Many science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) domains are White-male-dominated; yet, investigations exploring how White men scientists can counter women’s underrepresentation are lacking. We examined whether exposure to a White male scientist endorsed as an ally by a gender ingroup member (i.e., an allyship cue) encouraged identity-safety and positive STEM beliefs among White female students. Relative to a White male scientist without an allyship cue, participants that viewed an endorsed scientist reported greater perceptions of allyship, identity-safety (Experiment 1–3), interest, and self-efficacy in computer science (Experiments 2 and 3). In Experiment 3, we recruited White women in STEM and found that ally endorsement from a White or Black female, but not a White male, promoted identity-safety. Moreover, the endorsed scientist encouraged perceptions that they possessed a shared reality with participants and recognized the bias that women in STEM face. Allyship cues may help White men attract White female students to STEM.
Ashburn-NardoL. (2018). What can allies do? In ColellaA.KingE. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of workplace discrimination. (pp. 373–386) Oxford University Press.
3.
AveryD. R.HernandezM.HeblM. R. (2004). Who’s watching the race? Racial salience in recruitment advertising. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34, 146–161. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2004.tb02541.x
BrownK. T.OstroveJ. M. (2013). What does it mean to be an ally?: The perception of allies from the perspective of people of color. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 43, 2211–2222. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12172
7.
ChaneyK. E.SanchezD. T.RemediosJ. D. (2018). We are in this together: How the presence of similarly stereotyped allies buffer against identity threat. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 79, 410–422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2018.09.005
8.
ChengS.NgL.TraylorA.KingE. (2019). Helping or hurting?: Understanding women’s perceptions of male allies. Personnel Assessment and Decisions, 5, Article 6. https://doi.org/10.25035/pad.2019.02.006
9.
CheryanS.DruryB. J.VichayapaiM. (2013). Enduring influence of stereotypical computer science role models on women’s academic aspirations. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 37, 72–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684312459328
10.
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. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550611405218
11.
DasguptaN. (2011). Ingroup experts and peers as social vaccines who inoculate the self-concept: The stereotype inoculation model. Psychological Inquiry, 22, 231–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2011.607313
12.
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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2004.02.003
13.
DasguptaN.ScircleM. M.HunsingerM. (2015). Female peers in small work groups enhance women’s motivation, verbal participation, and career aspirations in engineering. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 112, 4988–4993. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1422822112
14.
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. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.88.2.276
15.
DeJesusJ. M.CallananM. A.SolisG.GelmanS. A. (2019). Generic language in scientific communication. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 116, 18370–18377. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1817706116
16.
DennehyT. C.DasguptaN. (2017). Female peer mentors early in college increase women’s positive academic experiences and retention in engineering. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 114, 5964–5969. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1613117114
17.
DovidioJ. F.KawakamiK.GaertnerS. L. (2002). Implicit and explicit prejudice and interracial interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 62–68. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.1.62
18.
DroogendykL.WrightS. C.LubenskyM.LouisW. R. (2016). Acting in solidarity: Cross-group contact between disadvantaged group members and advantaged group allies. Journal of Social Issues, 72, 315–334. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12168
19.
DruryB. J.KaiserC. R. (2014). Allies against sexism: The role of men in confronting sexism. Journal of Social Issues, 70, 637–652. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12083
20.
EatonA. A.SaundersJ. F.JacobsonR. K.WestK. (2020). How gender and race stereotypes impact the advancement of scholars in STEM: Professors’ biased evaluations of physics and biology post-doctoral candidates. Sex Roles, 82, 127–141. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-019-01052-w
21.
EchterhoffG.HigginsE. T.LevineJ. M. (2009). Shared reality: Experiencing commonality with others’ inner states about the world. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4, 496–521. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6924.2009.01161.x
22.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.LangA.-G.BuchnerA. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146
23.
Findley-van NostrandD.PollenzR. S. (2017). Evaluating psychosocial mechanisms underlying STEM persistence in undergraduates: Evidence of impact from a six-day pre-college engagement STEM academy program. CBE – Life Sciences Education, 16, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-10-0294
24.
FiskeS. T.CuddyA. J. C.GlickP.XuJ. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(6), 878–902. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.82.6.878.
25.
Flores NiemannY. (2020). The obfuscation of the realities of women of color due to the false dichotomy phrasing of “women and minorities.”Women & Therapy, 43, 278–286. https://doi.org/10.1080/02703149.2020.1729475
26.
