“Math is Hard!” The effect of gender priming on women’s attitudes

By J. Steele, N. Ambady. 2006

179 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Gender Studies, Literature and Literary Theory, Sociology and Political Science, AI Ethics, Fairness & Society

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Gender Studies

In Literature and Literary Theory

In Sociology and Political Science

In AI Ethics, Fairness & Society

Citations in the corpus

Queens Are Powerful Too: Mitigating Gender Bias in Dialogue Generation (2019, background): “This could be an e ﬀ ect of gender stereotype priming (Blair and Banaji, 1996; Steele and Ambady, 2006; Oswald, 2008; Derks et al., 2011; Verhaeghen et al., 2011).”
The role of STEM professors’ mindset beliefs on students’ anticipated psychological experiences and course interest. (2020, background): “…specific psychological constructs are also negatively affected by identity threatening situational cues among women in various STEM settings (Cheryan, Plaut, Davies, & Steele, 2009; Emerson & Murphy, 2015; Murphy et al., 2007; Rice, Montfort, Ray, Davis, & DeBlaere, 2019; Steele & Ambady, 2006).”
STEMing the tide: using ingroup experts to inoculate women's self-concept in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). (2011, background): “Other work has shown that women exhibit more implicit negative attitudes toward STEM when gender is made salient (Steele & Ambady, 2006).”
Women and minorities in science, technology, engineering and mathematics : upping the numbers (2007, background): “J. Steele and Ambady (2006) demonstrated that subtle gender primes could shift women’s attitudes in stereotype-consistent directions.”
Gender Stereotypes and Women's Reports of Liking and Ability in Traditionally Masculine and Feminine Occupations (2008, background): “Steele and Ambady (2006) found that making gender salient, by priming either gender identity or the category “female,” resulted in women reporting both an implicit and explicit preference for the arts over math.”
The Role of Stereotype Threats in Undermining Girls’ and Women’s Performance and Interest in STEM Fields (2012, unknown): “For example, women subtly reminded of their gender report less interest in math fields compared to arts-oriented fields (Steele and Ambady 2006).”
My Fair Physicist? Feminine Math and Science Role Models Demotivate Young Girls (2012, background): “Finally, because STEM is uniquely branded ‘‘unfeminine,’’ gender-neutral feminine role models should not affect math-related outcomes, arguing against the possibility that feminine STEM role models reduce math aspirations via mere feminine cues (e.g., Steele & Ambady, 2006).”
When a “worker” becomes an “older worker”: The effects of age‐related social identity on attitudes towards retirement and work (2008, result): “Similar findings have been shown for other stigmatized groups such as women (e.g. Steele and Ambady, 2006), unemployed people (e.g. Desmette et al., 2001) and the elderly (e.g. Hess et al., 2003).”
Subtle activation of a social categorization triggers group-level emotions (2009, unknown): “Women who were subtly reminded of their gender categorization spoke in a less assertive style (Carli, 1990) and displayed a stereotype-consistent shift in implicit and explicit attitudes toward domains such as arts and mathematics ( Steele & Ambady, 2006 ).”
“How good are you in math?” The effect of gender stereotypes on students’ recollection of their school marks (2007, background): “More generally, Steele and Ambady (2006) recently found that female students primed with the category female or their gender identity reported more negative attitudes towards mathematics (e.g., doing an algebra problem) and more positive attitudes towards arts (e.g., writing an essay) than female…”