Manuscript of Honors Thesis

Solo Status and Role Models 1

Running head: SOLO STATUS AND ROLE MODELS IN ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE

Solo Status and Role Model Race: Their Effects on Academic Performance in African Americans

Alexandra B. Pederson

Davidson College


Abstract

The effects of classroom status (participant solo member versus participant group member) and role

model race (African American test creator, White test creator, or no race indicated) on African

American college students’ performances on a test of SAT verbal reasoning questions were

investigated. Classroom status and test creator race were determined using biographical description

sheets. Results indicated no significant differences in test scores between the six conditions, but did

reveal experimental SAT verbal scores (M = 320) significantly lower than pre-college SAT verbal

section scores (M = 520). Markedly diminished experimental scores are attributed to testing

anxiety aroused by perceived test difficulty and pretest race reporting evoking stereotype threat.

Limitations, implications, and future research are discussed.


Solo Status and Role Model Race: Their Effects on Academic Performance in African Americans

Threatening intellectual environments can be thought of as settings in which students come

to suspect that they may be devalued, stigmatized, or discriminated against because of a particular

social identity (Inzlicht & Good, 2006). Such settings compel students to conceptualize their own

social identities, as well as the stereotypes associated with them. Classrooms that include students

from multiple social groups, that is, ones that are heterogeneous, are likely to promote the

formation of threatening academic environments among those groups that are stigmatized. This

effect is likely to become particularly salient in settings where stigmatized group members are in

the numerical minority, as in the case of an African American student who finds himself

outnumbered by his White classmates.

According to the distinctiveness theory, described by McGuire, McGuire, Child, and

Fujioka (1978), a person’s spontaneous self-concept is mainly comprised of his or her peculiarities,

or the ways in which that person differs from others in his or her immediate social context.

McGuire et al. offer the example of a Black woman in a heterogeneous group: a Black woman in a

group of White women will tend to think of herself as Black, whereas a Black woman amongst

Black men will tend to be more conscious of her status as a woman. In their 1978 study, McGuire

et al. found that high-school students were more likely to define themselves as members of their

racial group when that group was the minority, rather than the majority, in their classrooms. The

results of Pinel, Warner, and Chua (2005) demonstrated that minority students’ stigma

consciousness increased upon arrival at a predominantly White college, and this increase in stigma

consciousness was correlated with lower minority GPAs. These findings indicate that being

outnumbered in a classroom setting can increase awareness of one’s group, which may in turn lead


to greater awareness of the stereotypes associated with that group, creating a threatening intellectual

environment.

Environments that activate these stereotypes might threaten intellectual performance by way

of a phenomenon known as stereotype threat (Shih, Pittinsky, & Ambady, 1999; Stangor, Carr, &

Kiang, 1998; Steele & Aronson, 1995). Stereotype threat can be defined as the discomfort

individuals feel when they are at risk of fulfilling a negative stereotype associated with their social

group (Inzlicht & Good, 2006). For instance, when faced with the stereotype that their group is not

proficient in mathematics and science, women may feel anxious about being judged in relation to

that stereotype, causing them to underperform and, ultimately, confirm the very stereotype that they

were trying to refute. Consideration of stereotype threat in combination with the aforementioned

distinctiveness theory leads one to assume that being in the numerical minority would increase

one’s awareness of his or her group and the stereotypes associated with that group, resulting in the

decline in academic performance associated with stereotype threat.

Research on distinctiveness, also referred to as solo status, has confirmed this supposition,

demonstrating that being in the numerical minority can lead to detrimental outcomes (e.g., Beaton,

Tougas, Rinfret, Huard, & Delisle, 2007; Inzlicht & Ben-Zeev, 2000; Saenz, 1994; Yoder &

Sinnett, 1985). Minority situations may be especially detrimental to individuals belonging to

socially devalued groups, such as females and racial or ethnic minorities. The findings of

Sekaquaptewa and Thompson (2003) indicated that women who were solos in a group that was

otherwise homogeneously male performed more poorly on a mathematics examination than those

who were not solo members. Furthermore, the results of this study also showed that men’s

performance was not dependent on solo status, supporting the role of stereotype threat in the

diminished academic performance of women. Inzlicht, Aronson, Good, and McKay (2006)


demonstrated that performance of African American participants on a GRE verbal test decreased as

numerical representation of African Americans in the test group decreased. In an intergroup

comparison design, such as that employed by Katz, Epps, and Axelson (1964), participants are told

either that their test scores will be compared to members of the group to which they belong (group

status) or to members of a differing group (solo status). The results of Katz et al. showed that

African American testers performed better when they believed their scores were to be compared to

those of other African Americans versus those of Whites. Unfortunately, the design of Katz et al.

most likely led to confounded independent variables, as the prestige of participants’ respective

schools and socioeconomic status also differed between groups. However, Loh and Nuttin (1972)

found that participants’ intellectual performances were appreciably higher when they believed they

were to be compared to an ethnically congruent group, revealing that this manipulation of solo

status, even in the absence of evident confounds, demonstrated the same effects observed in other

study designs.

