books they choose to read,
how their classmates treat them, the class they choose to take, and the careers they
decide to pursue (2001).
Shih et al. (1999) wrote that people carry different social identities, such as age,
race, and gender with them; therefore, different identities are associated with different
stereotypes and thus, individuals may be susceptible to them. Furthermore, research
implies that different academic performances tend to occur when males outnumber
females (Inzlicht and Ben-Zeev 2000). Gaps in academic performance could result
due to stereotypes impugning the math abilities of females, as well as the intellectual
abilities of minorities like Black and Hispanic students (Steele and Aronson 1995).
Stereotype threats affect the math scores of female and minority students, but most
teachers and parents are unaware of the phenomenon (Freeman 2003). The primary
purpose of this literature review was to study how much, and to what extent stereotype
threats affect the mathematics scores of females and minorities.
As mentioned earlier, achievement gaps exist regarding minority and female stu-
dents, and are most obvious in math and science (Freeman 2003). In 1997, 900 doc-
toral recipients graduated in computer science; however, this figure included only
three minority women, one Black and two Hispanic (National Science Foundation
2001). One study (Fine et al. 1997) concluded that Whites and Asian/Pacific Islander
students continue to outperform Black, Hispanic, and Native American students at
every grade level in all academic subjects. Psychological factors like low self-esteem,

123
Stereotype threat 247

anxiety, and stereotype threats contribute greatly to academic achievement discrepan-

cies; however, most researchers consider stereotype threat to be the most important
(and is often formulated as the single, most essential component) element—often
causing wider performance gaps (Oswald and Harvey 2001).

1.1 Stereotype threat theory with performance

The Stereotype Threat (ST) model (Steele and Aronson 1995) posits that, “when these
individuals perform a difficult task in an area in which the group is considered weak
(that is, in terms of the total number of individuals), they feel at risk of confirming
the stereotype, and psychological pressure will lead them to upper perform.” Studies
show that negative stereotypes associated with one’s gender group could adversely
affect intellectual performance (Good et al. 2003).
Stereotypes like blacks are lazy, girls are bad at math, and others can cause under-
achievement for adults as well as children (Reyna 2000). When a stereotype threat is
high, women are more likely to lose their problem solving skills as opposed to when a
stereotype threat is low (Quinn and Spencer 2001). In addition, minority groups tend
to suffer from a deficit performance while performing a difficult task in which their
identified racial group is considered weak (Cadinu et al. 2003).
Performance deficits concerning Blacks and stereotypes were found on verbal tests
(Steele and Aronson 1995), individuals with lower income on verbal tests (Croizet
and Claire 1998), Latino students on spatial ability tasks (Gonzales et al. 2002), ath-
letes on sports-related tasks (Stone et al. 1999), as well as women on mathematics
tests (Inzlicht and Ben-Zeev 2000). In regards to women and math, empirical research
has demonstrated that women underperform relative to their male counterparts when
stereotype threat is present (Spencer et al. 1999). However, when stereotype threat is
removed, the gender gap disappears. The theory predicts that stereotype threat leads
to disidentification with the negatively stereotyped domain.
One factor considered highly important in the development of stereotype threats is
evaluative scrutiny. What that signifies is that test takers are identifying their gender
before the test and group composition; that is, if a group of test takers is comprised of
different races or gender, a stereotype threat might occur. When women are confronted
about their poor math ability as a group, they often worry that their own behavior may
substantiate the negative stereotypes regarding women’s math abilities in the eyes of
others (Inzlicht and Ben-Zeev 2000).
In other words, stereotype threats may decrease minority and female students’ per-
formance, regardless of their actual performance. Keller (2002) reported on an exper-
iment (n = 75 high school students) designed to test the impact of increased salience
of negative stereotypic expectations on math performance. As expected, female par-
ticipants in the condition of heightened salience of negative stereotypic expectations
underperformed in comparison to their control group counterparts. In addition, it was
found that the effect of blatant stereotype threat resulted in increased self-handicap-
ping tendencies in women, which in turn led to significantly impaired math perfor-
mance (2002). Reyna (2000) pointed out that a stereotype could create internal barriers

