The Backlash of Token Mobility: The Impact of Past Group Experiences on Individual Ambition and Effort

Gender dynamics in elementary school teaching: The advantages of men

This article presents a study that identifies the gender dynamics prevailing in a specific context of tokenism – elementary school teaching – in which the members of an otherwise socially dominant group are proportionally scarce – men. The results contradict Kanter’s (1977) theory by showing that male elementary school teachers do not experience the tokenism dynamics. In line with Williams’ gender perspective and Amâncio’s gender symbolic asymmetry, the article finds that although men constitute a small minority in elementary education, they do not lose the social advantages they generally have: on the contrary, they seem rather to gain several privileges. Indeed, the results show strong links between the tokenism dynamics and gender asymmetry, putting the token men at an advantage. Thus, tokenism seems to be limited to maintaining the gender social order.

Gender Stereotypes

There are many differences between men and women. To some extent, these are captured in the stereotypical images of these groups. Stereotypes about the way men and women think and behave are widely shared, suggesting a kernel of truth. However, stereotypical expectations not only reflect existing differences, but also impact the way men and women define themselves and are treated by others. This article reviews evidence on the nature and content of gender stereotypes and considers how these relate to gender differences in important life outcomes. Empirical studies show that gender stereotypes affect the way people attend to, interpret, and remember information about themselves and others. Considering the cognitive and motivational functions of gender stereotypes helps us understand their impact on implicit beliefs and communications about men and women. Knowledge of the literature on this subject can benefit the fair judgment of individuals in situations where gender stereotypes are likely to play a role.

Becoming American: Stereotype Threat Effects in Afro-Caribbean Immigrant Groups

Educational and occupational data suggest that second-generation West Indian immigrants have less favorable outcomes than their first-generation counterparts, who are typically shown to outperform comparison groups of African Americans. In two studies, we explore the social psychological process of stereotype threat as it differentially affects the performance of first-and second-generation West Indian students. An initial questionnaire study of 270 West Indian students provided data on perceived favorability of African American and West Indian stereotypes, ethnic identification, and perceptions of discrimination. An experimental study of stereotype threat showed a significant interaction between generation and stereotype threat condition: first-and second-generation West Indian students performed equally in neutral conditions, but differed significantly when stereotype threat was present. While first-generation students increased their performance in the threat condition, second-generation students showed the performance decrements characteristic of African American students. Effects due to the race of the experimenter were also found, suggesting the importance of context in testing situations. Overall, the findings argue for the relevance of psychological processes in understanding broader demographic patterns of immigration and change.

Something to gain or something to lose? Affirmative action and regulatory focus emotions

Previous research on willingness to support affirmative action has examined groups that are historically advantaged or disadvantaged. We argue and show that support for affirmative action depends on whether people are induced to think of the in-group as having something to gain or as something to lose from affirmative action, and the self-regulatory focus this elicits. We hypothesized that group members should be more inclined to adopt a focus on promotion when in-group benefits of affirmative action are emphasized, while a focus on prevention should emerge when addressing potential in-group losses due to affirmative action. Data in support of this hypothesis were obtained in an experimental study asking university students ( N = 83) to report emotions indicating a focus on promotion or prevention. Results further indicate that emphasizing in-group benefits (vs. non-benefits) enhances support for affirmative action, and that these effects are mediated by the regulatory focus adopted. Importantly, only promotion-oriented emotions predict support when the in-group is seen to benefit from affirmative action, whereas prevention emotions only predict support when the in-group is portrayed as standing to lose from affirmative action. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.

The Effects of Social Identification on Individual Effort under Conditions of Identity Threat and Regulatory Depletion

The current study examined whether the influence of social identification on effort exertion in identity-threatening situations could be altered through a prior engagement in an effortful task (i.e. regulatory resource depletion). One hundred university students took part in the study. The results revealed that under intergroup threat, higher social identification was associated with greater effort exertion. In contrast, under intragroup threat, lower social identification was associated with greater effort exertion. A decrease of regulatory resources hampered the effect of social identification on effort in both threatening situations, suggesting a role for regulatory processes in the influence of social identification on effort. These results are discussed in terms of their implications for the importance of regulatory responses in group-based contexts.