Because the discussed research adequately displays the diminished academic performance

of numeric minorities, investigators must now examine ways to attenuate this effect, providing solo

members with an equal opportunity to succeed in intellectual environments. Inzlicht and Ben-Zeev

reported an interesting solo status finding in 2000: Investigators varied the number of minority

members in group settings, demonstrating that deficits in female test performance were inversely

proportional to the number of other females present during testing. Although the ability of schools

to increase the number of classroom minorities is limited, this is an effect that should not be

overlooked. A variant potentially more easily manipulated by school administrations could be

congruence of teacher characteristics with numeric minorities in the classroom. In 2002, Marx and

Roman investigated threatening intellectual environments resulting from classroom instructor

characteristics. The experimenters concluded that women performed better on mathematics


examinations in the presence of a competent female instructor, compared with performance in the

presence of a competent male instructor. The phenomenon observed in Marx and Roman, often

described as the role model effect, has been the focus of several research investigations (Dee, 2004;

Evans, 1992; Holmlund & Sund, 2008; Klopfenstein, 2005). Although the results of these

experiments have varied, all suggest a positive trend in the direction of improved academic

performance in the presence of a characteristically congruent teacher, or role model. Holmlund and

Sund examined the correlation between student-teacher gender congruence and improvements in

student outcomes, finding that having a same gender teacher was associated with better

performance in the natural sciences. Furthermore, the investigators noted that this effect was more

pronounced for male students, perhaps indicating that the positive effects related to teacher-student

congruence may be more pronounced with groups for which congruence is atypical, such as males

or racial minorities in a classroom setting, as White female instructors comprise the majority in this

field. Though Evans did not find a significant role model effect based on teacher-student gender,

he did report that African American students with a same-race teacher performed significantly

better than those with a White teacher. Dee found that teacher-student racial congruence was

associated with increased math and reading achievement with African American students.

Klopfenstein also demonstrated a positive correlation between teacher-student racial congruence

and academic achievement, theorizing that such effects may be related to “cultural congruence”:

African American students are better able to relate to same-race teachers, for example in areas of

oratory style, eliminating cultural differences that may impede a student’s academic improvement.

No matter the basis of these results, research on the role model effect suggests higher academic

performance in environments involving teacher-student congruence. Implications of the role model

effect should be considered while investigating possible methods for attenuating the academic

disadvantages experienced by solo members in classroom settings.


Current Research and Hypotheses

The current experiment investigated whether the role model effect associated with teacher-

student racial congruence could minimize the diminished academic performance experienced by

African American solo members in a classroom setting. In their 2007 experiment, Sekaquaptewa,

Waldman, and Thompson utilized biographical descriptions of fellow group members to manipulate

solo status, finding that this manipulation resulted in the greater race centrality associated with

stereotype threat in solo status conditions. To reduce the probability of confounds associated with

differing interactions in a live model classroom setting, and as Sekaquaptewa et al. have

demonstrated validity in solo status conditions created using biographical descriptions, the current

research adopted Sekaquaptewa et al.’s biographical description model and manipulated classroom

settings using “student profile sheets.” Teacher-student racial congruence was also determined

using biographical descriptions. This experiment defined the “teacher” as the test creator, a set-up

comparable to that in a typical classroom setting, in which a teacher would most likely be creating

academic tests to be taken by their students. Previous experiments have used scores on GRE

practice examinations as a measure of academic performance (Inzlicht et al., 2006; Steele &

Aronson, 1995). In order to avoid potential floor effects that may be associated with the difficult

nature of this examination, the current experiment alternatively used scores on a test comprised of

practice questions derived from the SAT, another well-validated, standardized test, as a measure of

academic performance. Because stereotypes concerning African American performance on verbal

tasks are seemingly more prevalent than those concerning mathematical ability, only verbal

reasoning question types were utilized in an attempt to maximize the effects observed in this study

(Inzlicht et al.; Steele & Aronson).


Based on the effects of solo status and role model race reported by previous investigators,

the following hypotheses were expected to characterize African American academic performance in

this experiment:

1) Participants in solo status classrooms, that is those in which they are in the numeric

minority, would perform significantly worse on a test of verbal reasoning than participants in group

status conditions.

2) African American participants should demonstrate higher academic performance in

racially congruent Teacher Race conditions: the role model effect should lead to better test

performance with African American teachers.