123
248 C. S. Smith, L.-C. Hung

inhibiting success by increasing low self-esteem, dashed hopes for the future, or even
lost confidence due to an environment allowing stereotype threats to occur.
Implicit associations can also lead to stereotype threat. Nosek et al. (unpublished)
found that women in college—even those in math and the sciences—held a strong
implicit association between math and masculinity. This is also shown on standardized
college admissions tests, where there is a robust correlation among women between
negative stereotypes and low self- identification in math and the sciences. Endorsing
a belief in the legitimacy of negative stereotypes can also lead to endorsement about
inherent abilities between different social groups (Jost and Banaji 1994). Schmader
et al. (2004) suggested that if fewer women become scientists and engineers, this status
quo could possibly maintain itself by the belief in real, inherent differences suggested
by negative stereotypes. In order to ameliorate this situation, sound interventions are
needed and it is there where we now focus our attention.

1.2 Interventions

Professional educators should strive to instill in minority students the idea that regard-
less of one’s race or sex, each individual has academic potential and that if it is
developed, one can succeed in academics. How might this be achieved? One possi-
ble method is by having class work that is challenging but not so difficult that it lies
outside an individual’s ability. For instance, a female in her senior year of high school
receiving poor marks in math, should be nudged gently toward excellence, but not
in a manner making her feel incompetent. Once minority students realize they are
competent, even if they did not reach a predetermined level set by the majority, they
will likely feel more relaxed in classroom settings that previously made them anxious
(Gonzales et al. 2002).
Educators should also endeavor to make the learning environment as unbiased as
possible. For instance, in a calculus class where both sexes are students, the teacher
should make sure that there are no posters, paintings, etc, anywhere in the classroom
denigrating minority students—including women (Freeman 2003). When a student
feels that his or her mathematical ability is mediocre at best and atrocious at worst,
seeing something that is possibly discriminatory in the classroom could dash any hopes
for academic success that a student might have.
Specific techniques that could be used by educators include: (1) lessening the impor-
tance of the task (Croizet and Claire 1998; Steele and Aronson 1995); (2) reducing
the salience of the stereotype (Spencer et al. 1999); (3) providing excuses for poor
performance (Brown and Josephs 1999; Stone et al. 1999); (4) claiming the test is not
susceptible to the stereotype (Walsh et al. 1999); (5) altering ability conceptions from
static to fluid (Aronson et al. 2002) and; (6) presenting people with successful role
models from their own group (Marx and Roman 2002; McIntyre et al. 2003).
As mentioned in number six above, one possible method for alleviating women’s
mathematics stereotype threat is the use of successful role models. In one study (Marx
and Roman 2002), the experimenter (who was either a man or a woman) administered
a difficult math test to both college-age men and women. The experimenter claimed
to have written the test, and thus, he/she was highly competent in mathematics. When

