Invoking Multiple Stereotypes: What Regulatory Focus Tells Us About How We Look at Threat

• In Event: The Power of Perceptions: Examining How Race, Gender, and Athletic Identities Influence Self-Concepts, Efficacy, and Stereotype Threat

Abstract

In a study examining the performance of African American students, Steele and Aronson (1995) discovered that performance on an identical task varied between groups when the purpose of the task was framed differently – a simple exercise versus an intelligence test. The authors found that the group told that the test was diagnostic of their intelligence performed significantly worse. Steele and Aronson (1995) argued that the self-evaluative threat of confirming a negative stereotype about a group to which one belongs could potentially lead to a decrease in performance. The field of research on stereotype threat has since exploded to investigate not only its underlying causes but also ways to counteract it.
Rather than looking at why stigmatized individuals are failing to perform to their full ability under stereotype threat, it is important to identify why some of those individuals manage to remain unaffected by stereotype threat. Rydell, McConnell, and Beilock (2009) examined how multiple identities and stereotype threat interact and found that when confronted with two stereotyped aspects of their identity, one positive and one negative, they performed better than those who were only primed with a negative stereotype. While stereotype threat has been widely studied, the effect of positive stereotypes is an area that needs considerable research in order to help develop a more complete picture about how stereotypes affect us (Shih, Pittinsky, & Ho, 2013). Perhaps how a stereotype is invoked, as well as the characteristics associated with the stereotyped identity, could explain the differential effects.
The purpose of this study was to build on previous work on the possible interaction between multiple identities and stereotype threat (Rydell, McConnell, & Beilock, 2009), by examining how the relationship between regulatory focus (a proposed moderator of stereotype threat) and multiple identities informs the conceptual framework of stereotype threat’s underlying processes. A promotion focus is induced when regulatory concerns are related to ideals, aspirations, and maximizing gains; whereas a prevention focus is induced when concerns are related to responsibilities, safety, or minimizing losses. Grimm et al. (2009) has proposed that stereotype threat is actually a mismatch between regulatory focus and reward structure.
An experimental study was conducted with 137 college students to examine the interaction between positive and negative primed stereotypes and regulatory focus. Participants were randomly assigned to a series of stereotype threat conditions, and then randomly assigned to a reward structure with either a gains or losses reward structure on a Math test. It was found that males across stereotype threat conditions performed best under a reward structure that emphasized minimizing losses. They also performed worse when a negative stereotype about female math ability was presented. Female performance showed a trend (nonsignificant) that suggested improved performance over the neutral threat when confronted with a negative stereotype. Females did perform significantly better across threat conditions in a reward structure that emphasized maximizing goals. The results have implications for how we study stereotype threat, particularly on the role it plays in female participation in STEM programs.

Author

• Alyssa Reinhart, The University of Texas - Austin