3) An interaction between Classroom Status and Teacher Race was predicted: Participants

in the White teacher condition were expected to perform significantly better in group status

classrooms than in solo status classrooms. A significant difference in performance between

Classroom Status conditions would not be evident in the Black teacher condition, though a trend in

the direction of better performance in group status classrooms should still be demonstrated.

Method

Participants

Participants were 41 African American undergraduate students, drawn from a historically

African American institution located in North Carolina. Thirty-five of the participants were women

and all were between the ages of 18 and 22 years. Participants were recruited from two

undergraduate classes for which the professors had consented to administration of the experiment.

The experiment was then conducted during class time, with 20 students present in one class and 21

students present in the other.


After obtaining informed consent, participants were randomly assigned to one of six

conditions in a Teacher Race (Black teacher versus White teacher versus control teacher) ×

Classroom Status (solo status classroom versus group status classroom) factorial design.

Participants experienced only one level of each of the two independent variables (Teacher Race and

Classroom Status), making this a between-subjects design.

Materials and Design
The dependent variable in this design was academic performance, as measured by

participants’ scores on a verbal reasoning test. The verbal reasoning test was comprised of 20 items

taken from a Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) practice test (The College Board, 2005). The 20 items

were questions 6, 8-11, 17, 18, 21-30, and 32-34 from Section 5 of the College Board Official SAT

Practice Test 2008-09. These items were chosen to include questions between medium and hard

difficulty levels, as identified by The College Board (2005), in order to decrease the likelihood of

ceiling effects.

Before completing the verbal reasoning test, each participant was asked to study a list of ten

student profiles and a test creator description to be recalled following the testing period. The

student profile sheet and test creator description studied by a participant varied according to which

of the six possible conditions (Black teacher - solo status classroom (B-SS), White teacher - solo

status classroom (W-SS), control teacher - solo status classroom (C-SS), Black teacher - group

status classroom (B-GS), White teacher - group status classroom (W-GS), or control teacher - group

status classroom (C-GS)) he or she was assigned to. The test creator description was associated

with Teacher Race (Black teacher, White teacher, or control teacher) whereas allotment of the

student profile sheet was determined by Classroom Status (solo status classroom or group status

classroom).


All participants were told that the verbal reasoning test content was created by an imaginary

teacher, described on the test creator description sheets. Participants in all three Teacher Race

conditions received the same test creator description, and sheets varied only by the teacher

photograph: In the Black teacher condition, a photograph of an African American test creator was

included (BT sheet; Appendix A), in the White teacher condition, a photograph of a White test

creator (WT sheet; Appendix B), and in the control condition, a box containing the words “Photo

Not Available” (CT sheet; Appendix C). The researcher and five other Davidson College seniors

judged the males in the photographs used for the Black teacher condition and the White teacher

condition to be of equal attractiveness.

Additionally, all participants received a list of ten imaginary student profiles (the student

profile sheet), associated with Classroom Status, with whom the participant was told his or her

scores would be compared. These profiles contained information regarding each “student’s”

gender, hometown region, race, and the number of student activities in which he or she participated.

The sheet reviewed by participants in both Classroom Status conditions was identical, apart from

the race of all 10 students: In the solo status condition, eight of the students were listed as White,

non-Hispanic, in addition to one Black, non-Hispanic student and one Hispanic student (SS sheet;

Appendix D), whereas in the group status condition, eight of the students were described as Black,

non-Hispanic, with one White, non-Hispanic student and one Hispanic student (GS sheet; Appendix

E). Thus, in the solo status condition a participant was told that his or her scores were to be

compared with a group in which he or she was in the racial numerical minority (an African

American participant in a mostly White classroom). In the group status condition, participants were

led to believe that their scores would be compared with a group comprised of mostly same race

students (an African American participant in a mostly Black classroom). A blank student profile

sheet always immediately followed presentation of the Classroom Status student profile sheet, with


participants filling out the same profile information (gender, hometown region, race, and the

number of student activities in which he or she participated), expectantly decreasing suspicion

concerning the alleged purpose of the stimuli. In summary, a participant in the White teacher - solo

status classroom (W-SS), for example, studied, and was asked to recall, the WT sheet and the SS

sheet, whereas a participant in the Black teacher - group status classroom (B-GS), alternatively,

received the BT sheet and the GS sheet. The order of presentation of test creator description sheets

and student profile sheets was counterbalanced between participants.

All participants also completed two questionnaires. The first was a two-question awareness

questionnaire. The second, a recall questionnaire, was composed of six questions on recall, one of

which specifically addressed the race of students listed on the student profile sheet and two of

which addressed the race of the test creator on the test creator description sheet, and five questions

related to the participant’s previous SAT scores and current GPA. The SAT score and GPA

information were used to ensure that baseline intelligence levels between the six conditions were

not significantly different. All of these sheets (the student profile sheet, the test creator sheet, the

verbal reasoning test, and the questionnaire sheets) were compiled into a 15-page packet for each

participant. These packets, the order, contents, and arrangement of which varied according to

condition, counterbalancing, and randomization, were laid out on student desks prior to the arrival

of participants.

