Think like a Monkey: Borrowing from Animal Social Dynamics to Reduce Stereotype Threat
Essay Preview: Think like a Monkey: Borrowing from Animal Social Dynamics to Reduce Stereotype Threat
Report this essay
Cultural expectations of women and men are rooted in the male/female binary classifications found in biology. Darwins sexual selection theory includes claims that males and females follow universal templates of males being passionate while females are coy (Roughgarden 164). Yet these evolutionary ideas form the basis for gender stereotypes. The widely accepted ideas of men being more adept to quantitative analysis and better qualified for positions in senior level management than women cause a psychological phenomenon called “stereotype threat.” This anxiety to underperform is experienced by women who are expected to produce results in male-dominated fields, causing an underestimation of their true abilities. Bergeron, Block and Echtenkamp of Columbia University conducted research that focused on the detrimental effects of stereotype threat, commenting that “there is an enduring stereotype in all industrialized countries that equates management with being male and that this may be the biggest impediment to women in the workplace” (135). Several steps can be taken to correct this anxiety, including an early intervention of stereotypes in child play. If women experience early on that they can achieve an equal rate of success in performing certain tasks that are ascribed to be better suited for men, they may be able to reduce stereotype threat. However, the real issue is that our society has one-sided ideas about gender. Womens exposure to gender stereotypes of male dominance in the quantitative fields has a negative psychological effect in both the short and long run. This stereotype threat leads to a womans underperformance because she believes that men are typically better at certain tasks, and it results in reaffirmation of said stereotype. This vicious cycle lowers female aspirations of leadership positions and can only be reversed by loosening our ideas of traditional gender roles in a realization that we do not have to be exempt from the great diversity of social dynamics that exists in the animal world.
A typical stereotype that unfairly undermines womens intellectual ability is the expected variation in academic performance between men and women in quantitative fields such as the mathematical sciences. Stereotype threat, the widely studied psychological phenomenon, sets in when women are exposed to situations in which they are targeted by negative gender stereotypes. Since men are typically perceived as being more capable of solving quantitative problems, a great example would be a math test. In 2009, Gregory Walton, Assistant Professor at Stanford University, and Steven Spencer, Professor of Psychology at the University of Waterloo, did extensive research on the topic and conducted experiments confirming stereotype threat and its effect on womens performance. Their article “Latent Ability: Grades and Test Scores Systematically Underestimate the Intellectual Ability of Negatively Stereotyped Students” describes a collection of evidence across several experiments in which men and women were given a math test. With the intent to induce stereotype threat, one such group was explicitly told that this test was evaluative of their math skills, while another group was presented the test as being nonevaluative of the stereotyped ability and as expected to yield no group differences (Walton and Spencer 1133-1134). The results of the test confirmed the negative effects of stereotype threat in that the women performed considerably lower than the men in the first group, while the second group, in which a neutral testing environment had been created, women and men performed equally well. Walton and Spencer conclude that womens performance on math tests underestimates their true abilities, and that a gender gap is created due to stereotype threat (1137). Because the stereotype of mens superior performance on such tests is widely known, women experience an anxiety that inhibits their motivation in doing well. In turn, their bad test results reinforce this stereotype, which creates a vicious cycle of underperformance that is not at all reflective of womens abilities. Walton and Spencer suggest that such achievement gaps could be closed by creating a neutral testing environment and removing such biases (1137). An approach to reach this goal would be to explain to women before taking the test what stereotype threat is and that it can be overcome.
Even though educating women about stereotype threat may result in improved math test performance, a solution to eliminate the threat that goes beyond mere discussion is needed. Johns, Schmader and Martens, from the Department of Psychology at the University of Arizona, conducted research similar to Walton and Spencers mentioned above, but with focus on how to eliminate stereotype threat regarding womens math performance. Their findings concluded that this psychological threat can be alleviated when the women are educated on their possible anxieties relating to stereotypes before taking the test (Johns, Schmader, and Martens 175). These results welcome discussion of the issue at hand, which could definitely be a step in the right direction. Part of the goal is to motivate women and reduce their anxiety, and this study offers some insight into possibly beneficial techniques. The researchers, however, recognized a flaw in their hypothesis when they tested a group that was told about stereotype threat but also informed that the test measured their math skills. In addition, it was mentioned to the group that their results would be compared to the mens performance (Johns, Schmader, and Martens 176). Imagine being already nervous about taking a test because you will be compared to someone else who may be better than you, and then you are told to not think of an elephant. What do you think of? Exactly. Teaching the women about the threat did not do the trick in this case. John, Schmader and Martens state that teaching about stereotype threat “might offer a practical means to reducing its detrimental effects,” but a practical solution that may not even work all that well seems like a temporary fix (175). Talking about this threat helps women understand what they are exposed to and why they might feel a certain way. But doesnt calling it a psychological phenomenon tell women that what they are experiencing is only in their heads? Just talking about stereotypes clearly does not eliminate the problem at its core.
The negative effects of gender stereotypes go far beyond the classroom and test-taking environments and into inhibiting women in their career advancement. A common perception is that senior level management and executive positions are held by men. In fact, women held an equal number of management positions as men in the year 2009, but only 25% of women were employed as chief executives (Household Data). The