It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Implicit stereotypes are associations learned through past experiences. Implicit stereotypes can be activated by the environment, and operate outside of intentional conscious cognition. For example, one may hold an implicit stereotype that women are poor at math. The source of these associations may be misidentified, or even unknown by the individual who holds them, and may persist even when an individual rejects the stereotype explicitly.
“Math is Hard!” The effect of gender priming on women’s attitudes
Stereotyping researchers have found that priming a social category, such as the elderly (Bargh, Chen, & Burrows, 1996) or soccer hooligans (Dijksterhuis & van Knippenberg, 1998), can automatically elicit stereotypeconsistent behaviors, including slower walking and decreased intellectual performance, respectively,
Implicit Association Tests reveal an implicit association for male with science and math, and females with arts and language. Girls as young as nine years old have been found to hold an implicit male-math stereotype and an implicit preference for language over math. Women have stronger negative associations with math than men do, and the stronger females associate with a female gender identity, the more implicit negativity they have towards math. For both men and women, the strength of these implicit stereotypes predicts both implicit and explicit math attitudes, belief in one’s math ability, and SAT performance. The strength of these implicit stereotypes in elementary-aged girls predicts academic self-concepts, academic achievement, and enrollment preferences, even more than do explicit measures.
Women with a stronger implicit gender-math stereotype were less likely to pursue a math-related career, regardless of their actual math ability or explicit gender-math stereotypes. This may be because women with stronger implicit gender-math stereotypes are more at risk for stereotype threat. Thus, women with strong implicit stereotypes perform much worse on a math test when primed with gender than women who have weak implicit stereotypes. These implicit gender stereotypes are robust; in a study of more than 500,000 respondents from 34 nations, more than 70% of individuals held this implicit stereotype.[
Originally posted by mirrormaker326
reply to post by nixie_nox
If you read my original post, instead of putting words in my mouth, then you would see that I adamantly denied a difference in the abilities of female to males in math.
I said that they many females do not LIKE math, not that they were inferior in ablitites. Females are better students in general. The gender priming argument has no weight anymore. If a female enjoys higher levels of math, then in the United States she can pursue it. Girls are not choosing the Hard Sciences because they do not like them as much as their male counterparts.
So where is this discouragement happening?
60 percent of those who experienced discouragement said they experienced it in college;
41 percent said they experienced discouragement in high schools; and
35 percent have experienced it in the workplace.
“Math is Hard!” The eVect of gender priming on women’s attitudes
In three studies, we examined the eVect of a self-relevant category prime on women’s attitudes towards the gender-stereotyped domains of arts (positively stereotyped) and mathematics (negatively stereotyped). In Study 1, women who were subtly reminded of the category female (Study 1a) or their gender identity (Study 1b) expressed more stereotype consistent attitudes towards the academic domains of mathematics and the arts than participants in control conditions. In Study 2, women who were reminded of their female identity similarly demonstrated a stereotype-consistent shift in their implicit attitudes towards these domains relative to women in a control condition. The potential role of the working self-concept in mediating social category priming eVects as well as the practical implications of these Wndings are discussed.
Originally posted by mirrormaker326
reply to post by nixie_nox
Stop putting words into my mouth. You are pretty good at that. If I made any comment on any message board about how Racism doesn't exist or if I said anything that could be construed as supporting institutionalized, explicit, or hidden racial bigotry, then find it.
I didn't say you were racist, I said you were sexist. So no, I am not putting words in your mouth.
You are projecting qualities onto me that are baseless and unfounded. Racism is indefensible and you can make me look like a bad guy by accusing me of being racist when I merely said that the reason that females are under represented in the Mathematical Sciences is because many don't like it.
See my previous point.
So let me get this straight, you admit that racism is alive and well, yet sexism is magically eliminated?
If you like Science and Math, then good for you, I am not saying you shouldn't or that you should be restricted from doing something you like. But claiming that sexism is the only reason that there are not a lot of women in the Mathematical/Hard Sciences (Not Biological or life, there are plenty of women in these fields), is bull #.
Ok, so racism happens, sexism doesn't. How does that happen?
So racism exists but sexism doesn't. I wonder where black women fit into that?
So then women are only interested in the non-traditional sciences? Wow,how selective of females. I suppose you think women have equal opportunites in politics as well.
If women just didn't care, why has the number of women in other sciences, tripled, the past two decades? Interest grows in every science except STEM?
Some of the discrimination is not so obvious, and employers may not even be concious of doing it, but science fields want people that are singleminded and aggressive. Well since women are taught not to be aggressive, they tend to get glossed over.
“Substantial research shows that resumes and journal articles were rated
lower by male and female reviewers when they were told the author was
a woman; similarly, a study of postdoctoral fellowships awarded showed
that female awardees needed substantially more publications to achieve
the same competency rating as male awardees”
Fact is, realspoke and I have given you information upon information on how gender bias occurs on a pretty rampant scale, and you have yet to provide any information to back up your opinion.
For someone who is in the sciences, your views are pretty narrow when the only reason you can come up with is that: women just don't care.
So since you think it is bs, are you willing to come out and say right now: that no sexism and oppression occurs at all for women?
Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by smyleegrl
Also girls are more interested in texting, and facebook and twitter as opposed to boys. It has been shown that girls spend more time on facebook than guys. I had to take all the way up to calculus 3, and then differential equations in college, and guess what..the smartest people in the class were guys.
You hit the nail on the head, I went for a walk and realized that the clown moderator who started this thread is trying to stir the pot.