Procedure

Upon obtaining consent, the experimenter (an African American, female, senior psychology

major at the participating institution) explained to all participants that in the next 45 minutes they

would work on a verbal reasoning test, and that their scores would be compared to the scores of


other students at universities across the United States. In order to decrease awareness among

participants of the actual purpose of the study, the experimenter told participants the following:

This study is being conducted at several institutions across the country, and your results will

be used to compare your institution to other schools. Your participation will help the

researchers determine what best predicts high test performance, such as school, student

involvement, or hometown region, and will aid in designing tests that more effectively

measure student academic ability, rather than tests on which performance is related to

student profiles.

The experimenter then informed participants that they would review and be asked to recall

information from the list of profiles of the students with whom they were to be compared, as well as

a description of their test creator. Furthermore, the experimenter explained that in addition to the

recall test, participants would complete two supplementary questionnaires following completion of

the verbal reasoning test.

After describing the procedure, the experimenter instructed participants to flip to the first

page of their 15-page study packet and told participants that they would now be studying either the

student profiles or the test creator description. For either sheet, the experimenter allowed 3 min

study of the information, but after 2 min 30 sec, if the participant was looking at the student

profiles, he or she was instructed to flip to the next page and complete the blank student profile

sheet. A second 3 min interval followed, during which participants studied whichever sheet they

did not examine during the first interval. Following these two 3 min intervals the experimenter

gave the following explanation of the verbal reasoning test:

This test consists of twenty questions and will take approximately 25 minutes to complete. I

will inform you at the halfway point, and when there are only 5 minutes left. Each test


consists of three different sections. Please refer to the instructions for that section if you

have questions. If you have any additional questions, please raise your hand. However, I

will be unable to help you answer any test questions. Please answer these questions to the

best of your ability, as your results will be used to compare your institution to other colleges

throughout the country. If you finish the test before the 25 minutes are up, you may review

your answers, but please do not return to the pages before the verbal reasoning test, or flip

ahead to future pages.

If there were no questions, the experimenter then began the 25-min testing period. Following the

25-min testing period, the experimenter instructed participants to flip the page and allowed 1 min

for completion of the two-question awareness questionnaire. After 1 min, the experimenter asked

participants to turn to the final page of the study packet and complete the recall questionnaire.

Participants were allowed 2 min to answer these questions after which they were thanked and the

study period was complete.

Results

The SPSS 16.0 software for Windows was used for statistical analysis. An alpha level of .

01 was used for all statistical tests to provide balance between type I and type II errors. A one-way

analysis of variance was first conducted in order to ensure random assignment resulted in

statistically similar study condition groups. Random assignment resulted in nonsignificant

differences in gender distribution (approximately 1 male per condition) and intelligence level (as

determined by GPA), F(5,27) = 2.65, p = .05, across the six groups at the .01 significance level,

though it is worth noting that the GPA for the C-GS group (M = 2.43, SD = 0.38) was significantly

lower than the GPA for the W-GS group (M = 3.37, SD = 0.45) or the W-SS group (M = 3.38, SD =

0.47) at the .05 significance level, as determined through post hoc comparisons (see Table).


A 3 × 2 ANOVA was conducted to evaluate the effects of the three Teacher Race conditions

(Black teacher, White teacher, or control teacher) and the two Classroom Status conditions (solo

status classroom or group status classroom) on verbal reasoning test scores. The dependent

variable, verbal reasoning test scores, was computed by awarding one point for each correct answer

reported on the verbal reasoning test, in accordance with the answers outlined by Section 5 of the

2008-2009 Official SAT Practice Test (The College Board, 2005). This allowed for verbal

reasoning test scores ranging between 0 and 20 points. Results of the ANOVA indicated no

significant main effects for Teacher Race, F(2, 35) = 0.15, p = .86, or Classroom Status, F(1, 35) =

1.77, p = .19, and indicated no significant interaction between the two, F(2, 35) = 0.42, p = .66 (see

Figure 1). The average verbal reasoning test score across all groups was 5.78 (SD = 2.07) out of 20.

The verbal reasoning test scores were then used to compute an SAT Verbal Section Score.