123
Stereotype threat 249

the experimenter was male, women scored worse than men, but when a female created
and administered the test, the scores were equal; that is, they scored as well as men
and significantly better than women taking the test for a man.
In a second study, the same researchers Marx and Roman (2002), found that
women scored worse than men when a female of fairly low math competence was
the experimenter, however, women scored notably better (and as well as men) when a
female possessing somewhat high math competence was the experimenter, regardless
of whether the experimenter was physically present. Thus, it was shown that a com-
petent role model, in the relevant domain, could ameliorate the performance deficits
usually affecting the members of stereotyped groups, when they are in situation that
induces stereotype threat (2002).
This does not mean that the role model has to be someone the student knows; for
that matter, the role model does not need to be anyone the student will ever meet.
McIntyre et al. (2003) demonstrated similar role model effects by having participants
read biographical essays of fictitious successful women immediately before taking a
difficult math test. A male experimenter told students that they would be participat-
ing in two unrelated experiments: one to develop stimulus materials for subsequent
research, and the other to help standardize items for the math section of the Graduate
Record Examination (GRE).
To insure that all participants were aware of and had recently been reminded of
the stereotype that women do not perform as well as men on math tests, the exper-
imenter stated the stereotype explicitly. Then he had the students read and critique
either four brief biographies of a highly successful woman architect, lawyer, physi-
cian, and inventor; or four very similar essays, in which the same accomplishments
were attributed to four corporations. He then left the room and a female experimenter,
blind to condition, administered a difficult math test drawn from sample GRE items
(2003).
Like the math test for Marx and Roman, women’s scores suffered when there were
no successful female role models, however, their scores were markedly better when
the role models were successful women. Using role models to alleviate women’s math-
ematics stereotype threat might depend on the domain in which the role models had
succeeded and on mechanisms entirely different from other effective alleviation tech-
niques (McIntyre et al. 2003). If a role model is used, is it mandatory to use a specific
number of biographies? According to McIntyre et al. (2005), the answer is no. It is
virtually impossible to know which part of their intervention caused the alleviation
effects that they reported. What about using three biographies, or two? Would only
one work? The authors state that the domain of a role model’s specific success might
be so important that only certain types of success alleviate the performance deficits
associated with stereotype threat.
Women participants might have perceived, for instance, that successful architects
must have extremely high spatial ability, which is known to be correlated with compe-
tence at math (McIntyre et al. 2003). Reading about one successful woman architect
might have been enough to dispel any negative effects of the stereotype, and reading
about the successful physician, lawyer, and inventor might have added nothing of any
importance. With the McIntyre et al. (2003) procedure, all participants read about all

123
250 C. S. Smith, L.-C. Hung

four role models, so it was impossible to detect whether one was more effective than
the others were.
Another method is blurring group identity. Rosenthal and Crisp (2006) conducted a
study examining the context of culture, race, and gender with stereotype threat. There
were three experiments, all aimed at determining how the blurring of group identity
reduces stereotype threat with the experiment looking at the groups created by gen-
der. First, females looked at women and their careers encouraging intergroup overlap
to reduce biases, with the next two focusing less on careers and more on skills and
knowledge that differ between genders, i.e., testing women’s math skills (2006). The
results confirmed that completing a task to blur group boundaries significantly reduces
the effects of stereotype threat. On the other hand, while introducing a threat prior to
completing the task in the third experiment improved math scores, there was little
difference between the non-threat groups and the group that received the threat after
completing the task (2006). The implication is that simply placing women in a math
test situation induces stereotype threat; thus, by blurring group identity, stereotype
threats might be eased.
Math related gender stereotypes rely greatly on the extent to which one endorses it.
Blanton et al. (2002) found that while the propensity toward stereotype endorsement
was not pervasive among women in their sample (M = 2.52 on a 0–11 scale), 41% of
their sample stated there is at least “some truth” to the math related gender stereotype.
In addition, the predisposition toward supporting the stereotype tended to moderate
women’s self-perceptions in response to social comparison information. Women who
believe men are mathematically superior evaluate their own math ability by using only
women as a basis of comparison. On the other hand, women who reject these stereo-
types, tend to take pride in themselves and other women once the stereotype threat
is disconfirmed. Teaching women to disown cultural stereotypes could alleviate the
pernicious effects of math related gender stereotypes.

1.3 Two cases: female underperformance in male-dominated environments

Steele et al. (2002) surveyed a total of 2,015 students, including 744 females and 605
males during their first year of university, and 333 female and 333 male during their last
year, in order to examine the perceptions of undergraduate women in male dominated
academic areas. The participants were undergraduates at a private university in the
northeastern United States, and were contacted for the completion of a questionnaire.
Those not initially responding were sent a reminder postcard, followed by a telephone
reminder. Re-mails were sent as requested. Of the students contacted, 801 returned
the questionnaire in the self-addressed, stamped envelope provided.
The overall response rate was 39.8%, consisting of 477 first-year students (35.4%)
and 324 final-year students (48.6%), with demographics totaling 48.5% women and
29.7% men. Consistent with the university’s population, Caucasian students were the
majority, mainly from middle-class to upper middle class socioeconomic backgrounds.
The remainder identified themselves as Asian (13%) and Black (4.2%), while 11.8%
described themselves as mixed or from some other racial category.

