Cited by 97Social and Intergroup PsychologyEducation, Achievement, and GiftednessPsychometric Methodologies and Testing

Stereotype threat effects in settings with features likely versus unlikely in operational test settings: A meta-analysis.

Shewach, Oren R., Sackett, Paul R., Quint, Sander·2019·Journal of Applied Psychology

Abstract

-values ranging from .00 to -.14. Fourth, the meta-analytic database is subjected to tests of publication bias, finding nontrivial evidence for publication bias. Overall, results indicate that the size of the stereotype threat effect that can be experienced on tests of cognitive ability in operational scenarios such as college admissions tests and employment testing may range from negligible to small. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/apl0000420

Cites

123 of 123 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Stereotype threat effects are typically more pronounced in individuals who are domain-identified.

    “As an example, Shewach et al. (2019) stated that stereotype threat effects are typically more pronounced in individuals who are domain-identified, that is, performance on the domain is important to them.”
  • Student samples typically used in this research have vastly different motivation for completing tests as part of research, often for course credit where performance is irrelevant, compared with people taking CATs as part of a recruitment process who are motivated by the potential for a new role where performance is important.

    “Shewach et al. (2019)also commented that student samples typically used in this research have vastly different motivation for completing tests as part of research, often for course credit where performance is irrelevant, when compared with people taking CATs as part of a recruitment process who are motivated by the potential for a new role where performance is important.”

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

    Major

    The cited work was retracted on 2013-01-01 (notice 10.1037/a0031270), before this paper was published (2019-12). Its authors could have known.

    Cited work 10.1037/0022-3514.91.2.243 · retracted 2013-01-01 · notice 10.1037/a0031270 · this paper published 2019-12

  • Cites a retracted work: 10.1002/ejsp.310

    Major

    The cited work was retracted on 2012-10-05 (notice 10.1002/ejsp.1919), before this paper was published (2019-12). Its authors could have known.

    Cited work 10.1002/ejsp.310 · retracted 2012-10-05 · notice 10.1002/ejsp.1919 · this paper published 2019-12

  • Cites a retracted work: 10.1073/pnas.1018601108

    Info

    The cited work was retracted on 2025-05-01 (notice 10.1073/pnas.2508040122), not before this paper was published (2019-12).

    Cited work 10.1073/pnas.1018601108 · retracted 2025-05-01 · notice 10.1073/pnas.2508040122 · this paper published 2019-12

3 of 3

Cites

3 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Authors
Shewach, O. R., Sackett, P. R., & Quint, S.
Venue
Journal of Applied Psychology
Published
2019-12
Volume
104
Issue
12
Pages
1514-1534
ISSN
  • 0021-9010 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1854
OpenAlex
W2946059574
Cited by
97
References
123
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 1
FWCI
24.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Applied Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
Keywords
stereotype threat, cognitive ability testing, college entrance examination, employment testing, publication bias, test performance
MeSH terms
Cues, Educational Measurement, Humans, Personnel Selection, 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