First, verbal reasoning test scores were used to calculate Raw SAT Scores (see Table). To do this,

1 point was awarded for each correct answer and 0.25 point was subtracted for each incorrect

answer, allowing for scores between -5 and 20. These scores were then computed from values out

of 20 possible points to values out of 49 possible points (the total number of points possible on the

full length 2008-2009 Section 5 Official SAT Practice Test; The College Board, 2005). The SAT

Verbal Section Conversion Table was then utilized to convert these Raw SAT Scores into SAT

Scores ranging between 200 and 800 points (see Table; The College Board). Reported pre-college

SAT Verbal Section Scores (n = 12) were compared to those participants’ experimental session

SAT Verbal Section Scores using a paired-samples t test. The results of this test indicated that the

mean experimental session SAT Verbal Section Score (M 12 pre-college score reporters = 320, SD

= 70; M all participants = 300, SD = 60) was significantly lower than the mean reported pre-college

SAT Verbal Section Score (M = 520, SD = 80), t(11) = 6.12, p < .01 (see Figure 2).


Furthermore, of the 31 participants who responded to the classroom race item on the recall

questionnaire, 61.29% (n = 19) correctly identified the classroom race as a White numeric majority

or a Black numeric majority. On the questions about test creator race, 22 of 26 responders, or

84.62%, correctly identified the race of the teacher. Out of the 11 participants in the control teacher

condition, for which no race-specifying photograph was included, five participants assumed the test

creator was Black, five participants assumed the test creator was White, and one participant did not

respond. Seventy-five percent of the participants in the group status classroom condition, or that

which was comprised of mostly Black students, believed that the test creator was Black, whereas

66.67% of the reporting participants in the solo status classroom condition, or that which was

comprised of mostly White students, assumed that the test creator was White. Of the two students

in the solo status classroom condition that believed the test creator was Black, one incorrectly

identified the classroom race as mostly Black and one did not report the classroom race.

Discussion

The present data do not support the three hypotheses outlined by the experimenter, which

stated:

1) Solo status classrooms would result in significantly worse verbal reasoning test scores

than group status classrooms.

2) Black teacher conditions, or teacher-participant race congruence, would lead to

significantly better verbal reasoning test scores than White teacher conditions.

3) There would be an observed interaction between Classroom Status and Teacher Race,

indicating that although solo status classroom scores would be significantly lower than group status

classroom scores in White teacher conditions, Black teachers would more dramatically increase


solo status classroom scores than group status classroom scores, leading to a nonsignificant

difference between these groups.

Alternatively, analyses indicated no significant differences between any Classroom Status or

Teacher Race conditions. Several factors may have contributed to these findings.

First, the number of participants recruited for this study may have constrained statistical

power, leading to nonsignificant findings. Before recruitment began, the researcher used the

G*Power 3 power analysis program to determine that a sample size of 120 participants (20 in each

of the six conditions; compared with actual sample size, 41 participants) would be necessary to

achieve 80% power in the occurrence of a large effect size (0.4, as defined by Cohen, 1969; Faul,

Erdfelder, Lang, & Buchner, 2007). Unfortunately, because the participating institution did not

allow participant compensation, the present study was conducted during class hours, when students

were readily available. The length of the complete study period, approximately 40 min, established

that consenting professors must devote an entire class meeting to administration of the experiment,

leading to low professor interest. Future research should adequately address the limitation of

sample size.

Second, floor effects may have restricted the range of verbal reasoning test scores, leading

to nonobservable trends within the data. As reported within the Results section, the average verbal

reasoning test score for all participants was 5.78 (SD = 2.07) out of 20 possible points. Twenty-

eight of 41 participants achieved a score of 5 or lower, indicating that nearly three-fourths of

participants answered fewer than 25% of test questions correctly. These numbers presumably

reveal data subject to floor effects. Two reasons that may explain these effects are participants

guessing answers rather than fully attempting to logically assess each question and low participant

motivation. That said, however, due to the set-up of this experiment, requiring participants to sit


through the entire 25-min testing period with no stimuli aside from the testing booklet, it seems

unlikely that participants would have quickly run through the 20 questions, simply guessing

answers without attempting to work through the problems. The 25-min period allowed plenty

adequate time for participants to complete each question in its entirety, as a full-length Official

SAT section allows only 25 min for 35 questions, or about 42 sec per question, while the

experiment permitted approximately 75 sec per question (The College Board, 2005). Furthermore,

although it may be possible that the participants were not motivated to complete the test to the best

of their ability, the average SAT verbal score in this experiment, 300 points, fell far below the

average national SAT verbal score, approximately 500 points (The College Board). Because SAT

scoring awards 200 points for mere completion of a section, even with no correct answers, it seems

improbable that these students were so unmotivated that such severely compromised scores should

result. Additionally, because past researchers, studying demographically similar populations, have

been able to report significant findings utilizing scores on the GRE, a more difficult standardized

test, without exceeding the motivation exercised in this design (leading participants to believe that

their scores would be used to compare their school to other schools across the United States), it

seems somewhat improbable that low motivation alone could have led to such low scores in the

current experiment (e.g., Inzlicht et al., 2006; Steele & Aronson, 1995).

