Women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) are labeled unfeminine, a costly social label that may discourage female students from pursuing these fields. Challenges to this stereotype include feminine STEM role models, but their counterstereotypic-yet-feminine success may actually be demotivating, particularly to young girls. Study 1 showed that feminine STEM role models reduced middle school girls’ current math interest, self-rated ability, and success expectations relative to gender-neutral STEM role models and depressed future plans to study math among STEM-disidentified girls. These results did not extend to feminine role models displaying general (not STEM-specific) school success, indicating that feminine cues were not driving negative outcomes. Study 2 suggested that feminine STEM role models’ combination of femininity and success seemed particularly unattainable to STEM-disidentified girls. The results call for a better understanding of feminine STEM figures aimed at motivating young girls.
AmbadyN.ShihM.KimA.PittinskyT. L. (2001). Stereotype susceptibility in children: Effects of identity activation on quantitative performance. Psychological Science, 12, 385–390.
2.
American Association of University Women. (2010). Why so few? Women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Washington, DC: Author.
3.
AsgariS.DasguptaN.StoutJ. G. (2012). When do counterstereotypic ingroup members inspire vs. deflate? The effect of successful professional women on young women’s leadership self-concept. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 370–383.
4.
BeamanL.DufloE.PandeR.TopalovaP. (2012). Female leadership raises aspirations and educational attainment for girls: A policy experiment in India. Science, 335, 582–586.
5.
BuckG. A.Leslie-PeleckyD.KirbyS. (2002). Bringing female scientists into the elementary classroom: Confronting the strength of elementary students’ stereotypical images of scientists. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 14, 1–10.
6.
BuckG. A.Plano ClarkV. L.Leslie-PeleckyD.LuY.Cerda-LizarragaP. (2008). Examining the cognitive processes used by adolescent girls and women scientists in identifying science role models: A feminist approach. Science Education, 92, 2–20.
7.
CarrP. B.SteeleC. M. (2009). Stereotype threat and inflexible perseverance in problem solving. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 853–859.
8.
ChambersD. W. (1983). Stereotypic images of the scientist: The draw-a-scientist test. Science Education, 67, 255–265.
CheryanS.PlautV. C.DaviesP.SteeleC. M. (2009). Ambient belonging: How stereotypical environments impact gender participation in computer science. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 1045–1060.
11.
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.
12.
ColeE. R.ZuckerA. N. (2007). Black and White women’s perspectives on femininity. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 13, 1–9.
13.
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.
14.
EtcoffN. L.StockS.HaleyL. E.VickeryS. A.HouseD. M. (2011). Cosmetics as a feature of the extended human phenotype: Modulation of the perception of biologically important facial signals. PLoS ONE, 6, e25656.
15.
GoodC.AronsonJ. (2008). The development of stereotype threat: Consequences for social and educational equality. In TurielE.WainrybC.SmetanaJ. (Eds.), Social development, social inequalities, and social justice (pp 155–183). New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum.
16.
GoodC.AronsonJ.InzlichtM. (2003). Improving adolescents’ standardized test performance: An intervention to reduce the effects of stereotype threat. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 24, 645−662.
17.
GueguenN. (2008). The effects of women’s cosmetics on men’s courtship behavior. North American Journal of Psychology, 10, 221–228.
18.
HalimM. L.RubleD. (2010). Gender identity and stereotyping in early and middle childhood. In ChrislerJ.McCrearyD. (Eds.), Handbook of gender research in psychology (1st ed., pp. 495–525). New York, NY: Springer.
19.
HannoverB.KesselsU. (2004). Self-to-prototype matching as a strategy for making academic choices: Why German high school students do not like math and science. Learning and Education, 14, 51–67.
20.
HartmanH.HartmanM. (2008). How undergraduate engineering students perceive women’s (and men’s) problems in science, math, and engineering. Sex Roles, 58, 251–265.
21.
HeilmanM. E.OkimotoT. G. (2007). Why are women penalized for success at male tasks? The implied communality deficit. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 81–92.
22.
HuguetP.RégnerI. (2007). Stereotype threat among schoolgirls in quasi-ordinary classroom circumstances. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 545–560.