123
Stereotype threat 251

The principle emphasis for the study was to focus on both current, and future self-
reports regarding sexual discrimination, stereotype threats, identification with one’s
major, and one’s desire to change his or her major. Each participant was asked, “To
what extent are you discriminated against in your major because of your gender?” This
was followed with “To what extent are students of your same gender discriminated
against in your major because of their gender?”
In order to assess the amount of sex discrimination students’ anticipated in the
future, participants were asked, “If you were going to pursue a career in a field related
to your major, to what extent do you believe you would be discriminated against
because of your gender?” Following this was, “If other students of your same gender
were to pursue a career in a field related to your major, to what extent do you believe
they would be discriminated against because of their gender?” Results showed that
women in male-dominated academic areas, such as math, science, and engineering
perceived higher levels of sex discrimination. Similarly, these women reported antic-
ipating the most sex discrimination for them and other women, if they pursued a career
commonly thought of as “male.”
Oswald and Harvey (2001) researched the impact of environmental stereotype
threats on women’s math performance. Seventy-two female undergraduates partic-
ipated, and each student was randomly assigned to the stereotype threat removed
and non-removed conditions. In addition, a male experimenter tested each respondent
individually. Tests were administered in a laboratory, where a cartoon depicting a girl
struggling with an easy math problem while a boy answered one much more difficult,
hung prominently on the wall. Within the control condition, tests were administered
in an environment lacking any hostility.
After the introduction of the hostile environment, the experimenter then gave the
participant the instructions for the math test and read them aloud. The directions
included the stereotype threat manipulation. Both test instructions informed the par-
ticipants that she had half an hour to work on the 50-item math test. In the removed
stereotype threat condition, the instructions included the statement “males and females
do equally well on this test.” In the non-removed stereotype threat condition, no infor-
mation regarding the gender performance differences was given. Results intimated that
environmental stereotype threats have measured impacts regarding female students’
math performance. In other worlds, participants in the non-stereotype threat condition
performed better than participants in the stereotype threat condition.
Both Steele et al. (2002) and Oswald and Harvey (2001) imply that while women
do perform in a hostile environment, they tend to have a lower performance than when
performing in a friendly atmosphere.

1.4 Two cases: minority with academic performance

Steele and Aronson (1995) recruited 117 male and female, Black and White Stan-
ford undergraduates, using campus advertisements that offered $10.00 an hour for
participation; 114 were randomly assigned to the three experimental conditions (diag-
nostic, non-diagnostic, and challenge). Participants that signed up for the experiment
were contacted by telephone prior to their experimental participation. Each was asked

123
252 C. S. Smith, L.-C. Hung

to provide their SAT verbal and quantitative scores, to rate their enjoyment of ver-
bally oriented classes, and to provide background information such as year in school,
major, etc. When participants arrived at the laboratory, the experimenter, a Caucasian,
explained that for the next 30 min, they would work on a set of verbal problems in a
format identical to the SAT exam. When everyone was finished, the students would
answer questions about their experience.
The experimenter gave each participant a page that stated the purpose of the study,
the correct procedure for answering questions, the importance of indicating guessed
answers, as well as describing the test as very difficult. Furthermore, students should
expect to answer many of the questions incorrectly, and that participants would receive
feedback regarding their performance at the end of the session. In the diagnostic con-
dition, participants were informed that the study was concerned with “various personal
factors involved in performance on problems requiring reading and verbal reasoning
abilities.” In the non-diagnostic and challenge conditions, the description of the study
did not refer to verbal ability.
Results showed that Black participants underperformed compared to their White
counterparts when the test was presented as a measure of their ability. However,
when the test was presented as less reflective of ability, Black participants’ per-
formance improved dramatically, achieving the same performance as the White
respondents.
In one study (Cadinu et al. 2003), a group of Black Americans were provided
with positive and negative information concerning the minority (Blacks) or major-
ity (Whites) group, and followed this release of information with a test designed to
estimate the participants’ performance.
Details were as follows: the authors selected 81 males and 19 females, all African–
American soldiers stationed at an Italian NATO base. They were randomly assigned
to one of the four conditions: American/Negative, American/Positive, Black/Nega-
tive, or Black/Positive; that is, information received fit one of the categories. Spe-
cifically, the study design was: A group of Black Americans living in Italy was
told that the verbal ability of the in-group (American or Black) was lower (negative
information) or higher (positive information) than the verbal ability of the out-group
(Italians or Americans). Thus, a 2 (Black versus American in-group) × 2 (Negative
versus Positive information) experimental design was created. All participants were
asked to gauge how well they would perform on the verbal test, and then took the
test.
Participants were administered a questionnaire at the NATO base, and both Black
and White individuals participated in the study, however, the questionnaires used by
White participants were discarded. Results indicated that respondents in the Neg-
ative information condition performed worse when compared to individuals in the
Positive information condition. Furthermore, the study suggested that when an indi-
vidual strongly identified with a minority group, he or she might be more vulnerable
concerning stereotype effects.
Although these two case studies did not study math performance per se, the re-
sults logically apply to minorities exhibiting weaker identification and thus, further
research using this model could be used in estimating math ability and stereotype
threats.

