Within American gender norms is the expectation that women should be modest. We argue that violating this “modesty norm” by boasting about one’s accomplishments causes women to experience uncomfortable situational arousal that leads to lower motivation for and performance on a self-promotion task. We hypothesized that such negative effects could be offset when an external source for their situational arousal was made available. To test hypotheses, 78 women students from a U.S. Northwestern university wrote a scholarship application essay to promote the merits of either the self (modesty norm violated) or another person as a letter of reference (modesty norm not violated). Half were randomly assigned to hear information about a (fake) subliminal noise generator in the room that might cause “discomfort” (misattribution available) and half were told nothing about the generator (normal condition: misattribution not available). Participants rated the task and 44 new naive participants judged how much scholarship money to award each essay. Results confirmed predictions: under normal conditions, violating the modesty norm led to decreased motivation and performance. However, those who violated the modesty norm with a misattribution source reported increased interest, adopted fewer performance-avoidance goals, perceived their own work to be of higher quality, and produced higher quality work. Results suggest that when a situation helps women to escape the discomfort of defying the modesty norm, self-promotion motivation and performance improve. Further implications for enhancing women’s academic and workplace experiences are discussed.
AllenJ.GervaisS. J.SmithJ. L. (2013). Sit big to eat big: The interaction of body posture and body concern on restrained eating. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 37, 325–336.
2.
AllenJ.SmithJ. L. (2011). The influence of sexuality stereotypes on men's experience of gender-role incongruence. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 12, 77–96. doi:10.1037/a0019678
3.
AmanatullahE. T.MorrisM. W. (2010). Negotiating gender roles: Gender differences in assertive negotiating are mediated by women’s fear of backlash and attenuated when negotiating on behalf of others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 256–267. doi:10.1037/a0017094
4.
Ben-ZeevT.FeinS.InzlichtM. (2005). Arousal and stereotype threat. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 174–181. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2003.11.007
5.
BlakemoreJ. E. O. (2003). Children's beliefs about violating gender norms: Boys shouldn't look like girls, and girls shouldn't act like boys. Sex Roles, 48, 411–419. doi:10.1023/A:1023574427720
6.
BoicheJ.PlazaM.ChalabaevA.GuilletE.SarrazinP. (2014). Social antecedents and consequences of sport gender stereotypes during adolescence. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 38(2), 259–274. doi:10.1177/0361684313505844
7.
BowlesH. R.BabcockL. (2012). How can women escape the compensation negotiation dilemma? Relational accounts are one answer. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 37, 80–96. doi:10.1177/0361684312455524
8.
BrescollV. L. (2011). Who takes the floor and why: Gender, power and volubility in organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 56, 622–641. doi:10.1177/0001839212439994
9.
BrescollV. L.UhlmannE. L. (2008). Can an angry woman get ahead? Status conferral, gender, and expression of emotion in the workplace. Psychological Science, 19, 268–275. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02079.x
10.
BrodishA. B.DevineP. G. (2009). The role of performance-avoidance goals and worry in mediating the relationship between stereotype threat and performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 180–185.
11.
BronsteinP. (2006). The family environment: Where gender role socialization begins. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
12.
BudworthM.MannS. L. (2010). Becoming a leader: The challenge of modesty for women. Journal of Management Development, 29, 177–186. doi:10.1108/02621711011019314
13.
ButlerR. (1987). Task involving and ego involving properties of evaluation: Effects of different feedback conditions on motivational perceptions, interest, and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 474–482. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.79.4.474
CooperJ. (1998). Unlearning cognitive dissonance: Toward an understanding of the development of dissonance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 34, 562–575. doi:10.1006/jesp.1998.1365
16.
CooperJ.ZannaM. P.TavesP. A. (1978). Arousal as a necessary condition for attitude change following induced compliance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 1101–1106. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.36.10.1101
17.
CrawfordM. (1988). Gender, age, and the social evaluation of assertion. Behavior Modification, 12, 549–564. doi:10.1177/01454455880124004
18.
CroizetJ.DesprésG.GauzinsM.HuguetP.LeyensJ.MéotA. (2004). Stereotype threat undermines intellectual performance by triggering a disruptive mental load. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 721–731.
19.
CsikszentmihalyiM. (1978). Intrinsic rewards and emergent motivation. In LepperM. R.GreeneD. (Eds.), The hidden costs of reward (pp. 205–216). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
20.
DiekmanA. B.BrownE. R.JohnstonA. M.ClarkE. K. (2010). Seeking congruity between goals and roles: A new look at why women opt out of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics careers. Psychological Science, 21, 1051–1057. doi:10.1177/0956797610377342
21.
EaglyA. H.WoodW.DiekmanA. B. (2000). Social role theory of sex differences and similarities: A current appraisal. In EckesT.TrautnerH. M. (Eds.), The developmental social psychology of gender (pp. 123–174). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
22.
ElliotA. J.DevineP. G. (1994). On the motivational nature of cognitive dissonance: Dissonance as psychological discomfort. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 382–394. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.67.3.382
23.
ElliotA. J.HarackiewiczJ. M. (1996). Approach and avoidance achievement goals and intrinsic motivation: A mediational analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 461–475.
24.
ElliotA.McGregorH. (2001). A 2 × 2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 501–519.
25.
ElliotA. J.MurayamaK. (2008). On the measurement of achievement goals: Critique, illustration, and application. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 613–628. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.100.3.613
26.
FestingerL.CarlsmithJ. M. (1959). Cognitive consequences of forced compliance. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 58, 203–210. doi:10.1037/h0041593
27.
FinneyS. J.PieperS. L.BarronK. E. (2004). Examining the psychometric properties of the Achievement Goal Questionnaire in a general academic context. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64, 365–383.
