
Intelligence and the Stereotype Threat - tokenadult
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/07/opinion/sunday/intelligence-and-the-stereotype-threat.html
======
yummyfajitas
One interesting implication of this work (obvious caveats [1]), those who are
more likely to suffer from stereotype thread will underperform those who
don't. Thus, even if one measures equal ability among applicants, he should
prefer those from a group which is stereotypically superior [2].

An interesting question this raises is how much collectivist attitudes play a
role in this effect. For example - consider two hypothetical individuals from
a stereotypically underperforming group. Individual A is a collectivist and
strongly cares about the perception and welfare of his group. Individual B is
an individualist and holds no special affection for his group relative to any
other.

Will A be more vulnerable to stereotype thread than B? It's reasonable to
hypothesize that individual B might care about stereotypes less than A, and
therefore might be less affected.

A fairly straightforward way to test this would be to repeat stereotype threat
experiments using dimensions on which people are not typically collectivist
(e.g., blood type rather than tribal affiliation).

[1] Assuming the effect survives outside the laboratory, wouldn't necessarily
apply in a hypothetical world with different stereotypes, etc.

[2] I'm focusing solely on maximizing group performance, ignoring legal risks,
moral issues, etc.

~~~
shenberg
As an interesting aside, blood type is actually considered to be a predictor
of a person's personality, temperament, etc in Japan - see
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_types_in_Japanese_culture>

~~~
stephengillie
As is the birth month in European culture.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrology>

------
clarkm
Though it's not yet published (and still under review), Wicherts and de Haan
have a paper titled "A meta-analysis of the effects of stereotype threat on
the cognitive test performance of African Americans"[1] which compares all
published and unpublished studies on the stereotype threat. After examining
the studies' methodologies, sample sizes, and other quality indicators, they
found that the only variable correlated with publication is whether the study
supported the existence of a significant stereotype threat.

In other words, the studies are suffering from massive publication bias, which
is leading some researchers to question the very existence of the stereotype
threat.

[1] The paper is referenced on Wicherts' CV:
<http://wicherts.socsci.uva.nl/CVJMW.pdf>

~~~
tokenadult
Thanks for the link (which I have shared as a direct Facebook friend with the
author of the New York Times piece submitted here). Jelte Wicherts is a
straight shooter and a very good researcher. I look forward to the publication
of another forthcoming article listed on the CV:

Kan, K. J., Wicherts, J. M., van der Maas, H. L. J., & Widaman, K. F. (under
review). A genetic origin of Black-White mean IQ differences? Weak inferences
based on ambiguous results.

~~~
clarkm
Good to hear you passed this reference along -- hopefully its results are
widely discussed and don't fall victim to the same publication bias, which
would be quite ironic.

And I agree about Jelte Wicherts. I especially like his commitment to open
data and data sharing.

------
strlen
Anecdotally, this seems to be a serious hinderance in the American primary and
secondary systems: student sees a setback and deduces he simply isn't "smart
enough to study math" and this becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy through the
mechanisms described in this article. Obviously mathematics and heavily
mathematical sciences _are_ very much cognitively demanding, but the students
arriving to this conclusion aren't usually studying the kind of math that's
beyond the limits of an average college bound students: in other words, "not
being good at math" is valid reason to drop abstract algebra or complex
analysis during the junior year of college, but it's not a reason to accept a
C in high school[1] algebra, declare yourself "bad at math", and then choose a
major that involves very little math (even if excludes subject fields they're
truly passionate about and excel at).

AP Calculus and AP Physics were the most dreaded classes in high school and
students were discouraged to take them. I did take AP Calculus (for obvious
reasons I was already familiar with functions that take other functions as
parameters and return yet other functions) but I followed conventional wisdom
and held-off on AP Physics.

Oddly, however, when I got to college I got better grades in _more difficult_
calculus classes (multivariate, vector calculus, differential equations) in
college and did well in Physics (which was meant to serve as a "weed-out"
class, i.e., forced-curved such that at least 25-50% would fail). I think the
psychology had much to do with this: this is a freshman class full of people,
why _shouldn't_ I master this material?

I wonder what would happen if instead high school students were told "these
are the very basics of modern physics and mathematics and every technical
major or minor -- at colleges that are far less selective than where many of
you are headed -- is expected to pass them."

