Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
di Bella, Laura; Crisp, Richard (2016)
Languages: English
Types: Article
Experiences that compel people to challenge social stereotypes can promote enhanced cognitive flexibility on a range of judgmental domains. Women in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) fields are chronically exposed to such experiences and may therefore also demonstrate these benefits. Two studies examined the differential effects of counterstereotypical experiences on women from STEM and non-STEM fields. Results showed that imagining or recollecting these experiences led women from STEM fields to exhibit a lesser reliance on heuristic thinking compared to women from non-STEM fields, and this difference was mediated by self-perceived resilience to the negative impact of gender stereotyping. Implications for psychologists’ and educators’ understanding of the relationship between counterstereotypical experiences and heuristic thinking are discussed.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Appel, M., Kronberger, N., & Aronson, J. (2011). Stereotype threat impairs ability building: Effects on test preparation among women in science and technology. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41(7), 904-913. doi:10.1002/ejsp.835
    • Blickenstaff, J. C. (2005). Women and science careers: Leaky pipeline or gender filter? Gender and Education, 17(4), 369-386. doi:10.1080/09540250500145072
    • Busenitz, L. W., & Barney, J. B. (1997). Differences between entrepreneurs and managers in large organizations: Biases and heuristics in strategic decision-making. Journal of Business Venturing, 12(1), 9-30. doi:10.1016/S0883-9026(96)00003-1
    • Chen, S., & Chaiken, S. (1999). The heuristic-systematic model in its broader context. In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual-process theories in social psychology (pp. 73-96). New York, NY, US: Guilford Press.
    • Cheng, C. Y., Sanchez-Burks, J., & Lee, F. (2008). Connecting the dots within. Psychological Science, 19(11), 1178-1183. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02220.x
    • Cheryan, S., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2000). When positive stereotypes threaten intellectual performance: The psychological hazards of “model minority” status. Psychological Science, 11(5), 399-402. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00277
    • Crisp, R. J., Bache, L. M., & Maitner, A. (2009). Dynamics of social comparison in counterstereotypic domains: Stereotype boost, not stereotype threat, for women engineering majors. Social Influence, 4, 171-184. doi:10.1080/15534510802607953
    • Crisp, R. J., Birtel, M. D., & Meleady, R. (2011). Mental simulations of social thought and action: Trivial tasks or tools for transforming social policy? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20, 261-264. doi:10.1177/0963721411413762
    • Gocłowska, M. A., Crisp, R. J., & Labuschagne, K. (2013). Can counter-stereotypes boost flexible thinking? Group Processes & Intergroup Relations. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/1368430212445076
    • Good, C., Aronson, J., & Harder, J. A. (2008). Problems in the pipeline: Stereotype threat and
    • Higgins, E. T. (1998). Promotion and prevention: Regulatory focus as a motivational principle. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 1-46. doi:10.1016/S0065- 2601(08)60381-0
    • Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
    • HM Treasury, Department of Trade and Industry, and Department for Education and Skills (2004). Science and Innovation Investment Framework 2004-2014. Retrieved from www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/33A/Abspend04_sciencedoc_1_ 090704.pdf.
    • Hutter, R. R. C., & Crisp, R. J. (2005). The composition of category conjunctions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,31(5), 647-657. doi:10.1177/0146167204271575
    • Hutter, R. R. C., & Crisp, R. J. (2006). Implications of cognitive busyness for the perception of category conjunctions. Journal of Social Psychology, 146(2), 253-256. doi:10.3200/SOCP.146.2.253-256
    • Hutter, R. R. C., Crisp, R. J., Humphreys, G. W., Waters, G. M., & Moffitt, G. (2009). The dynamics of category conjunctions. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 12(5), 673- 686. doi:10.1177/1368430209337471
    • Inzlicht, M., & Ben-Zeev, T. (2000). A threatening intellectual environment: why females are susceptible to experiencing problem-solving deficits in the presence of males. Psychological Science : A Journal of the American Psychological Society / APS, 11, 365-371. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00272
    • Johns, M., Schmader, T., & Martens, A. (2005). Knowing is half the battle: teaching stereotype threat as a means of improving women's math performance. Psychological science : a journal of the American Psychological Society / APS (Vol. 16, pp. 175-179). doi:10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.00799.x
    • Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1973). On the psychology of prediction. Psychological Review, 80(4), 237-251. doi:10.1037/h0034747
    • Keller, J. (2007). Stereotype threat in classroom settings: the interactive effect of domain identification, task difficulty and stereotype threat on female students' maths performance. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 323-338. doi:10.1348/000709906X113662
    • Kidd, J. M., & Green, F. (2006). The careers of research scientists: Predictors of three dimensions of career commitment and intention to leave science. Personnel Review, 35(3), 229-251. doi:10.1108/00483480610656676
    • Kirkup, G., Zalevski, A., Maruyama, T., & Batool, I. (2010). Women and men in science, engineering and technology: The UK statistics guide. Bradford: the UKRC. Retrieved from: http://www.theukrc.org/files/useruploads/files/final_sept_15th_15.42_ukrc_statistics_gui de_2010.pdf
    • Knobloch-Westerwick, S., Glynn, C. J., & Huge, M. (2013). The Matilda effect in science communication: An experiment on gender bias in publication quality perceptions and collaboration interest. Science Communication, 35(5), 603-625. doi:10.1177/1075547012472684
    • Kunda, Z., Miller, D. T., & Claire, T. (1990). Combining social concepts: The role of causal reasoning. Cognitive Science, 14(4), 551-577. doi:10.1207/s15516709cog1404_3
    • Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. C. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159-174. doi:10.2307/2529310
    • Lee, S. J. (2006). Additional complexities: social class, ethnicity, generation, and gender in
    • Asian American student experiences. Race Ethnicity and Education, 9(1), 17-28.