123
Stereotype threat 253

1.5 Two cases: the combination of female and minority performance

Other studies revealed similar research results with the combination of both females
and minorities. One study (Good et al. 2003) supported the thesis that stereotype
threats profoundly influence both female and minority students. An experiment was
designed to measure an in-depth intervention: 138 7th-grade students (both male and
female), residing within a rural school district in Texas that served minority students
with low income, were used. The study’s purpose centered on performing test methods
that would help female, minority, and low-income adolescents overcome the effects
of stereotype threats.
Students enrolled in a computer skills class as part of their junior high curricu-
lum; random assignment of the students was determined by the school administration
and thus, all students participated. Students were randomly assigned to one of three
experimental groups, as well as one control group, for a total of four groups. In addi-
tion, each group had a mentor. Among the three experimental groups, the mentors
taught their students positive information, whereas the reverse was true regarding the
control group. Results showed that African American participants reported feeling
judged negatively by others due to the lens of cultural stereotypes. On the other hand,
Caucasian students reported the opposite, regardless of experimental conditions. Sim-
ilarly, female students in the experimental groups gained higher math test scores, as
compared to those in the control group, whose scores remained the same.
Shih et al. (1999) provided a better explanation for these facts. In their study, 46
undergraduate Asian–American females received a quantitative test, and those ran-
domly assigned to the female-identity-salient group had to indicate their sex, as well
as answering questions related to their gender. Participants in the Asian-identity-salient
group were required to indicate their ethnicity, as well as answering questions related
to their ethnic identity. Those assigned to the no-identity salient group were asked
to answer questions, without giving any sense of the respondent’s identity. Results
proved that: (1) participants in the female-identity group had the worst performance
(28% accuracy), (2) unlike the Asian-identity condition (44% accuracy) and the (3)
no-identity group (59% accuracy). This study demonstrated the powerful influence of
stereotype on individual performance. The results indicated that women’s quantitative
performance could be affected negatively when identifying themselves as female. In
addition, when individuals identify themselves as minority, their performance suffers
from a negative effect.
Both studies, Good et al. (2003) and Shih et al. (1999), proved that when individuals
identify themselves as female and minority, their likelihood for underperforming in
class is doubled. From these two experiments, two gender and two race cases, support
was found for the aforementioned precept.

1.6 Limitations

Stereotypes abound for different racial groups but when one minority group is empha-
sized, another is often overlooked. For example, Asian men are better at mathematics
than other racial or ethnic groups and are always physically smaller; Black men are
inherently better basketball players or more likely to commit crimes; and White men do

123
254 C. S. Smith, L.-C. Hung

not have “rhythm” like their Black counterparts, but make the best scientists. All state-
ments are stereotypes and deserve research, though not in this paper. For this study, the
emphasis centered on analyzing how stereotype threat affected female performance
in math and science.
This paper is a literature review and as such, there are several distinct limitations.
A review examines only a small subsection of a specific topic and here, females’ suc-
cess in mathematics was studied. That does not mean, however, that explicit racial or
ethnic groups were discussed. For instance, it was not the article’s purview to examine
Black females, age 20 and younger, that attended Ivy League universities, nor were
White females, age 16 and in the 11th grade taking an Algebra II class, the primary
focus. For such detailed information regarding age, the reader should center his/her
attention on empirical studies.

