Threats in Stereotypes
The purpose of this study is to research racial stereotypes in term of class within race. The design is such that the prepotency of race and class, as independent dimensions for stereotyping. The subjects were 92 whites and 180 college students. The Katz and and Braley technique were used to obtain the stereotypes. The subjects were asked to select from a list of 85 adjectives any which they thought described each of the following groups: Upper-class white Americans, upper-class Negroes, lower-class white Americans, and lower-class Negroes. The results are as follows. White and Negro subjects described both upper-class white Americans and upper-class Negroes as intelligent, ambitious, industrious, neat, and progressive. The two groups of subjects assigned pleasure-loving and sophisticated to upper-class white Americans but not to upper-class Negroes. They both assigned ostentatious to upper-class Negroes but not upper-class white Americans. Both groups of subjects assigned ignorant, lazy, loud, and physically dirty to the two lower-class racial groups. The white subjects characterized both lower-class racial groups as being happy-go lucky, unreliable, and pleasure-loving. The results indicate that when subjects are given an opportunity to stereotype race in terms of classes within the races, the resulting stereotypes vary more as a function of class rather than race. For both groups of subjects, the stereotypes were more class-linked than race-linked. This procedure had little evidence showing purely race-linked stereotyping.
Discussion
​
Interpretation of results
Results indicated our research hypothesis was rejected. Our hypothesis was that there would be a significant difference in stereotypes in African-American and other racial groups. Our results found that there was not a significant difference in stereotypes between ethnicities. As in another study (Journal of Negro Education) results indicate that when subjects are given an opportunity to stereotype race in terms of classes within the races, the resulting stereotypes vary more as a function of class rather than race. For both groups of subjects the stereotypes were more class-linked than race-linked. This procedure had little evidence showing purely race-linked stereotyping. It was predicted that African-Americans and other racial groups other than Caucasian would have higher in stereotype threats.
​
Limitations
Findings do not support this study. However, several factors may limit our findings. For example, the sample size was small, which limits us to a bigger population of other ethnicities. A bigger population maybe would have wielded a significant result granted that there was more ethnics in the sample size. Also, there was not enough African-American participants in this study. Having more African-Americans in our study would of have given us, again, a significant result in stereotypes between ethnicities.
​
Implication
Results of the study suggest that stereotype type threat was not significant among ethnicity. African-Americans did show higher scores on stereotype threat than Caucasians. More minority ethnicities are needed. Due to conflict with previous research and limitations, future research should seek to clarify information on this topic in a larger sample size. Future research such as stereotypes between ethnicities in school and work would be beneficial to this study. If the school and work settings were predominantly of African American students or employees would be very beneficial.
​
​
​
​
Methods
​
Participants
Participants were 40 from experimental methods labs at UNT in Denton, TX. Participants for the current study were recruited from classrooms at UNT. The group consisted of both male and females. Ages ranging from 18-34. Ethnicity was 90% Caucasian, 8% African American, 2% Other. Participants were not compensated.
Measures
We used Measure of Stereotype Threats by Shapiro, J. R. (2011). The survey was administered after the participants completed inputting there classification and there information. The survey was a 12-item measure of 10 levels from feeling offended/experiencing major threats to not caring much/no experience. 1 in the scale was no experience/not caring and 10 being the highest amount of experience in all the ethnicities. Caucasians (M = 36.96, SD = 25.42), African Americans (M = 74.00, SD = 6.08), Hispanic/Latinos (M = 49.71, SD = 18.01), and Multiracial (M = 40.50, SD = 21.95)
​
Procedure
The participants were asked to answer the 12 question questionnaire, there were no time limits, but most participants finished within 7-10 minutes. We made three groups, approximately 15 people in each group. All groups were given the same survey and unlimited time as well, in the same environment.
​
Results
We conducted a one-way ANOVA to determine if a significant difference in stereotype threat exists between Caucasians, African Americans, Hispanics/ Latinos, and Multiracial participants.
​
Results of our one-way ANOVA indicates that there is not a significant difference in stereotype threat between Caucasians (M = 36.96, SD = 25.42), African Americans (M = 74.00, SD = 6.08), Hispanic/Latino (M = 49.71, SD = 18.01), and Multiracial (M = 40.50, SD = 21.95) participants. The overall model was not significant, F(3, 39) = 2.56, p = .069.
References
​
Brown. R. P., & Daay, E. (2006). The difference isn’t black and white: Stereotype threat and the
race gap on raven’s advance progressive matrices. Journal of Applied Psychology. Vol 91
(4), 979-985. Doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.91.4.979.
Harrison, L. A., Stevens, C. M., Monty, A. N., & Coakley, C. A. (2006). The consequences of
stereotype threat on the academic performance of white and non-white lower income
college students. Social Psychology of Education, 9 (3), 341-357, doi:10.007/s11218005
-5456-6.
Journal of Negro Education. Vol.25 (1), Winter, 1956. pp. 75-78
Palumbo, M. V., & Steele-Johnson, D. (2014). Do test perception influence test performance?
Exploring stereotype threat theory. North American Journal of Psychology, Vol 16 (1), 1-
12.
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, US. (2011) Self and Identity, Vol 10 (2), 263-
277.