    • doi:10.1080/13613320500490630
    • Lesko, A. C., & Corpus, J. H. (2006). Discounting the difficult: How high math-identified women respond to stereotype threat. Sex Roles, 54(1), 113-125. doi:10.1007/s11199-005- 8873-2
    • Leung, A. K., Maddux, W. W., Galinsky, A. D., & Chiu, C. (2008). Multicultural experience enhances creativity: The when and how. American Psychologist, 63(3), 169-181. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.63.3.169
    • Maddux, W. W., & Galinsky, A. D. (2009). Cultural borders and mental barriers: The relationship between living abroad and creativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(5), 1047. doi:10.1037/a0014861
    • Marx, D. M., & Roman, J. S. (2002). Female Role Models: Protecting Women's Math Test Performance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. doi:10.1177/01461672022812004
    • McGraw, K. O., & Wong, S. P. (1996). Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychological Methods, 1(1), 30-46. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.1.1.30
    • Mednick, S. A. (1962). The associative basis of the creative process. Psychological Review, 69, 220-232. doi:10.1037/h0048850
    • Moss-Racusin, C. A., Dovidio, J. F., Brescoll, V. L., Graham, M. J., & Handelsman, J. (2012). Science faculty's subtle gender biases favor male students. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(41), 16474-16479. doi:10.1073/pnas.1211286109
    • National Science Foundation (2013). Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering: 2013 (National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics: Arlington, VA. Retrieved from nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/
    • Neuberg, S. L., & Newsom, J. T. (1993). Personal need for structure: Individual differences in the desire for simpler structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(1), 113-131. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.65.1.113
    • Pinel, E. C. (1999). Stigma consciousness: the psychological legacy of social stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 114-128. doi:10.1037/0022- 3514.76.1.114
    • Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879-891. doi:10.3758/BRM.40.3.879
    • Richman, L. S., vanDellen, M., & Wood, W. (2011). How women cope: Being a numerical minority in a Male‐ Dominated profession. Journal of Social Issues, 67(3), 492-509. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2011.01711.x
    • Samuelson, W., & Zeckhauser, R. (1988). Status quo bias in decision making. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 1(1), 7-59. doi:10.1007/BF00055564
    • Schmader, T. (2002). Gender Identification Moderates Stereotype Threat Effects on Women's Math Performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 194-201. doi:10.1006/jesp.2001.1500
    • Seymour, E. (1995). The loss of women from science, mathematics, and engineering undergraduate majors: An explanatory account. Science Education, 79(4), 437-473. doi:10.1002/sce.3730790406
    • Shafir, E., Diamond, P. A., & Tversky, A. (1997). Money illusion. Quarterly Journal of Economics, CXII, 341-74. doi:10.1162/003355397555208
    • Shih, M., Pittinsky, T. L., & Ambady, N. (1999). Stereotype susceptibility: Identity salience and shifts in quantitative performance. Psychological Science, 10(1), 80-83. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00111
    • Smith, C. S., & Hung, L. C. (2008). Stereotype threat: Effects on education. Social Psychology of Education, 11(3), 243-257. doi:10.1007/s11218-008-9053-3
    • Steele, C. M. (1997). A threat in the air. How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance. The American Psychologist, 52(6), 613-629. doi:10.1037/0003- 066X.52.6.613
    • Steele, J., James, J. B., & Barnett, R. C. (2002). Learning in a Man'S world: Examining the perceptions of undergraduate women in Male‐ Dominated academic areas. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26(1), 46-50. doi:10.1111/1471-6402.00042
    • Steele, C. M., Spencer, S. J., & Aronson, J. (2002). Contending with group image : The psychology of stereotype and identity threat. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 34, 379-440. doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(02)80009-0
    • Steinberg, J. R., Okun, M. A., & Aiken, L. S. (2012). Calculus GPA and math identification as moderators of stereotype threat in highly persistent women. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 34(6), 534-543. doi:10.1080/01973533.2012.727319
    • Stout, J. G., Dasgupta, N., Hunsinger, M., & McManus, M. 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(2), 255-270. doi:10.1037/a0021385s
    • Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology. doi:10.1037/h0054651
    • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1971). Belief in the law of small numbers. Psychological Bulletin, 76(2), 105-110. doi:10.1037/h0031322
    • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973). Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5(2), 207-232. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(73)90033-9
  • Inferred research data

    The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    Title Trust
  • Discovered through pilot similarity algorithms. Send us your feedback.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article