Ambient belonging: how stereotypical cues impact gender participation in computer science.

By Sapna Cheryan, V. Plaut, Paul G. Davies, C. Steele. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2009

1,318 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Literature and Literary Theory, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e9abcc403b216184bb3ba92989f56f70691408c1

How researchers see this paper

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

In Literature and Literary Theory

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Beyond Social Contagion: Associative Diffusion and the Emergence of Cultural Variation (2018, background): “therefore unappealing—academic field (Cheryan et al. 2009).”
Computing Whether She Belongs: Stereotypes Undermine Girls’ Interest and Sense of Belonging in Computer Science (2016, methodology): “The more that people perceive a mismatch between the academic environment and their own identity, the less likely they are to feel that they belong there (Cheryan et al., 2009; Stephens, Fryberg, Markus, Johnson, & Covarrubias, 2012).”
Consumer and Object Experience in the Internet of Things: An Assemblage Theory Approach (2018, background): “The material interactions of lights coded by programmed rules might serve as an ambient identity cue (Cheryan et al. 2009), where the lights shift to play an expressive role signifying their agency and autonomy.”
The effects of an academic environment intervention on science identification among women in STEM (2013, background): “For instance, undergraduate women feel less out-of-place in a computer science classroom featuring neutral nature posters compared to “geeky” Star Trek posters (Cheryan et al. 2009).”
By Whom and When Is Women’s Expertise Recognized? The Interactive Effects of Gender and Education in Science and Engineering Teams (2014, background): “Science and engineering teams represent a setting in which men are expected to excel while women experience negative stereotypes (Cheryan et al., 2009).”
The Stereotypical Computer Scientist: Gendered Media Representations as a Barrier to Inclusion for Women (2013, methodology): “…female gender role influences the way women see themselves (Eagly 1987), the perceived incompatibility between computer science stereotypes and the female gender role compromised women's sense of belonging and discouraged them from pursuing these fields (Cheryan et al. 2009; Diekman et al. 2010).”
Why are women underrepresented in Computer Science? Gender differences in stereotypes, self-efficacy, values, and interests and predictors of future CS course-taking and grades (2014, background): “Stereotypes about CS are quite negative (e.g. Beyer, 1999a, 1999b; Cheryan et al., 2009; Craig, Paradis, & Turner, 2002; Goode, Estrella, & Margolis, 2006).”
When Do Female Role Models Benefit Women? The Importance of Differentiating Recruitment From Retention in STEM (2011, background): “However, for women not yet identified with STEM, concerns about negative gender stereotypes are less of a barrier to participation than concerns about dissimilarity from people in the field (Cheryan & Plaut, 2010; Cheryan et al., 2009).”
Not Feeling Good in STEM: Effects of Stereotype Activation and Anticipated Affect on Women’s Career Aspirations (2017, background): “…cues can diminish expectancies for one’s performance (Cadinu et al. 2003), elicit a sense of competence-related threat (Steele et al. 2002), suggest that one has to work harder than others (Smith et al. 2013), and reduce the sense of social belonging (Cheryan et al. 2009; Murphy et al. 2007).”
Why Are Some STEM Fields More Gender Balanced Than Others? (2017, neutral): “Even computer science environments that are composed entirely of women can deter women if their environments fit current masculine stereotypes (Cheryan et al., 2009).”
Evidence that gendered wording in job advertisements exists and sustains gender inequality. (2011, neutral): “…research has focused more specifically on the types of cues that signal safety (i.e., belongingness) for members of under-represented groups (e.g., Cheryan, Plaut, Davis, & Steele, 2009; Davies, Spencer, Quinn, & Gerhardstein, 2002; Murphy, Steele, & Gross, 2007; Purdie-Vaughns, Steele, Davies,…”
Fitting in or Opting Out: A Review of Key Social-Psychological Factors Influencing a Sense of Belonging for Women in Physics. (2016, background): “Cheryan and colleagues [48] have also shown that”