CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 913Social and Intergroup PsychologyEducation, Achievement, and GiftednessCareer Development and Diversity

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 123 of the 124 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Does stereotype threat affect test performance of minorities and women? A meta-analysis of experimental evidence.

Nguyen, Hannah-Hanh D., Ryan, Ann Marie·2008·Journal of Applied Psychology
DOI 10.1037/a0012702
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

A meta-analysis of stereotype threat effects was conducted and an overall mean effect size of |.26| was found, but true moderator effects existed. A series of hierarchical moderator analyses evidenced differential effects of race- versus gender-based stereotypes. Women experienced smaller performance decrements than did minorities when tests were difficult: mean ds = |.36| and |.43|, respectively. For women, subtle threat-activating cues produced the largest effect, followed by blatant and moderately explicit cues: ds = |.24|, |.18|, and |.17|, respectively; explicit threat-removal strategies were more effective in reducing stereotype threat effects than subtle ones: ds = |.14| and |.33|, respectively. For minorities, moderately explicit stereotype threat-activating cues produced the largest effect, followed by blatant and subtle cues: ds = |.64|, |.41|, and |.22|, respectively; explicit removal strategies enhanced stereotype threat effects compared with subtle strategies: ds = |.80| and |.34|, respectively. In addition, stereotype threat affected moderately math-identified women more severely than highly math-identified women: ds = |.52| and |.29|, respectively; low math-identified women suffered the least from stereotype threat: d= |.11|. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0012702

Cites

123 of 123 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cited works that were retracted

Works this paper cites that were later retracted, from the retraction notices publishers deposit. Major when the notice came out before this paper was published.

  • Cites a retracted work: 10.1037/0022-3514.91.2.243

    Info

    The cited work was retracted on 2013-01-01 (notice 10.1037/a0031270), not before this paper was published (2008).

    Cited work 10.1037/0022-3514.91.2.243 · retracted 2013-01-01 · notice 10.1037/a0031270 · this paper published 2008

  • Cites a retracted work: 10.1002/ejsp.310

    Info

    The cited work was retracted on 2012-10-05 (notice 10.1002/ejsp.1919), not before this paper was published (2008).

    Cited work 10.1002/ejsp.310 · retracted 2012-10-05 · notice 10.1002/ejsp.1919 · this paper published 2008

2 of 2

Citations

Cites

2 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 124 references

1 of the 124 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 801–834 of 834

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Nguyen, H.-H. D., & Ryan, A. M.
Affiliations
  • California State University, Long Beach (US)
  • Michigan State University (US)
ORCID
Ryan, Ann Marie
Venue
Journal of Applied Psychology
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2008
Volume
93
Issue
6
Pages
1314-1334
ISSN
  • 0021-9010 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1854
DOI
10.1037/a0012702
OpenAlex
W2170594921
Cited by
913
References
124
Citations by year
2026: 27 · 2025: 38 · 2024: 50 · 2023: 38 · 2022: 73 · 2021: 74 · 2020: 72 · 2019: 81 · 2018: 68 · 2017: 82 · 2016: 55 · 2015: 56 · 2014: 54 · 2013: 44 · 2012: 41
FWCI
7.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Applied Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • Michigan State University
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Career Development and Diversity
Keywords
stereotype threat, test performance, women, racial minorities, gender stereotypes, racial stereotypes
MeSH terms
Affect, Employee Performance Appraisal, Female, Humans, Male, Minority Groups, Psychological Tests, Stereotyping

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review