For the 12 participants who completed the SAT items in the final questionnaire, pre-college

SAT verbal section scores were averaged and compared with the mean calculated experimental

SAT verbal score. This mean calculated experimental SAT verbal score, 320 points, was

dramatically lower than the mean reported pre-college score, 520 points. Although these figures

only reflect the data of 12 participants, it is likely that they are representative of those scores

obtained by the entire population: the overall mean experimental score was 300 points (compared

with the 320 points for the 12 reporters). Furthermore, 35 of 41 total participants reported the year


in which they took the SAT, indicating that at least 85.37% of participants indeed took the SAT and

were familiar with this type of test format. The mean GPA for the 12 reporting participants was

3.33 (SD = 0.45), compared with 3.16 (SD = 0.44) for the entire population, further indicating this

subset as a representative sample. Thus, these results would most likely characterize those of the

entire population, revealing radically lower SAT scores than those previously demonstrated by the

participants. Though the current scores may be lower as a result of using only those questions of

medium and hard difficulty level, or because students may have utilized preparatory means to

achieve higher scores on their pre-college SAT scores, it is unlikely that such design elements

would have caused a 200-point discrepancy. This seems especially improbable after considering

that experimental scores were achieved when the population was older and had reached a higher

level of education, which should have counteracted, at least minimally, some of the effects of

difficulty level and lack of preparation. Also, although social desirability may have caused

participants to report scores higher than those they truly obtained, resulting in the observed score

deficit, this is unlikely as all participants’ written data were completely anonymous and

confidential. The particularly low scores in this design most likely reflect alternative phenomena.

One possible explanation is that the procedures outlined in this experiment aroused an

extreme sense of stereotype threat in African American participants. In order to maximize

observable effects, this design utilized verbal reasoning questions and asked participants to report

their race immediately preceding the testing period. In accordance with past research, this design

used verbal reasoning questions to evoke stereotype threat within African American test-takers, as

negative stereotypes are more often associated with the verbal abilities, rather than the

mathematical abilities, of African Americans (Inzlicht et al., 2006; Steele & Aronson, 1995).

Additionally, studies have shown that asking a member of a socially devalued group, such as

females or ethnic minorities, to report his or her gender or race immediately before beginning a test


can elicit anxieties about being judged in relation to stereotypes associated with that group, causing

them to perform more poorly (e.g., Steele & Aronson). Because African American participants in

this experiment were asked both to complete a verbal reasoning test and to report their race before

beginning testing, it is highly probable that these factors contributed to the low scores observed in

all conditions, confirming the findings of past experimenters (e.g., Shih et al., 1999; Stangor et al,

1998; Steele & Aronson).

Alternatively, inflated perceived test difficulty may have increased participant anxiety

levels, resulting in compromised performance and lower test scores. In an attempt to amplify the

reinforcing, encouraging attributes of the role model, the test creator description sheet described the

teacher as a professor at a highly well-known, prestigious Ivy League university. Moreover, the

description also stated that the test creator administered the experimental verbal reasoning test in

his undergraduate English courses, in order to increase the plausibility of describing the professor

as the creator of the experimental test. Due to the recognizably prestigious university used in the

description, most participants would have almost certainly associated this test, claimed to be used in

classes at this university, as one that was academically rigorous. In accordance with past research,

it is possible that perceiving this test as highly difficult would have produced elevated levels of

anxiety within participants (Head & Lindsey, 1983). Research has also demonstrated that elevated

anxiety levels lead to underperformance on tests of academic ability, indicating that the anxiety

evoked by perceived test difficulty could very well have compromised the performance of

participants in this experiment, leading to lower test scores (e.g., Daniels & Hewitt, 1978; Head &

Lindsey; Ramond, 1953). The combined effect of these two phenomena could have certainly been

powerful enough to cause the 200 point deficit noted in this experiment.


Results of the recall questionnaire also displayed interesting findings. As reported in the

results section, 84.62% of participants correctly identified the race of the teacher on their test

creator description sheet. This very high percentage, combined with no participant reports of

awareness that the test creator did not truly create and use this test in his classes, demonstrates that

this biographical description, utilizing photographs to display the teacher race, may be a valid

model for manipulation of this variable. For the Classroom Status conditions, 61.29% of

participants correctly reported their classroom as having either a White numeric majority or a Black

numeric majority. Though this figure is lower than that for the Teacher Race conditions, participant

reports concerning the race of the test creator in control teacher conditions, or those conditions for

which no photograph was included and thus no race was specified, illuminate some additional

information about knowledge of the racial distribution on student profile sheets. As previously

reported, five control teacher participants reported that the test creator was Black and five reported

that the test creator was White. Four out of the five participants in control teacher conditions who

reported the test creator was White were also in the solo status classroom condition, or that in

which eight out of ten students on the student profile sheet were identified as White. Three out of

five of the participants who identified the test creator as Black were in the group status classroom

condition, or that in which eight out of ten students on the student profile sheet were identified as

Black. Of the two students in the group status classroom that did not identify the test creator as

Black, one did not correctly identify the racial majority of the classroom and the other did not

report the race of the classroom. Therefore, although only about two-thirds of participants were

able to correctly identify the prominent classroom racial homogeneity using this biographical

description model, trends in teacher race identification would suggest that viewing the student

profile sheet did, at least subconsciously, affect the perceptions of participants as intended. For


these reasons, the current research further validates Sekaquaptewa et al.’s (2007) model for creating

solo status conditions using biographical descriptions.