GoodC.RattanA.DweckC. S. (2012). Why do women opt out? Sense of belonging and women’s representation in mathematics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102, 700–717. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026659
27.
HigginsE. T.Rossignac-MilonM.EchterhoffG. (2021). Shared reality: From sharing-is-believing to merging minds. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 30, 103–110. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721421992027
28.
JohnsonI. R.PietriE. S. (2020). An ally you say? Endorsing White women as allies to encourage perceptions of allyship and organizational identity-safety among Black women. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430220975482
29.
JohnsonI. R.PietriE. S.BuckD. M.DaasR. (2021). What’s in a pronoun: Exploring gender pronouns as an organizational identity-safety cue among sexual and gender minorities. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 97, Article 104194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2021.104194
30.
JohnsonI. R.PietriE. S.FulliloveF.MowrerS. (2019). Exploring identity-safety cues and allyship among Black women students in STEM environments. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 43, 131–150. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684319830926
KaiserC. R.MajorB.JurcevicI.DoverT. L.BradyL. M.ShapiroJ. R. (2013). Presumed fair: Ironic effects of organizational diversity structures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104, 504–519. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030838
33.
KroeperK. M.WilliamsH. E.MurphyM. C. (2020). Counterfeit diversity: How strategically misrepresenting gender diversity dampens organizations’ perceived sincerity and elevates women’s identity threat concerns. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000348
34.
KutlacaM.RadkeH. R.IyerA.BeckerJ. C. (2020). Understanding allies’ participation in social change: A multiple perspectives approach. European Journal of Social Psychology, 50, 1248–1258. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2720
35.
LaCosseJ.KrusemarkD.FoltzJ.PlantE. A. (2021). Antiracism: Development and validation of a measure designed to identify White Americans who proactively fight to end discrimination toward Black Americans. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/13684302211048886
36.
LentR. W.BrownS. D.SheuH.-B.SchmidtJ.BrennerB. R.GlosterC. S.WilkinsG.SchmidtL. C.LyonsH.TreistmanD. (2005). Social cognitive predictors of academic interests and goals in engineering: Utility for women and students at historically Black universities. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52, 84–92. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.52.1.84
37.
LentR. W.SheuH.-B.MillerM. J.CusickM. E.PennL. T.TruongN. N. (2018). Predictors of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics choice options: A meta-analytic path analysis of the social-cognitive choice model by gender and race/ethnicity. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 65, 17–35. https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000243
38.
LewisK. L.StoutJ. G.FinkelsteinN. D.PollockS. J.MiyakeA.CohenG. L.ItoT. A. (2017). Fitting in to move forward: Belonging, gender, and persistence in the physical sciences, technology, engineering, and mathematics (pSTEM). Psychology of Women Quarterly, 41, 420–436. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684317720186
39.
LewisK. L.StoutJ. G.PollockS. J.FinkelsteinN. D.ItoT. A. (2016). Fitting in or opting out: A review of key social-psychological factors influencing a sense of belonging for women in physics. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 12, Article 020110. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.020110
40.
LindbergS. M.HydeJ.PetersenJ. L.LinnM. C. (2010). New trends in gender and mathematics performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 1123–1135. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021276
MartinyS. E.NikitinJ. (2019). Social identity threat in interpersonal relationships: Activating negative stereotypes decreases social approach motivation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 25, 117–128. https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000198
43.
MillessK. L.WoutD. A.MurphyM. C. (2021). Diversity or representation? Sufficient factors for Black Americans’ identity safety during interracial interactions. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/cdp0000492
44.
MorgenrothT.RyanM. K.PetersK. (2015). The motivational theory of role modeling: How role models influence role aspirants’ goals. Review of General Psychology, 19, 465–483. https://doi.org/10.1037/gpr0000059
45.
MoserC. E.BranscombeN. R. (2021). Male allies at work: Gender-equality supportive men reduce negative underrepresentation effects among women. Social Psychological and Personality Science. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/19485506211033748
46.
Moss-RacusinC. A.DovidioJ. F.BrescollV. L.GrahamM. J.HandelsmanJ. (2012). Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 109, 16474–16479. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1211286109
47.
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. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01995.x
48.
MurphyM. C.TaylorV. J. (2012). The role of situational cues in signaling and maintaining stereotype threat. In InzlichtM.SchmaderT. (Eds.), Stereotype threat: Theory, process, and application (pp. 17–33). Oxford University Press.