23.
KahnemanD.TverskyA. (1972). Subjective probability: A judgment of representativeness. Cognitive Psychology, 3, 430–454.
24.
KemmelmeierM.OysermanD. (2001). The ups and downs of thinking about a successful other: Self-construals and consequences of upward social comparison. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31, 311–320.
25.
KesselsU. (2005). Fitting into the stereotype: How gender-stereotyped perceptions of prototypic peers relate to liking for school subjects. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 20, 309–323.
26.
KundaZ.OlesonK. C. (1995). Maintaining stereotypes in the face of disconfirmation: Constructing grounds for subtyping deviants. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 565–579.
27.
LockwoodP.KundaZ. (1997). Superstars and me: Predicting the impact of role models on the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 91–103.
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.
32.
McKellarD. (2007). Math doesn’t suck: How to survive middle school math without losing your mind or breaking a nail. New York, NY: Penguin.
33.
MuzzattiB.AgnoliF. (2007). Gender and mathematics: Attitudes and stereotype threat susceptibility in Italian children. Developmental Psychology, 43, 747–759.
34.
NashR.FieldmanG.HusseyT.LevequeJ. L.PineauP. (2006). Cosmetics: They influence more than Caucasian female facial attractiveness. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36, 493–504.
35.
National Science Foundation. (2007). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering. Arlington, VA: Author.
36.
OysermanD.FrybergS. A. (2006). The possible selves of diverse adolescents: Content and function across gender, race and national origin. In DunkelC.KerpelmanJ. (Eds.), Possible selves: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 17–39). Huntington, NY: Nova.
37.
PajaresF. (2005). Gender differences in mathematics self-efficacy beliefs. In GallagherA. M.KaufmanJ. C. (Eds.), Gender differences in mathematics: An integrative psychological approach (pp. 294–315). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
38.
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.
39.
PlantE. A.BaylorA. L.DoerrC. E.Rosenberg-KimaR. B. (2009). Changing middle-school students’ attitudes and performance regarding engineering with computer-based social models. Computers and Education, 53, 209–215.
40.
ProninE.SteeleC. M.RossL. (2004). Identity bifurcation in response to stereotype threat: Women and mathematics. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 152–168.
41.
RichardsZ.HewstoneM. (2001). Subtyping and subgrouping: Processes for the prevention and promotion of stereotype change. Personality & Social Psychology Review, 5, 52–73.
42.
RudmanL. A.FairchildK. (2004). Reactions to counterstereotypic behavior: The role of backlash in cultural stereotype maintenance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 157–176.
43.
SeibtB.ForsterJ. (2004). Stereotype threat and performance: How self-stereotypes influence processing by inducing regulatory foci. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 38–56.
44.
SenguptaR. (2006). Reading representations of Black, East Asian, and White women in magazines for adolescent girls. Sex Roles, 54, 799–808.
45.
SimpkinsS. D.Davis-KeanP. E.EcclesJ. S. (2006). Math and science motivation: A longitudinal examination of the links between choices and beliefs. Developmental Psychology, 42, 70–83.
46.
SpencerS. J.SteeleC. M.QuinnD. M. (1999). Stereotype threat and women’s math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 4–28.
47.
SteeleJ. (2003). Children’s gender stereotypes about math: The role of stereotype stratification. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 33, 2587–2606.
48.
SteeleJ. R.AmbadyN. (2006). “Math is hard!” The effect of gender priming on women’s attitudes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 428–436.
49.
StoutJ. G.DasguptaN.HunsingerM.McManusM. (2011). STEMing the tide: Using ingroup experts to inoculate women’s self-concept and professional goals in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 255–270.
50.
WigfieldA.EcclesJ. S.MacIverD.ReumanD. A.MidgleyC. (1991). Transitions during early adolescence: Changes in children’s domain-specific self-perceptions and general self-esteem across the transition to junior high school. Developmental Psychology, 27, 552–565.
51.
YoderJ. D.SchleicherT. L. (1996). Undergraduates regard deviation from occupational gender stereotypes as costly for women. Sex Roles, 34, 171–188.