2 Implications and future research

If stereotype threat is the cause for a number of the discrepancies found between
male and female performance in math, several implications are clear. First, females
are being kept from fields where their innate talent could further humanity. Female
students should be taught that males are not necessarily better at math and science,
and if a boy does better on a math quiz than does his female classmate, it means
nothing—other than the fact that the boy may have studied and the girl did not.
Second, since stereotype threat begins at an early age, kindergarten and elementary
teachers should be taught to make sure that their behavior does not lead to the devel-
opment of stereotype threat. For instance, if male children, as a group, do worse in a
kindergarten language class compared to girls, the teacher should refrain from making
statements indicating that the score discrepancy is normal. Teachers should be taught
to realize that their manner of speaking and/or teaching could lead to stereotypes and
thus, it should be incumbent upon them to remove any sexist language attitudes or
language contributing to stereotype threat.
The research is clear. The chief reason for gender differences in mathematical
achievement is due too cultural influences, not ability. While this is common knowl-
edge for psychologists, the public still labors under an antiquated belief system where
women are better in language than they are in math. One possible method for dealing
with the problem would be publishing the results in popular magazines and/or journals,
thus allowing individuals to see that biology does not cause all differences in ability.
Future studies should examine the thesis that stereotype threats continue through
an individual’s life span. The bulk of the literature focuses on problems experienced
in college years, completely disallowing for situations that could occur in the respon-
dents’ future, such as career choices. For instance, a female that enjoys mathematics
but has always struggled to make average grades in math courses decides to follow
her teacher’s advice and become an engineer. Compare this to another female that
struggled with math, but had a teacher that said females should avoid math and hence,
the student becomes a lawyer. Researchers should examine how influential parents,
friends, teachers, etc. are in the contribution or negation of stereotype threat.
In terms of demographics, most studies were conducted on various college cam-
puses within the United States. Due to the paucity of research, there is insufficient

123
Stereotype threat 255

evidence to state how demographic variables (i.e., majors studied, familial socioeco-
nomic status, etc.) affect mathematical ability in female minorities. For instance, a
future study could elucidate how an individual’s locale affects his/her career choices.
Do African American females from the Mississippi Delta react in the same manner to
stereotype threats, as would Black women from Puerto Rico, or are there differences
and if so, how and why?
Another potential for future study would be to gauge whether stereotype threats
transcend language and culture. For instance, do Australian aboriginal females expe-
rience stereotypes in the classroom as do their American counterparts, or are there
racial, ethnic, and/or cultural differences? Do the same factors that apply to token
Black students in an otherwise all White school affect Taiwanese aboriginals in an
otherwise all Han Chinese school? If so, what are the similarities and differences? If
stereotype threat is transnational, is it worse in other countries or is it similar to that
experienced in the West? Research answering these questions is needed.
One area overlooked by scholars centers on psychological factors. For instance,
does one’s ego or self-concept have a role in stereotype threats; that is, does one’s
predilection toward specific behavior (or thoughts) render an individual more sus-
ceptible to this phenomenon? Another avenue disregarded by researchers’ concerns
family structure. Do individuals’ raised in a two-parent home have greater protec-
tion from stereotype threats when compared to those raised in a single parent home?
In addition, does it matter how one sees himself/herself in relation to society? For
instance, if a family (regardless of color) raises a child to feel that he or she is capable
of success, would this have a significant difference in the child’s behavior if he or she
is confronted by a stereotype threat? If the concept of stereotype threat is to gain in
intellectual stature, these issues and others must be addressed.
Parents could help, too. Minority parents should be taught how important it is for
their children to feel competent at school, and one way for this to be achieved is
by teaching that regardless of one’s grades, each student is special and deserving of
respect. By doing this, parents will teach that it is not important what the dominant
majority thinks; rather, what is of crucial importance is how one thinks about him/her-
self. Young children should be taught not to feel pain or embarrassment in a class full
of majority students, especially if the minority child does not do as well on tests.
In future research, the continued identification of stereotype threats existing in
other minority groups, such as Native American should be addressed. In addition, as
human nature transcends both race and language, and if stereotype threats exist, can
the phenomenon generalize to minority groups in other societies, such as aboriginals
in Taiwan?