49.
National Science Foundation. (2019). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering (Special Report NSF 19-304). https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd
50.
O’BrienL. T.GarciaD. M.BlodornA.AdamsG.HammerE.GravelinC. (2020). An educational intervention to improve women’s academic STEM outcomes: Divergent effects on well-represented vs. underrepresented minority women. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 26, 163–168. https://doi.org/10.1037/cdp0000289
51.
O’BrienL. T.HittiA.ShafferE.CampA. R. V.HenryD.GilbertP. N. (2017). Improving girls’ sense of fit in science: Increasing the impact of role models. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8, 301–309. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550616671997
52.
OstroveJ. M.BrownK. T. (2018). Are allies who we think they are?: A comparative analysis. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 48, 195–204. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12502
53.
ParkJ. W.VaniP.Saint-HilaireS.KrausM. W. (2020). Beneficiary activists’ attitudes toward allies in social movements. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/umzk2
54.
PietriE. S.DrawbaughM. L.JohnsonI. R.ColvinV. E. (2020). Maybe he is relatable too: Encouraging women to identify with male scientists by highlighting bias against fathers. Psychology of Women Quarterly. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684320972118
55.
PietriE. S.JohnsonI. R.MajidS.ChuC. (2020). Seeing what’s possible: Videos are more effective than written portrayals for enhancing the relatability of scientists and promoting Black female students’ interest in STEM. Sex Roles. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-020-01153-x
56.
PietriE. S.JohnsonI. R.OzgumusE. (2018). One size may not fit all: Exploring how the intersection of race and gender and stigma consciousness predict effective identity-safe cues for Black women. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 74, 291–306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.06.021
57.
PietriE. S.JohnsonI. R.OzgumusE.YoungA. I. (2018). Maybe she is relatable: Increasing women’s awareness of gender bias encourages their identification with women scientists. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 42, 192–219. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684317752643
58.
Purdie-VaughnsV.SteeleC. M.DaviesP. G.DiltmannR.CrosbyJ. R. (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. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.94.4.615
59.
RadkeH. R. M.HornseyM. J.BarlowF. K. (2018). Changing versus protecting the status quo: Why men and women engage in different types of action on behalf of women. Sex Roles, 79, 505–518. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-017-0884-2
60.
RadkeH. R.KutlacaM.SiemB.WrightS. C.BeckerJ. C. (2020). Beyond allyship: Motivations for advantaged group members to engage in action for disadvantaged groups. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 24, 291–315. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868320918698
61.
RobertsS. O.Bareket-ShavitC.DollinsF. A.GoldieP. D.MortensonE. (2020). Racial inequality in psychological research: Trends of the past and recommendations for the future. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 15, 1295–1309. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620927709
62.
Rossignac-MilonM.BolgerN.ZeeK. S.BoothbyE. J.HigginsE. T. (2021). Merged minds: Generalized shared reality in dyadic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 120, 882–911. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000266
63.
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). Academic Press.
64.
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. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021385
65.
TamM.-Y. S.BassettG. W.Jr. (2006). The gender gap in information technology. In BystydzienskiJ. M.BirdS. R. (Eds.), Removing barriers: Women in academic science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (pp. 119–133). Indiana University Press.
66.
ThorneK. M.JonesM. K.DavisT. M.SettlesI. H. (2021). The significance of race in cross-racial mentoring of faculty of color. Translational Issues in Psychological Science. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/tps0000286
WaltonG. M.CohenG. L. (2007). A question of belonging: Race, social fit, and achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 82–96. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.1.82
70.
WaltonG. M.LogelC.PeachJ. M.SpencerS. J.ZannaM. P. (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. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037461
71.
WileyS.DunneC. (2019). Comrades in the struggle? Feminist women prefer male allies who offer autonomy- not dependency-oriented help. Sex Roles, 80, 656–666. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-018-0970-0
72.
WiltonL. S.BellA. N.VahradyanM.KaiserC. R. (2020). Show don’t tell: Diversity dishonesty harms racial/ethnic minorities at work. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 46, 1171–1185. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167219897149
73.
WindscheidL.Bowes-SperryL.KidderD. L.CheungH. K.MornerM.LievensF. (2016). Actions speak louder than words: Outsiders’ perceptions of diversity mixed messages. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101, 1329–1341. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000107
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.
