Class Notes (1,000,000)
CA (620,000)
UTSC (30,000)
Psychology (8,000)
PSYC12H3 (400)
Lecture

PSYC12H3 Lecture Notes - Stereotype Threat, Throy, Saccade


Department
Psychology
Course Code
PSYC12H3
Professor
Michael Inzlicht

This preview shows pages 1-2. to view the full 6 pages of the document.
Chapter 1: stereotype threat
Latinos and blacks still trail whites in reading and mathematics at all age levels. Hasn’t hcanged
much since 1990
These gaps exist all around the world
Gender diff also exist
Not diminised since 1994 despite women being better overall students . women stil a minority in
feilds
The real problem that holds marginalized groups back is the stereotype threat, the idea that they
will be viewed as lower by hte others because of expectation
Stereotype threat: situational predicament in which individuals are at risk, ofconfirming negative
stereotypes aout their group
This fear can ultimately scare them into losing cognitive ability and therefor confirming the
stereotype
Very popular phenomenon, makes ppl uncomfortable and stems away from nature vs nurture
debate saying that just the situation can have a greter effect than either
The existence and awareness of these stereotype creates a problem for reaching potential
Ch.2 role of situational cues in signaling and maintaining stereotype threat
Drawing from social identity throy,stereotype threat begins with the assumption that each
person has multiple social identities. Vigilance process initatiated when an identity’s value in a
setting becomes more salient
During vigilance phase: ppl’s attention is directed to other situational cues in the environment to
determine whether the identity may be a lability . vigilance can relax if the environmental cues
disconfirm social identity as being a source of stgma. Vigilance can increase if environmental
cues confrm that social identity will result in negative evaluation
A gender unbalanced video, women remember more were more vigilant had higher heart beat
and were less likely to feel apart of the group
Pl have diff thresholds of identity threat
Certan cues may be less threatening to people less invested in the particular domain
Ppl who are more close with their steretyoed social group are more vulnerable to stereotype
threat effect
2 cues reliably produce stereotype threat to negatively stereotype gourps for intellectual
abilities: diagnosticity of a test (validity of testing intellectual abilities) and the relevance of a
stereotype to people’s performance
Researchers can often refer to the stereotype by subtly mentioning it, or by telling the
participants that they will be avaluated on things and for fture potential this intensifies the threat
When tests are notoriously imp. It induces stereotype threat
The way the room is set up or the type of ppl in the room significantly affects the stereotyped
person

Only pages 1-2 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

All types of ppl can be affected by identity threating cues and experience the cognitive,
behavioural and emotional disrutions of stereotype threat
Other peoples behaviorus and media, subtle situational cues (sexist behaviour ie.) can cause
the stereotype threat process and interfere with performance aspirations and cognitive
processes of stigmatized individuals
Situational cues tied to one’s outcomes orr interpersonal treatments are likely to be those that
have the most impa ct onppl’s psychological and hevaioural outcomes
- Stereotype threat concerns, belonging concern, authenticity concerns, trust and fairness
concerns, discrimination and devaluation concerns, marginalization/ghettoizaton/social
exclusion concerns
Cues can speack to many different concerns at once
By changing situational cues in an environment, one mght dampen the identity threat there is an
implication of stereotype threat theory
- Dentity safe setting scontain identity affirming cures which signal people that their
identity is welcomed and respected
- Dentity safe cues very in explicitness. Focus on alleviating threat signalled by
diagnosticity and stereotype relevance
- Ex. Say that the test doesn’t accurately predict academic ablity, not call it a test, shows
no racial difference/gender differences
- The manner this is done influences ppls perception of threat or safety and effectiveness
varies by social group
- Tests that explicitly rebuttal notion that there is racial difference n the evaluation show
the most reduction in stereotype threat. This is because these thoughts are pretty much
automatic
- In women same result as above. Explicit more effective than subtle
- In minority student, subtle reductions were more effective than explicit ones. (calling it a
puzzle rather than a test)
- Can introduce cues to neutralize the threatening ones.
- Critical mass: # of idenetity matess that it takes for individuals to feel they will not be
jjudged according to their social identity
o Potent safe cue
o Also sharing group membership with key individuals in settings also decreases
threat
- Most successful focus on disconforming stigmatized individuals’ social identity concerns
o May be worried about nto fitting in as well
o Even brief exposure to cues that directly target people’s social identity concerns
by decoupling their identity from their negative experiences in a setting protect
them of the effects of stereotype threat
One cue can shape the interpretation of another (ex. Not a lot of diversity n the brochure of a
company, but has diversity policy. So the policy cue counteracts the other one and vice versa
Ch.3 an integration of processes that underlie stereotype threat
Anxiety and negative stereotype activation are overly simplistic explanations for stereotype
threat
Also, stereotypes are nt just activated and automatically induce consistent behaviour
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version