People often search for cues in the environment to determine whether or not they will be judged or treated negatively based on their social identities. Accordingly, feedback from gatekeepers—members of majority groups who hold authority and power in a field—may be an especially important cue for those at risk of experiencing social identity threat, such as women in math settings. Across a series of studies, women who received positive (“Good job!”) versus objective (score only) feedback from a male (vs. female) authority figure in math reported greater confidence; belonging; self-efficacy; more favorable Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) attitudes/identification/interest; and greater implicit identification with math. Men were affected only by the type of math feedback they received, not by the source of feedback. A meta-analysis across studies confirmed results. Together, these findings suggest that positive feedback from gatekeepers is an important situational cue that can improve the outcomes of negatively stereotyped groups.
AbramsD.HoggM. A. (Eds.). (1999). Social identity and social cognition. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
2.
AdamsG.GarciaD.Purdie-VaughnsV.SteeleC. (2006). The detrimental effects of a suggestion of sexism in an instruction situation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 602-615.
3.
AkcinarE. N.CarrP. B.WaltonG. M. (2011). Interactions with men and whites matter too. Psychological Inquiry, 22, 247-251.
4.
AronsonJ.LustinaM. J.GoodC.KeoughK.SteeleC. M. (1999). When White men can’t do math: Necessary and sufficient factors in stereotype threat. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 29-46.
5.
BanduraA. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37, 122-147.
6.
BlascovichJ.SpencerS. J.QuinnD. M.SteeleC. M. (2001). African Americans and high blood pressure: The role of stereotype threat. Psychological Science, 12, 225-229.
7.
BossonJ. K.SwannW. B.PennebakerJ. W. (2000). Stalking the perfect measure of implicit self-esteem: The blind men and the elephant revisited?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 631-643.
8.
BranscombeN. R.EllemersN.SpearsR.DoosjeB. (1999). The context and content of social identity threat. In EllemersN.SpearsR.DoosjeB. (Eds.), Social identity: Context, commitment, content (pp. 35-58). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
9.
BraverS. L.ThoemmesF. J.RosenthalR. (2014). Continuously cumulating meta-analysis and replicability. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9, 333-342.
10.
CheryanS.DruryB. J.VichayapaiM. (2013). Enduring influence of stereotypical computer science role models on women’s academic aspirations. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 37, 72-29.
11.
CheryanS.PlautV. C. (2010). Explaining underrepresentation: A theory of precluded interest. Sex Roles, 63, 475-488.
12.
CheryanS.PlautV. C.DaviesP.SteeleC. M. (2009). Ambient belonging: How stereotypical cues impact gender participation in computer science. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 1045-1060.
13.
CheryanS.SiyJ. O.VichayapaiM.DruryB. J.KimS. (2011). Do female and male role models who embody STEM stereotypes hinder women’s anticipated success in STEM?Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2, 656-664.
14.
CohenG. L.SteeleC. M.RossL. D. (1999). The mentor’s dilemma: Providing critical feedback across the racial divide. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 1302-1318.
15.
CunninghamW. A.NezlekJ. B.BanajiM. R. (2004). Implicit and explicit ethnocentrism: Revisiting the ideologies of prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 1332-1346.
16.
CunninghamW. A.PreacherK. J.BanajiM. R. (2001). Implicit attitude measures: Consistency, stability, and convergent validity. Psychological Science, 12, 163-170.
17.
DasguptaN. (2011). Ingroup experts and peers as social vaccines who inoculate the self-concept: The stereotype inoculation model. Psychological Inquiry, 22, 231-246.
18.
DasguptaN.AsgariS. (2004). Seeing is believing: Exposure to counterstereotypic women leaders and its effect on the malleability of automatic gender stereotyping. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 642-658.
19.
DasguptaN.McManus ScircleM.HunsingerM. (2015). Female peers in small work groups enhance women’s motivation, verbal participation, and career aspirations in engineering. Proceedings of the National Academic of Sciences, 112, 4988-4993.
20.
DaviesP. G.SpencerS. J.QuinnD. M.GerhardsteinR. (2002). Consuming images: How television commercials that elicit stereotype threat can restrain women academically and professionally. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1615-1628.
21.
DaviesP. G.SpencerS. J.SteeleC. M. (2005). Clearing the air: Identity safety moderates the effects of stereotype threat on women’s leadership aspirations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 276-287.
22.
DeciE. L. (1971). Effects of externally mediated rewards on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 18, 105-115.
23.