Considering the discussed implications of the current findings, the researcher suggests the

following approaches for improvement of the efficacy of this design in future studies:

1) Increasing the number of participants, and thus increasing power, should be a primary

goal of future researchers. If recruiting the large number of African American participants

necessary to adequately enhance power is not feasible, this experiment could alternatively be run

using women as solo status members among men. Although this would clearly only be a model for

the effects of other socially devalued minorities, such as African Americans, past research has

indicated similarities between the effects of stereotype threat and solo status on women among men

and African Americans among Whites in classroom settings (e.g., Beaton et al., 2007; Inzlicht &

Ben-Zeev, 2000; Saenz, 1994; Yoder & Sinnett, 1985).

2) Future research should attempt to alleviate the floor effects observed in this experiment.

One way to do this would be to change the university in the test creator description to one that is

less well known and academically rigorous. Also, easy level SAT questions, as well as the medium

and difficult level questions used in the current study, could be incorporated into the verbal

reasoning test. Though race reporting before testing may have lowered overall scores, it is not

recommended that this manipulation be altered, as it assists in eliciting the spontaneous self-

concept discussed by McGuire et al. (1978), increasing the awareness of participants as to the racial

similarities or dissimilarities between themselves, the teacher, and the students in the classroom.

Another way to increase scores may be to increase participant motivation. One way of doing this

may be to offer raffle tickets or a prize to those participants who score above a certain value, such


as 80% and higher. All participants, regardless of actual score could be awarded the outlined

reward.

3) Researchers should also aim to increase the response rates among participants on the

recall questionnaire. Running this experiment in individual sessions, rather than during 20-person

class meetings, should improve the response rate, as increased reactivity, due to the one-on-one

nature of the individual session, would most likely cause participants to leave fewer questions

requiring answers blank. Individual experimental sessions may also lead to increased test scores

and increased effects of independent variables, as there would be fewer distractions during the

testing period and during study of the manipulative stimuli.

School achievement gaps between African Americans and Whites have been and continue

to be strikingly persistent in American society (Steele & Aronson, 1995). The grades of African

American high-school graduates average two-thirds of a letter grade lower than those of White

graduates (Steele & Aronson). Moreover, drop-out rates, often correlated with frequent and

prolonged academic failure, are 70% for African American college students compared with 42% for

White college students (Steele & Aronson). Although such problems are commonly attributed to

socioeconomic disadvantage or the segregation and discrimination continually endured by African

Americans and other socially devalued groups, an exponentially increasing body of research

questions the sufficiency of these explanations, pointing towards other social phenomena, such as

stereotype threat and solo status effects. Consequently, future research should continue to

investigate the effects of solo status and role models utilizing the above outlined suggestions,

expanding understanding of potential alleviators of racial, and other, achievement gaps in the

classroom.


References

Beaton, A., Tougas, F., Rinfret, N., Huard, N., & Delisle, M. N. (2007). Strength in numbers?

Women and mathematics. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 22, 291-306.

The College Board. (2005). Official SAT practice test 2008-09. Retrieved November 14, 2008,

from https://satonlinecourse.collegeboard.com/SR/digital_assets/assessment/pdf/

0833A611-0A43-10C2-0148-CC8C0087FB06-F.pdf

Daniels, B., & Hewitt, J. (1978). Anxiety and classroom examination performance. Journal of

Clinical Psychology, 34, 340-345.

Dee, T. S. (2004). Teachers, race, and student achievement in a randomized experiment. The

Review of Economics and Statistics, 86, 195-210.

Evans, M. O. (1992). An estimate of race and gender role-model effects in teaching high-school.

The Journal of Economic Education, 23, 209-217.

Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical

power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior

Research Methods, 39, 175-191.

Head, L. Q., & Lindsey, J. D. (1983). The effects of trait anxiety and test difficulty on

undergraduates’ state anxiety. The Journal of Psychology, 113, 289-293.

Holmlund, H. H., & Sund, K. (2008). Is the gender gap in school performance affected by the

sex of the teacher? Labour Economics, 15, 37-53.

Inzlicht, M., Aronson, J., Good, C., & McKay, L. (2006). A particular resiliency to threatening

environments. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 323-336.


