As noted in a previous posting,
a number of studies have found that males outperform females on tests of
general knowledge. The reasons for this are not yet clear. Women’s poorer test
performance could be because they actually have acquired less knowledge than
men, or it could be that they are not accessing all the knowledge they have. Studies
have found that experimental manipulations can actually improve a person’s
performance on general knowledge tests to an extent. Women generally perform
more poorly than men on spatial tasks, yet it has also been found that it is
possible to experimentally improve women’s performance on these tasks so that
they equal the performance of men. Whether or not it would be possible to
improve women’s performance on tests of general knowledge relative to men has
not yet been examined. Such a study would help illuminate whether gender
differences in this area are due to real differences in acquired knowledge or
mainly due to the nature of the testing situation.
Trivial pursuit questions have been used to experimentally test general knowledge
Sex differences in general knowledge favouring males that were
identified in a number of studies have been attributed to differing interests between
men and women rather than differences in ability (Lynn & Irwing, 2002; Lynn, Irwing, & Cammock, 2002).
Another possibility that has not been explored in the research literature is
that stereotype threat could have a detrimental effect on the performance of
females in tests. Stereotypes are generally more favourable to men than women
in intellectual domains. Men are generally perceived as more intelligent and
rate themselves higher on intelligence than women (Ortner & Sieverding, 2008). Stereotypes can have a
self-fulfilling effect and have been known to affect performance on achievement
tests. For example, women who are reminded of their female identity perform more
poorly on maths tests compared to a control group. However, priming of
stereotypes can sometimes have a positive effect. Asian women primed with their
Asian identity performed better than normally on a maths test.
"Oh no, not a test!!!"
Priming of stereotypes has also been found to affect
performance on tests of general knowledge for better or worse (Dijksterhuis &
van Knipperburg, 1998). People who were asked to think about a typical soccer
hooligan (stereotypically associated with stupidity) and to list behaviours and
attributes associated with such a person performed more poorly on a general knowledge
test compared to those who took the test with no priming. This experimental
procedure was also performed using a prime of a professor (associated with
intelligence) rather than a soccer hooligan, and in this case, people actually performed
better compared to those who received no priming. Obviously, thinking of
professors cannot somehow make a person more knowledgeable than they really are.
The authors of this study suggested that a person’s typical performance on such
a test is less than optimal, meaning there is usually room for improvement. Priming
of the professor stereotype might improve performance by leading to specific
behavioural changes, such as increased concentration or more analytical and
systematic thinking. The hooligan prime might worsen performance by inducing
sloppier thinking or reduced concentration (Dijksterhuis
& van Knippenberg, 1998).
Gender differences in spatial tasks are considered to be
well-established, having been extensively investigated by researchers. However,
there is evidence that priming of stereotypes can improve women’s performance
on such tasks to a level equivalent to that of men (Ortner & Sieverding, 2008). The stereotype prime used
was that of gender itself. Participants were asked to read a text that was
described as “a task to test ability to put oneself in the shoes of another
person.” The text consisted of a description of a day in the life of either a “typical
woman” or a “typical man”. For example, the typical woman text described a
woman who looked after children, spent time chatting with her friends, and who
liked to daydream. The typical man text, described a man who drove a motorbike
to work, was outgoing and tough-minded, bossed people around at work, and
lifted weights in his spare time. Participants were then asked to describe what
they would be like if they were that person, to develop a sense of
identification with the person in the story. Subsequently, they performed a
mental rotation task. After being primed with the story about a typical woman,
female participants performed much worse than males. Males who received this
prime performed only slightly worse than males who received the typical man
prime. What was very striking though was that after receiving the typical man
prime, females performed nearly as well as males on this task. The authors
argued that these results imply that “normal” testing situations involve subtle
stereotype threats, even when stereotypes are not explicitly mentioned. Gender differences
in performance can therefore be reduced by changing the way the task is
presented.
Experimental tests of general knowledge have so far not
examined the effects of stereotypes on gender differences in performance. It is
possible that asking people to perform a knowledge test activates a subtle
stereotype threat that adversely affects women. Using an experimental priming
procedure such as the one described above could enhance the performance of
women relative to men on such tests. If this proved to be the case it would
imply that women actually know more than they are letting on when they typically
perform such tests. On the other hand, if a substantial gender difference remained
after such a procedure it would provide evidence that males do tend to acquire
more knowledge than females. Perhaps this might be due to a greater interest in
understanding how things work, as opposed to a greater interest in
interpersonal concerns, which is stereotypically more feminine. Additionally,
it is also possible that gender differences in general knowledge are the result
of a combination of reduced female performance due to stereotype threat and
greater actual knowledge by males. Even if priming stereotypes had a modest
effect on female performance compared to that of males, it could provide some
guidance on how to assist people of both sexes in using their knowledge more effectively.
© Scott McGreal. Please do not reproduce without
permission. Brief excerpts may be quoted as long as a link to the original
article is provided.
This article also appears on Psychology Today on
my blog Unique - Like Everybody Else.
Other posts discussing the possibilities of priming
Opening the Mind: Where Skepticism and Superstition Meet
Reason Versus Faith? The Interplay of Intuition and Rationality In Supernatural Belief
Turning the Wheels of the MInd - Clockwise movements increase openness to experience
Other posts discussing the possibilities of priming
Opening the Mind: Where Skepticism and Superstition Meet
Reason Versus Faith? The Interplay of Intuition and Rationality In Supernatural Belief
Turning the Wheels of the MInd - Clockwise movements increase openness to experience
Are
Sex And Religion Natural Enemies?
Other posts discussing intelligence
related topics
Cold Winters and the
Evolution of Intelligence: A critique of Richard Lynn’s Theory
The
Illusory Theory of Multiple Intelligences – a critique of Howard Gardner’s
theory
References
Dijksterhuis,
A., & van Knippenberg, A. (1998). The relation between perception and
behavior, or how to win a game of trivial pursuit. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74
(4), 865-877 DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.74.4.865
Lynn, R., & Irwing, P. (2002). Sex differences in
general knowledge, semantic memory and reasoning ability. British Journal of Psychology, 93(4), 545-556. doi:
10.1348/000712602761381394
Lynn, R., Irwing, P., & Cammock, T. (2002). Sex
differences in general knowledge. Intelligence,
30(1), 27-39. doi: 10.1016/s0160-2896(01)00064-2
Ortner,
T. M., & Sieverding, M. (2008). Where are the Gender Differences? Male
Priming Boosts Spatial Skills in Women Sex
Roles, 59 (3-4), 274-281 DOI: 10.1007/s11199-008-9448-9
I believe that the stereotype threat (discovered by Claude Steele) has a huge impact on women in today's society. There is a constant demand for women in what's considered a "males field" and if we don't perform as well as the men we're looked down upon. Women are in constant fear of being looked down upon and reduced to the usual "dumb woman" stereotype that we created since the beginning of time. We set ourselves up for this by not letting women into the work field until the early 1920's. If we would have always been in the work force, there would be no difference or question of our intelligence or worth. Now all women are aware of this stereotype and do even more poorly on tasks they are underestimated with because of it.
ReplyDelete