DiekmanA. B.BrownE. R.JohnstonA. M.ClarkE. K. (2010). Seeking congruity between roles and goals: A new look at why women opt out of STEM careers. Psychological Science, 21, 1051-1057.
24.
DruryB. J.SiyJ. O.CheryanS. (2011). When do female role models benefit women? The importance of differentiating recruitment from retention in STEM. Psychological Inquiry, 22, 265-269.
25.
EcclesJ. S.JacobsJ. E.HaroldR. D. (1990). Gender role stereotypes, expectancy effects, and parents’ socialization of gender differences. Journal of Social Issues, 46, 183-201.
26.
FazioR. H.JacksonJ. R.DuntonB. C.WilliamsC. J. (1995). Variability in automatic activation as an unobtrusive measure of racial attitudes: A bona fide pipeline?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 1013-1027.
27.
GoffmanE. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the management of a spoiled identity. New York, NY: Touchstone.
28.
GrahamC.BakerR. W.WapnerS. (1984). Prior interracial experience and Black student transition into predominantly White colleges. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 1146-1154.
29.
GreenwaldA. G.BanajiM. R. (1995). Implicit social cognition: Attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Psychological Review, 10, 24-27.
30.
GreenwaldA. G.NosekB. A.BanajiM. R. (2003). Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 197-216.
31.
HarackiewiczJ. M. (1979). The effects of reward contingency and performance feedback on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1352-1363.
32.
HattieJ.TimperleyH. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81-112.
33.
InzlichtM.Ben-ZeevT. (2000). A threatening intellectual environment: Why females are susceptible to experiencing problem-solving deficits in the presence of males. Psychological Science, 11, 365-371.
34.
KawakamiK.SteeleJ. R.SifaC.PhillsC. E.DovidioJ. F. (2008). Approaching math increases math=me and math=pleasant. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 818-825.
35.
LeyensJ.De sertM.CroizetJ.DarcisC. (2000). Stereotype threat: Are lower status and history of stigmatization preconditions of stereotype threat?Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1189-1199.
36.
LockwoodP. (2006). Someone like me can be successful: Do college students need same- gender role models?Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30, 36-46.
37.
LockwoodP.KundaZ. (1997). Superstars and me: Predicting the impact of role models on the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 91-103.
38.
LogelC.WaltonG. M.SpencerS. J.IsermanE. C.von HippelW.BellA. E. (2009). Interacting with sexist men triggers social identity threat among female engineers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 1089-1103.
39.
MarkusH. R.KundaZ. (1986). Stability and malleability of the self-concept. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 858-866.
40.
MarkusH. R.NuriusP. (1986). Possible selves. American Psychologist, 41, 954-969.
41.
MarkusH. R.SteeleC. M.SteeleD. M. (2002). Colorblindness as a barrier to inclusion: Assimilation and nonimmigrant minorities. In ShwederR.MinowM.MarkusH. R. (Eds.), Engaging cultural differences: The multicultural challenge in liberal democracies (pp. 453-472). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
42.
MarxD. M.RomanJ. S. (2002). Female role models: Protecting women’s math test performance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1183-1193.
43.
McCroskeyJ. C.TevenJ. J. (1999). Goodwill: A reexamination of the construct and its measurement. Communication Monographs, 66, 90-103.
44.
McIntyreR. B.PaulsonR. M.LordC. G. (2003). Alleviating women’s mathematics stereotype threat through salience of group achievements. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 83-90.
45.
Mendoza-DentonR.Page-GouldE. (2008). Can cross-group friendships influence minority students’ well-being at historically white universities?Psychological Science, 19, 933-939.
46.
MurphyM. C.SteeleC. M.GrossJ. J. (2007). Signaling threat: How situational cues affect women in math, science, and engineering settings. Psychological Science, 18, 879-885.
47.
NosekB. A.BanajiM. R.GreenwaldA. G. (2002). Math=male, me=female, therefore math ≠ me. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 44-59.
48.
NosekB. A.SmythF. L. (2011). Implicit social cognitions predict sex differences in math engagement and achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 48, 1124-1154.
49.
O’BrienL. T.CrandallC. S. (2003). Stereotype threat and arousal: Effects on women’s math performance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 782-789.
50.
Page-GouldE.Mendoza-DentonR.MendesW. B. (2014). Stress and coping in interracial contexts: The influence of race-based rejection sensitivity and cross-group friendship in daily experiences of health. Journal of Social Issues, 70, 256-278.
51.
