Structured Abstract
Setting
The experimental research is being conducted in a medium-sized Midwestern town and a large Midwestern city.
Sample
Approximately 900 female undergraduates and women in a residential program for female students with interests in math and science are participating. Because stereotype threat is most likely to occur for those highly invested in performing well, women pursuing math and science careers provide an ideal population to examine in a real-world education assessment setting.
Research design and methods
The first component of this work explores how stereotype threat interferes with women's math performance. Studies 1 and 2 test the idea that stereotype threat induces verbal worries that consume phonological resources needed for solving certain types of math problems. Studies 3 and 4 test the counterintuitive predictions that individuals with greater working memory capacity are more susceptible to stereotype threat. Studies 5 and 6 examine if stereotype threat carries over and impairs subsequent tasks that rely on working memory but are not implicated by stereotype threat.
Students are randomly assigned to experimental or control conditions in every experiment described above.
Control condition
Students in the control conditions are not provided with framing information that precipitates stereotype threat.
Key measures
Student performance on math problems is the primary data being collected.
Data analytic strategy
Analysis of variance techniques are being used to examine student performance on mathematical problems as a function of participation in the experimental or control condition.
People and institutions involved
IES program contact(s)
Products and publications
Publications:
ERIC Citations: Find available citations in ERIC for this award here.
Select Publications:
Book chapters
Beilock, S.L. (2007). Choking Under Pressure. In R. Baumeister, and K. Vohs (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Social Psychology (pp. 141-142). Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
Beilock, S.L., and Lyons, I.M. (2009). Expertise and the Mental Simulation of Action. In K.D. Markman, W.P. Klein, and J.A. Suhr (Eds.), Handbook of Imagination and Mental Simulation (pp. 21-34). New York: Psychology Press.
Beilock, S.L., and Ramirez, G. (2011). On the Interplay of Emotion and Cognitive Control: Implications for Enhancing Academic Achievement. In J.P. Mestre, and B.H Ross (Eds.), The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, Volume 55 (pp. 137-169). San Diego: Elsevier, Inc.
DeCaro, M.S., and Beilock, S.L. (2013). The Benefits and Perils of Attentional Control. In M. Csikszentmihalyi, and B. Bruya (Eds.), Effortless Attention: A New Perspective in the Cognitive Science of Attention and Action (pp. 51-73). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Schmader, T., and Beilock, S.L. (2011). An Integration of Processes That Underlie Stereotype Threat. In T. Schmader, and M. Inzlicht (Eds.), Stereotype Threat: Theory, Process, and Application (pp. 34-50). New York: Oxford University Press.
Journal articles
Beilock, S.L. (2008). Math Performance in Stressful Situations. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17(5): 339-343.
Beilock, S.L., and Decaro, M.S. (2007). From Poor Performance to Success Under Stress: Working Memory, Strategy Selection, and Mathematical Problem Solving Under Pressure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33(6): 983-998.
Beilock, S.L., and Gonso, S. (2008). Putting in the Mind Versus Putting on the Green: Expertise, Performance Time, and the Linking of Imagery and Action. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61(6): 920-932.
Beilock, S.L., Jellison, W.A., Rydell, R.J., Mcconnell, A.R., and Carr, T.H. (2006). On the Causal Mechanisms of Stereotype Threat: Can Skills That Don't Rely Heavily on Working Memory Still be Threatened?. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(8): 1059-1071.
Beilock, S.L., Lyons, I.M., Mattarella-Micke, A., Nusbaum, H.C., and Small, S.L. (2008). Sports Experience Changes the Neural Processing of Action Language. PNAS Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105(36): 13269-13273.
Beilock, S.L., Rydell, R.J., and McConnell, A.R. (2007). Stereotype Threat and Working Memory: Mechanisms, Alleviation, and Spillover. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136(2): 256-276.
Decaro, M.S., Thomas, R., and Beilock, S.L. (2008). Individual Differences in Category Learning: Sometimes Less Working Memory Capacity Is Better Than More. Cognition, 107(1): 284-294.
Decaro, M.S., Wieth, M., and Beilock, S.L. (2007). Methodologies for Examining Problem Solving Success and Failure. Methods, 42(1): 58-67.
Ping, R.M., Dhillon, S., and Beilock, S.L. (2009). Reach for What You Like: The Body's Role in Shaping Preferences. Emotion Review, 1(2): 140-150.
Rydell, B.J., McConnell, A.R., and Beilock, S.L. (2009). Multiple Social Identities and Stereotype Threat: Imbalance, Accessibility, and Working Memory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(5): 949-966.
Sibley, B.A., and Beilock, S.L. (2007). Exercise and Working Memory: An Individual Differences Investigation. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 29(6): 783-791.
Questions about this project?
To answer additional questions about this project or provide feedback, please contact the program officer.