References

Aronson, J., Fried, C. B., & Good, C. (2002). Reducing the effects of stereotype threat on African American
college students by shaping theories of intelligence. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 38, 113–125.
Blanton, H., Christie, C., & Dye, M. (2002). Social identity versus reference frame comparisons: The mod-
erating role of stereotype endorsement. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38(3), 253–267.
Bolick, C. (1996). The affirmative action fraud: Can we restore the American civil rights vision? Washington,
DC: The Cato Institute.

123
256 C. S. Smith, L.-C. Hung

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(2), 246–257.
Bussey, K., & Bandura, A. (1992). Self-regulatory mechanisms governing gender development. Child
Development, 63, 1236–1250.
Cadinu, M., Maass, A., Frigerio, S., Impagliazzo, L., & Latinotti, S. (2003). Stereotype threat: The effect
of expectancy on performance. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 267–285.
Catsambis, S. (1994). The path to math: Gender and racial-ethnic differences in mathematics participation
from middle school to high school. Sociology of Education, 67, 199–215.
Contrada, R. J., Ashmore, R. D., Gary, M. L., Coups, E., Egeth, J. D., Sewell, A, Ewell, K., Goyal, T. M., &
Chasse, V. (2000). Ethnicity-related sources of stress and their effects on well-being. Current Directions
in Psychological Science, 9, 136–139.
Croizet, J., & Claire, T. (1998). Extending the concept of stereotype threat to social class: The intellectual
underperformance of students from low socioeconomic backgrounds. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 6, 588–594.
Eccles, J. S. (1987). Gender roles and women’s achievement-related decisions. Psychology of Women Quar-
terly, 11, 135–172.
Eccles, J. S. (1994). Understanding women’s educational and occupational choices: Applying the Eccles
et al. model of achievement-related choices. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18, 585–609.
Eccles, J. S., & Harold, R. D. (1992). Gender differences in educational and occupational patterns among
the gifted, (1990). In N. Colangelo, S. G. Assouline, & D. L. Ambroson (Eds.), Talent development:
Proceedings from the 1991 Henry B. and Jocelyn Wallace National Research Symposium on Talent
Development (pp. 3–29). Unionville, NY: Trillium Press.
Ernest, J. (1976). Mathematics and Sex. American Mathematical Monthly, 83, 595–614.
Fine, M, Weis, L., Powell, L. C., & Wong, L. M. (Eds.), (1997). Off White: Readings on Race, Power, and
Society. New York: Routledge.
Freeman, A., (2003). Raising minority achievement in science and math. Educational Leadership, 60,
31–40.
Gonzales, P. M., Blanton, H., & Williams, K. J. (2002). The effects of stereotype threat and double-minority
status on the test performance of Latino women. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 659–670.
Good, C., Aronson, J., & Inzlicht, M. (2003). Improving adolescents’ standardized test performance: An
intervention to reduce the effects of stereotype threat. Applied Development Psychology, 24, 645–662.
Hall, C. W., & Davis, N. B. (1999). Gender and racial differences in mathematical performance. Journal
of Social Psychology, 139(6), 677–689.
Halpern, D. F. (2000) Sex Differences in Cognitive Ability. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Huston, A. C. (1983). Sex typing. Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 4. Socialization, personality, and
social development (4th ed., pp. 387–467). New York: Wiley.
Hyde, J. S., Fennema, E., & Lamon, S. J. (1990). Gender differences in mathematics performance: A meta-
analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 139–155.
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(5), 366–371.
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(4), 796–805.
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.
Keller, J. (2002). Blatant stereotype threat and women’s math performance: self-handicapping as a strategic
means to cope with obtrusive negative performance expectations: Brief report. Sex Roles, 47, 193–198.
Levy, S. R., & Dweck, C. S. (1999). The impact of children’s static versus dynamic conceptions of people
on stereotype formation. Child Development, 70, 1163–1180.
Liben, L. S., & Signorella, M. L. (1980). Gender related schemata and constructive memory in children.
Child Development, 51, 11–18.
Martin, C. L., & Little, J. K. (1990). The relation of gender understanding to children’s sex-typed preferences
and gender stereotypes. Child Development, 61, 1427–1439.
Marx, D. M., & Roman, J. S. (2002). Female role models: Protecting women’s math test performance.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1183–1193.
Mau, W., & Lynn, R. (2000). Gender differences in homework and test scores in mathematics, reading, and
science at 10th and 12th grade. Psychology, Evolution, and Gender, 2, 119–125.

