Intelligence and the Stereotype Threat
nytimes.com
Intelligence and the Stereotype Threat
1–10 of 26 posts
Re: Intelligence and the Stereotype Threat
#2So the basic conclusion seems to be "anxiety makes people perform worse". Hardly a new finding.
Re: Intelligence and the Stereotype Threat
#3So the basic conclusion seems to be "anxiety makes people perform worse". Hardly a new finding.
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.
Re: Intelligence and the Stereotype Threat
#4One 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.
Re: Intelligence and the Stereotype Threat
#5So 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.
Re: Intelligence and the Stereotype Threat
#6This phenomenon sounds like a combination of a negative placebo effect and learned helplessness.
Re: Intelligence and the Stereotype Threat
#7So 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…
I think if making sure students felt safe was all that was necessary, the self-esteem movement of the '90s wouldn't be so harshly derided today. A possible alternative to making everyone felt non-competitive is to make the participants certain that the competition is egalitarian and fair, that everyone had equal opportunity to do well in it.
Re: Intelligence and the Stereotype Threat
#8So 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…
I think if making sure students felt safe was all that was necessary, the self-esteem movement of the '90s wouldn't be so harshly derided today. A possible alternative to making everyone felt non-competitive is to make the participants certain that the competition is egalitarian and fair, that everyone had equal opportunity to do well in it.
I actually don't believe it's about feeling safe. I think that humans themselves evolved out of necessity or vanish forever (a struggle). Also if you are born this way and have the guts to perfect and admit failure, you will eventually get something in return for your perseverance. I don't think that making anyone feel good about their mediocrity is a good way to settle any type of anxiety about ones being. It just delays the truth hitting them right in the face, for doing absolutely nothing.
Re: Intelligence and the Stereotype Threat
#9One 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 hy…
Unless outsider membership confers other values, such as perspective or the capacity to make larger out of the box thinking judgements (according to Simonton's research, it does), and unless the degree to which stereotypes undervalue people exceeds the performance gap in the particular situations you can create.
Re: Intelligence and the Stereotype Threat
#10So 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…
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.