Inzlicht, M., & Ben-Zeev T. (2000). A threatening intellectual environment: Why females are

susceptible to experiencing problem-solving deficits in the presence of males.

Psychological Science, 11, 365-371.

Inzlicht, M. & Good, C. (2004). How environments can threaten academic performance,

self-knowledge, and sense of belonging. In S. Levin & C. van Laar (Eds.), Stigma and

group inequality: Social psychological perspectives (pp. 129-150). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Katz, I., Epps, E. G., & Axelson, L. G. (1964). Effect upon negro digit-symbol performance of

anticipated comparison with whites and with other negroes. Journal of Abnormal and

Social Psychology, 69, 77-83.

Klopfenstein, K. (2005). Beyond test scores: The impact of black teacher role models on rigorous

math taking. Contemporary Economic Policy, 23, 416-428.

Loh, W. D., & Nuttin, J. M. (1972). Effects of interethnic-group comparisons and attitudes on task

performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24, 291-300.

Marx, D. M., & Roman, J. S. (2002). Female role-models: Protecting women’s math test

performance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1183-1193.

McGuire, W. J., McGuire, C. V., Child, P., Fujioka, T. (1978). Salience of ethnicity in

spontaneous self-concept as a function of one of ethnic distinctiveness in social-

environment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 511-520.

Pinel, E. C., Warner, L. R., & Chua, P. P. (2005). Getting there is only half the battle: Stigma

consciousness and maintaining diversity in higher education. Journal of Social Issues,

61, 481-506.


Ramond, C. K. (1953). Anxiety and task as determiners of verbal performance. Journal of

Experimental Psychology, 46, 120-124.

Saenz, D. S. (1994). Token status and problem-solving deficits- detrimental effects of

distinctiveness and performance monitoring. Social Cognition, 12, 61-74.

Sekaquaptewa, D., & Thompson, M. (2003). Solo status, stereotype threat, and performance

expectancies: Their effects on women's performance. Journal of Experimental Social

Psychology, 39, 68-74.

Sekaquaptewa, D., Waldman, A., & Thompson, M. (2007). Solo status and self-construal: Being

distinctive influences racial self-construal and performance apprehension in African

American women. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 13, 321-327.

Shih, M., Pittinsky, T. L., & Ambady, N. (1999). Stereotype susceptibility: Identity salience and

shifts in quantitative performance. Psychological Science, 10, 80-83.

Stangor, C., Carr, C., & Kiang, L. (1998). Activating stereotypes undermines task performance

expectations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 1191-1197.

Steele, C. M., & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test-performance of

African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 797-811.

Yoder, J. D., & Sinnett, L. M. (1985). Is it all in the numbers- a case-study of tokenism.

Psychology of Women Quarterly, 9, 413-418.


Appendix A

Black Test Creator Description (BT) Sheet


Appendix B

White Test Creator Description (WT) Sheet


Appendix C

Control Test Creator Description (CT) Sheet


Appendix D

Solo Status Student Profile (SS) Sheet


Appendix E

Group Status Student Profile (GS) Sheet


Author Note

I would like to extend thanks to Dr. Edward Palmer for his immeasurable support and

guidance throughout the completion of this project. Also, thank you to Dr. Cole Barton, who made

important contributions to the design of this experiment. Thanks to Dr. Hariette Richard, Fatima

Fuller, Nicole Guiberteaux, and Candice Owens for their endless correspondence and help in

implementing the protocol of this study. Finally, thank you to my parents, who, through their

stunning examples, have instilled in me an appreciation of diversity and understanding of the

importance of its tolerance, inspiring my interest in this field of research.


Table

Mean Values as a Function of Study Condition

Condition GPA Calculated Raw SAT Score Calculated SAT Score

B-GS 3.12 (0.37) 4 (5) 290 (50)

B-SS 3.14 (0.32) 5 (5) 310 (50)

C-GS 2.43 (0.38)* 3 (6) 280 (60)

C-SS 3.22 (0.41) 9 (6) 340 (50)

W-GS 3.37 (0.45)* 5 (9) 300 (80)

W-SS 3.38 (0.47)* 6 (7) 310 (70)

Note. Values enclosed in parentheses represent standard deviations. B = Black teacher, C = control teacher,
W = White teacher, GS = group status classroom, SS = solo status classroom.
*p < .05. Mean GPA for C-GS significantly lower than W-GS and W-SS.


Figure Captions

Figure 1. Mean verbal reasoning test scores ( + SD) as a function of study condition.

Figure 2. Mean SAT verbal section scores for reporting participants ( + SD) as a function of testing

time.

Manuscript of Honors Thesis

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Manuscript of Honors Thesis

Similar to Manuscript of Honors Thesis (20)

Manuscript of Honors Thesis