[1] When I came to the US in seventh grade from former USSR (where I was
already studying algebra, geometry, physics and chemistry at the time) I had a
math "placement test" tossed me the first day without any warning and scored
two points below the threshold to place me into a "pre-Algebra class" that
would merely qualify me for the privilege of studying algebra in 8th grade! I
had to take a course at a local community college and pass two additional
placement tests over the summer vacation to place into 8th grade algebra. It's
no wonder that students assume they're "bad at math" given such an
environment.

------
gojomo
There is a psychological test sometimes alleged to detect hidden stereotyping
called the 'Implicit Association Test' (IAT):

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implicit_Association_Test>

The usual interpretation of the IAT is that delays or errors in associating
certain categories with positive/negative traits indicates hidden bias. But if
a stereotype threat effect is also present when taking the IAT, then
delays/errors may be arising from a (self-fulfilling) fear of confirming
negative stereotypes about bias, moreso than any actual bias.

Since the IAT is often introduced as a way to detect subtle and stigmatized
biases, test-takers are explicitly primed to worry about stereotypes-about-
stereotyping. In this kind of use, the IAT might thus be more like a "push
poll" (or a Scientologist's 'E-meter'), designed to create effects in the
test-taker, than an objective measure of unprimed attitudes.

------
Weaponx2007a
So it's a social problem. And it should be solved with telling kids this:
Quote: " And we should ensure that the social climate at our children’s
schools is one of warmth and trust, not competition and exclusion."

That'll work. sure. Getting your papers graded above average is competition
and with competition comes fierceness and willingness to learn and fight. How
about a nice debate? Oh we can't because that would make two viewpoints
compete against one another.

~~~
MaysonL
I think it's fairly well proven by now that praising children for, and
reinforcing, hard work and persistence, has much better results than splitting
them into smart and stupid.

~~~
im3w1l
I think you are completely right!

One thing I wonder about, is how to avoid promoting useless work just for
works sake. Like how many people say you should track accomplishments, not
hours.

What do you think?

------
Apocryphon
This phenomenon sounds like a combination of a negative placebo effect and
learned helplessness.

------
Digit-Al
So the basic conclusion seems to be "anxiety makes people perform worse".
Hardly a new finding.

~~~
stupandaus
I think the point is to show that stereotypes generate anxiety that
subsequently affects performance, something which most people who do not face
stereotypes in their day to day lives take into account.

It would be really interesting to see if positive stereotypes like the Asian
model minority stereotype have the opposite impact of improving test
performance.

~~~
astine
I'd suggest that at the very least it creates extra pressure to perform and
that pressure by itself can help to generate better results.

------
bking
I personally take stereotypes as a challenge to prove someone wrong.

I guess it is just how you respond to the stressors of a possible static
constraint implied upon you. Do you accept their conclusion or decide to find
your own?

~~~
stephengillie
If I say "I'm going to analyze your traits and habits, and model your
personality relative to those similar to you", I've observed that most people
would tentatively agree to the process.

However, if I say "I'm going to group you with your stereotype", most people
become rebellious or contrary.

"Stereotype" seems like a hot-button keyword. We react to the term, not to the
concept behind it. Why?

~~~
pessimizer
Because "stereotype" != "analyze your traits and habits, and model your
personality." That's called personality analysis and modelling.

Stereotypes involve using unrelated culturally-bound flags to pretend like
you've done a personality analysis on someone. It's not stereotyping to notice
someone doesn't wear a lot of makeup, and then declare that that person
doesn't like to wear makeup, at least in the contexts that you've seen them
in. It's stereotyping to notice someone doesn't wear makeup, then declare them
a lesbian.

------
iamtoby2003
thanks for sharing this article, i cosntantly felt threatened and suffered
lack of condifence growing up and my performances were often affected by
"conditional stupidity"

------
Sniffnoy
So if you want a fair test, and some people are going to feel threatened no
matter what... how about the solution of trying to rattle _everybody_? :)

~~~
entropy_
Well, you'd be giving an advantage to people who perform better than others
when under stress. But then, that's not necessarily a bad thing is it?

As an aside, I've noticed that people respond to stress in extremely varying
ways. I've seen smart and talented people completely fail at tests because
they were stressed(even though I can personally attest to the fact that when
not under stress they would've performed perfectly). I've also seen others who
can be completely under-prepared for a test, not know how to answer half the
questions they encounter and yet still not panic and somehow squeeze by and
not fail(I know I've been in that position countless times because of my
reluctance to study throughout school). I remember reading an article(though I
can't find it now) a while back about how this was due to a fundamentally
different internal attitude, one that refuses to rise up to challenges and
simply declare themselves a failure and another that enjoys challenges and
manages to rise up to meet them.