123
Stereotype threat 257

McIntyre, R. B., Lord, C. G., Gresky, D. M., Ten Eyck, L. L., Frye, G. D. J., & Bond, C. F. (2005). A social
impact trend in the effects of role models on alleviating women’s mathematics stereotype threat. Current
Research in Social Psychology, 10(9), 116–136.
McIntyre, R. B., Paulson, R. M., & Lord, C. G. (2003). Alleviating women’s mathematics stereotype threat
through salience of group achievements. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 83–90.
McKown, C., & Weinstein, R. S. (2003). The development and consequences of stereotype consciousness
in middle childhood. Childhood Development, 74(2), 498–515.
National Science Foundation. (2001). Science and Engineering Degrees, by Race/Ethnicity of Recipients:
1990–1998. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
Nadya, F. A. (1995). Career linking: An intervention to promote math and science career awareness. Journal
of Counseling & Development, 73(5), 527–534.
O’Brien, L., & Crandall, C. (2003). Stereotype threat and arousal: Effects on women’s math performance.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29(6), 782–789.
Osborne, J. W. (2001). Testing stereotype threat: Does anxiety explain race and sex differences in achieve-
ment? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26, 291–310.
Oswald, D. L., & Harvey, R. D. (2003). A q-methodological study of women’s subjective perspectives on
mathematics. Sex Roles, 49, 133–142.
Oswald, D. L., & Harvey, R. D. (2001). Hostile environments, stereotype threat, and math performance
among undergraduate women. Current Psychology, 19(4), 44–64.
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(1), 55–71.
Reyna, C. (2000). Lazy, Dumb, or industrious: When stereotypes convey attribution information in the
classroom. Educational Psychology Review, 12(1), 86–110.
Rosenthal, H. E. S. & Crisp, R. J. (2006). Reducing stereotype threat by blurring intergroup boundaries.
Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin 32(4), 501–512.
Schmader, T. (2002). Gender identification moderates stereotype threat effects on women’s math perfor-
mance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 194–201.
Schmader, T., Johns, M., & Barquissau, M. (2004) The costs of accepting gender differences: The role of
stereotype endorsement in women’s experience in the math domain. Sex Roles, 50, 835–850.
Shih, M., Pittinsky, T. L., & Ambady, N. (1999). Stereotype susceptibility: Identity salience and shifts in
quantitative performance. American Psychological Society, 10(1), 81–83.
Sleeter, C. (1997). Mathematics, multicultural education, and professional development. Journal for
Research in Mathematics Education, 28, 680–696.
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.
Steele, C. M. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance.
American Psychologist, 52, 613–629.
Steele, C. M., & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African
Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(5), 797–811.
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, 38–64.
Stone, J., Lynch, C. I., Sjomeling, M., & Darley, J. M. (1999). Stereotype threat effects on black and white
athletic performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1213–1227.
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.

Author Biographies

Cary Stacy Smith is a Ph.D. candidate in psychology at Mississippi State University and is currently
employed as a predoctoral intern at South Florida Evaluation and Treatment Center, a maximum-security
psychiatric hospital located in Miami, Florida. His research interests include adolescent psychopathy and
stereotype threat.

Li-Ching Hung received her Ph.D. in Curriculum and Instruction from Mississippi State, is an assistant
professor at The Overseas Chinese Institute of Technology, located in Taichung, Taiwan. Her research inter-
ests include MMPI-II profiles of counselors, stereotype threat, and effective counseling styles for native
Chinese.

123
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.