Effective Use Of Stereotypes In Research

Many people have encountered stereotypes in their life. However, whether they have perpetuated them or have been assumed to fit one, people may not realize the effects that such stereotypes can actually have. Previous research has shown that priming for stereotypes has aversive effects on performing certain tasks. In the peer reviewed journal article, Predicting Performance Outcome From The Manner Of Stereotypes Activation and Stereotype Content, published in 2015, the authors conducted two studies to examine what kind of effects positive stereotypes and stereotypes in general, have on academic performance (1). For the first study, the researchers assessed the math skills of the participants, 69 Asian American female students, to see if the
condition assigned to them made a difference. The conditions were: being exposed to an implicit positive stereotype, no stereotype, explicit positive stereotype, explicit irrelevant stereotype, and explicit negative stereotype (1). In the second study, the researchers further examined the three explicit stereotype conditions. The results showed that compared to not being exposed to any stereotype, participants in the implicit positive stereotypes condition performed better, but worse when positive stereotypes were explicit. Also, explicit positive stereotypes still lead to better performance than negative and irrelevant explicit stereotypes (1). The research in this article provides important information about the effects that stereotypes can have on the academic performance of individuals in minority groups.
The article is featured in the Asian American Journal of Psychology, a journal published by the American Psychological Association.
The journal is published quarterly and focuses on research, advocacy, education, and policy within Asian American psychology. The Journal broadly defines Asian Americans as Americans of Asian and Pacific Islander ancestry in the United States and Canada (2). The intended audience for this journal is Psychologists and individuals interested in having a better understanding of Asian American individuals and communities, through research, practice, advocacy, education, and policy belonging to all areas of psychology and related disciplines(2). Overall, this article complies with the journal’s
guidelines.
The head writer Margaret Shih has a Ph.D in Social Psychology from Harvard University and currently works at UCLA Anderson School of Management. Her research focuses on the the psychological effects of stereotypes, prejudice, discrimination and stigma in organizations. She has seventeen other publications (3). Shih’s educational background and previous research make her more than qualified to be the head author in this article. In total, the authors used 30 literature sources to support their thoughts,predictions, and conclusions. Each resource is cited at least once in the article and is referenced appropriately at the end of the article.These parts of the article add to the dependability of the information gathered and the results.
Another aspect of an article that helps contribute to its reliability, is the format. The article follows a slightly modified IMRaD format. Since Shih et al (2015)’s article discusses two studies, there are two method sections, and two results/ discussion sections, followed by a general discussion. Overall, the introduction section which includes an overview of the studies, takes up about 40% as opposed to 25%. Combined, the methods section take up about 15% as opposed to the recommended 25%. Also, IMRaD recommends for the results section to take up 35% while the discussion sections takes up 15% to discuss limitations and implications of the research. However, the results section takes about 30%, and the general discussion does take about 15%. A reason for the introduction taking so much space and the methods takes so little, could be due to the fact that it has various sub headings. Also, the overview of the studies section also incorporates some information about the participants and the variables being looked at. This is information that is traditionally primarily included in the methods section.
Shih et al (2015)’s research provides further insight into the consequences that positive stereotypes have on academic performance.
Although they may seem like a compliment, being targeted for positive stereotypes is complicated and can result in both negative and positive consequences. Positive stereotypes can have detrimental effects when the one being stereotyped is aware. This research is valuable in providing support that stereotypes can do real damage. However, a limitation of this study is that it does not address the underlying process through which being stereotyped affects performance. Nonetheless, this is something that can be looked into in future research. Also, since the sample consisted of Asian Female students, these results are particularly significant to Asian Americans. Thus, it is highly logical that it is the Asian American Journal of Psychology. Another aspect discussed, was the IMRaD format. Even though the article had a modified version it was still easy to read, and it did not hinder the understanding of the article. Overall, Shih et al (2015)’s article is a trustworthy source that I would feel comfortable using as a
reference.