28.
GouldR. J.SloneC. G. (1982). The “feminine modesty” effect: A self-presentational interpretation of sex differences in causal attribution. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 8, 477–485. doi:10.1177/0146167282083014
29.
HarackiewiczJ.BarronK.TauerJ.CarterS.ElliotA. (2000). Short-term and long-term consequences of achievement goals: Predicting interest and performance over time. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 316–330. doi:10.1037//0022-0663,92.2.316
30.
Harmon-JonesE.BrehmJ. W.GreenbergJ.SimonL.NelsonD. E. (1996). Evidence that the production of aversive consequences is not necessary to create cognitive dissonance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 5–16. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.70.1.5
31.
HorganT.SmithJ. L. (2006). Interpersonal reasons for interpersonal perceptions: Gender-incongruent purpose goals and nonverbal judgment accuracy. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 30, 127–140. doi:10.1007/s10919-006-0012-4
32.
HunterH. W. (Ed.). (1997). The teachings of Howard W. Hunter. Salt Lake City, UT: Bookcraft.
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. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00272
34.
JohnsM.SchmaderT.MartensA. (2005). Knowing is half the battle: Teaching stereotype threat as a means of improving women's math performance. Psychological Science, 16, 175–179. doi:10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.00799.x
35.
LeaperC.BreedL.HoffmanL.PerlmanC. A. (2002). Variations in the gender-stereotyped content of children's television cartoons across genres. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32, 1653–1662. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2002.tb02767.x
36.
MarkusH. R.KitayamaS. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224–253. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.98.2.224
37.
Moss-RacusinC.PhelanJ. E.RudmanL. A. (2010). When men break the gender rules: Status incongruity and backlash against modest men. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 11, 140–151. doi:10.1037/a0018093
38.
Moss-RacusinC.RudmanL. A. (2010). Disruptions in women's self-promotion: The backlash avoidance model. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 34, 186–202. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2010.01561.x
39.
NguyenH.-H. H.RyanA. M. M. (2008). Does stereotype threat affect test performance of minorities and women? A meta-analysis of experimental evidence. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 93, 1314–1334. doi:10.1037/a0012702
40.
O'BrienL. T.CrandallC. S. (2003). Stereotype threat and arousal: Effects on women's math performance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 782–789. doi:10.1177/0146167203029006010
41.
OlsonJ. M. (1988). Misattribution, preparatory information, and speech anxiety. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 758–767. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.54.5.758
42.
RudmanL. A. (1998). Self-promotion as a risk factor for women: The costs and benefits of counterstereotypical impression management. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 629–645. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.74.3.629
43.
RudmanL. A.GlickP. (1999). Feminized management and backlash toward agentic women: The hidden costs to women of a kinder, gentler image of middle managers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1004–1010. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.77.5.1004
44.
RudmanL. A.GlickP. (2001). Prescriptive gender stereotypes and backlash toward agentic women. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 743–762. doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00239
45.
RudmanL. A.Moss-RacusinC. A.GlickP.PhelanJ. E. (2012). Reactions to vanguards: Advances in backlash theory. In DevineP.PlantA. (Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 45, pp. 167–227). New York, NY: Elsevier.
46.
SchmaderT.WhiteheadJ.WysockiV. H. (2007). A linguistic comparison of letters of recommendation for male and female chemistry and biochemistry job applicants. Sex Roles, 57, 509–514. doi:10.1007/s11199-007-9291-4
47.
ShawJ. I.SkolnickP. (1973). An investigation of relative preference for consistency motivation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 3, 271–280. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2420030306
48.
SmallD. A.GelfandM.BabcockL.GettmanH. (2007). Who goes to the bargaining table? The influence of gender and framing on the initiation of negotiation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 600–613. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.93.4.600
49.
SmithJ. L. (2004). Understanding the process of stereotype threat: A review of mediational variables and new performance goal directions. Educational Psychology Review, 16, 177–206. doi:10.1023/B:EDPR.0000034020.20317.89
50.
SmithJ. L.LewisK. L.HawthorneL.HodgesS. D. (2013). When trying hard isn’t natural: Women’s belonging with and motivation for male-dominated STEM fields as a function of effort expenditure concerns. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 3–15. doi:10.1177/0146167212468332
51.
SmithJ. L.SansoneC.WhiteP. H. (2007). The stereotyped task engagement process: The role of interest and achievement motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 99–114. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.99.1.99
52.
SmithJ. L.WhiteP. H. (2002). An examination of implicitly activated, explicitly activated, and nullified stereotypes on mathematical performance: It's not just a woman's issue. Sex Roles, 47, 179–191.
53.
SnyderC. R.LassegardM.FordC. E. (1986). Distancing after group success and failure: Basking in reflected glory and cutting off reflected failure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 382–388. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.2.382
54.
SymonsC.JohnsonB. T. (1997). The self-reference effect in memory: A meta analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 12, 371–394. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.121.3.371
55.
ThomanD. B.SmithJ. L.BrownE. R.ChaseJ.LeeJ. Y. K. (2013). Beyond performance: A motivational experiences model of stereotype threat. Educational Psychology Review, 25, 211–243. doi:10.1007/s10648-013-9219-1
56.
UrdanT. (Ed.). (1999). Advances in motivation and achievement: Motivation in context (Vol. 11). Stamford, CT: JAI Press.
57.
WadeM. E. (2001). Women and the salary negotiation: The costs of self-advocacy. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 25, 65–76. doi:10.1111/1471-6402.00008
58.
ZannaM. P.CooperJ. (1974). Dissonance and the pill: An attribution approach to studying the arousal properties of dissonance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 29, 703–709. doi:10.1037/h0036651
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.