Page-GouldE.Mendoza-DentonR.TroppL. (2008). With a little help from my cross-group friends: Reducing intergroup anxiety through cross-group friendship. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 1080-1094.
52.
ParkL. E.CookK. E.GreenwaldA. G. (2002). Implicit indicators of women’s persistence in math, science, and engineering. Psi Chi Journal of Undergraduate Research, 6, 145-152.
53.
ParkL. E.YoungA. F.TroisiJ. D.PinkusR. T. (2011). Effects of everyday romantic goal pursuit on women’s attitudes toward math and science. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 1259-1273.
54.
Perez-FelknerL.NixS.ThomasK. (2017). Gendered pathways: How mathematics ability beliefs shape secondary and postsecondary course and degree field choices. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1-11.
PreacherK. J.HayesA. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879-891.
57.
Purdie-VaughnsV.SteeleC. M.DaviesP. G.DitlmannR.CrosbyA. (2008). Social identity contingencies: How diversity cues signal threat or safety for African Americans in mainstream institutions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 615-630.
58.
RichardsZ.HewstoneM. (2001). Subtyping and subgrouping: Processes for the prevention and promotion of stereotype change. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 52-73.
59.
SchmaderT.CroftA. (2011). How stereotypes stifle performance. Personality and Social Psychology Compass, 5, 792-806.
60.
SchmaderT.JohnsM.ForbesC. (2008). An integrated process model of stereotype threat effects on performance. Psychological Review, 115, 336-356.
61.
SekaquaptewaD.ThompsonM. (2003). Solo status, stereotype threat, and performance expectancies: Their effects on women’s performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 68-74.
62.
SeymourE.HewittN. M. (1997). Talking about leaving: Why undergraduates leave the sciences. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
63.
ShapiroJ. R.NeubergS. L. (2007). From stereotype threat to stereotype threats: Implications of a multi-threat framework for causes, moderators, mediators, consequences, and interventions. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11, 107-130.
64.
SpencerS. J.SteeleC. M.QuinnD. M. (1999). Stereotype threat and women’s math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 4-28.
65.
SteeleC. M.AronsonJ. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual performance of African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 797-811.
66.
SteeleC. M.SpencerS. J.AronsonJ. (2002). Contending with group image: The psychology of stereotype and social identity threat. In ZannaM.P. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 34, pp. 379-440). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
67.
StoutJ. G.DasguptaN.HunsingerM.McManusM. A. (2011). STEMing the tide: Using ingroup experts to inoculate women’s self-concept in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 255-270.
68.
TracyJ. L.RobinsR. W. (2007). The psychological structure of pride: A tale of two facets. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 506-525.
69.
UmbachP.WawrzynskiM. (2005). Faculty do matter: The role of college faculty in student learning and engagement. Research in Higher Education, 46, 153-184.
70.
U.S. Department of Labor. (2009). Women in the labor force: A databook (2009). Washington, DC: Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor.
71.
VallerandR. J.ReidG. (1998). On the relative effects of positive and negative verbal feedback on males’ and females’ intrinsic motivation. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 20, 239-250.
72.
VogtC. M. (2008). Faculty as a critical juncture in student retention and performance in engineering programs. The Research Journal for Engineering Education, 97, 27-36.
73.
VogtC. M.HocevarD.HagedornL. (2007). A social cognitive construct validation: Determining women’s and men’s success in engineering programs. Journal of Higher Education, 78,337-364.
74.
WaltonG. M.CohenG. L. (2007). A question of belonging: Race, social fit, and achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 82-96.
75.
WaltonG. M.LogelC.PeachJ.SpencerS. J.ZannaM. (2015). Two brief interventions to mitigate a “chilly climate” transform women’s experience, relationships, and achievement in engineering. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107,468-485.
76.
WeberR.CrockerJ. (1983). Cognitive processes in the revision of stereotypic beliefs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 961-977.
77.
WoutD. A.ShihM. J.JacksonJ. S.SellersR. M. (2009). Targets as perceivers: How people determine when they will be negatively stereotyped. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 349-362.
78.
YeagerD. S.Purdie-VaughnsV.GarciaJ.ApfelN.BrzustoskiP.MasterA.. . . CohenG. L. (2014). Breaking the cycle of mistrust: Wise interventions to provide critical feedback across the racial divide. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143, 804-824.
79.
YoungD. M.RudmanL. A.BuettnerH. M.McLeanM. C. (2013). The influence of female role models on women’s implicit science cognitions. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 37, 283-292.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
