Gender Bias in Leader Evaluations: Merging Implicit Theories and Role Congruity Perspectives

This research extends our understanding of gender bias in leader evaluations by merging role congruity and implicit theory perspectives. We tested and found support for the prediction that the link between people’s attitudes regarding women in authority and their subsequent gender-biased leader evaluations is significantly stronger for entity theorists (those who believe attributes are fixed) relative to incremental theorists (those who believe attributes are malleable). In Study 1, 147 participants evaluated male and female gubernatorial candidates. Results supported predictions, demonstrating that traditional attitudes toward women in authority significantly predicted a pro-male gender bias in leader evaluations (and progressive attitudes predicted a pro-female gender bias) with an especially strong effect for those with more entity-oriented, relative to incrementally-oriented person theories. Study 2 (119 participants) replicated these findings and demonstrated the mediating role of these attitudes in linking gender stereotypes and leader role expectations to biased evaluations

Growth mindset messaging in stigma-relevant contexts: Harnessing benefits without costs

Growth mindsets are increasingly used to promote learning, development, and health. The increased popularity resulted in scrutiny and disputes about utility. The current work reviews a perspective critical to the debate. Namely, we focus on emerging research that examines both the favorable and potentially adverse consequences of growth mindset messaging in stigma-relevant contexts. This double-edge sword model merges the mindset perspective with attribution theory and the psychological essentialism literature. In stigmatizing contexts and in isolation, growth mindsets can indirectly predict lesspositive outcomes, via personal responsibility for the problem, but more positive outcomes, via expectations for the potential to manage conditions in the future. Programmatic research illustrates how to tailor growth mindset messages and interventions, to avoid the potential costs of blame, yet keep the benefits of self-efficacy and weakened essentialism

Implicit Theories of Weight Management: A Social Cognitive Approach to Motivation

Just as scientists develop general conceptual explanations of the phenomena they investigate, individuals also develop intuitive theories about such human characteristics as intelligence, personality, and athletic ability. These theories, unlike scientist\u27s theories, are not explicitly articulated or documented, and so they are termed implicit theories. Implicit theories, in achievement motivation, distinguish between the belief that human attributes are fixed (entity theory) or malleable (incremental theory) and have been shown to have far-reaching consequences for motivation, goal-orientations, and regulatory strategies in an array of domains. This dissertation extended implicit theories research to the domain of body-weight management. Drawing from an elaborate theoretical framework on implicit theories and health behavior research, the present work predicted that (a) individuals differ systematically in their beliefs about the malleability of body weight and (b) these implicit beliefs are related to coping and self-regulation strategies following dieting setbacks. To test these hypotheses, I first developed the Implicit Theories of Weight Management Scale and examined its psychometric properties. Results revealed internal reliability and convergent and discriminant validity. Implicit theories of weight management were moderately related to health and dieting locus of control but were distinct from personality dimensions such as the Big Five and trait optimism. Psychometric properties of the scale are presented and discussed. Next, I tested the hypothesis that implicit theories of weight management would be related to adaptive regulatory strategies (e.g., increased motivation) and to maladaptive coping (e.g., avoidance) following dieting setbacks and that this relation would be mediated by feelings of helplessness and optimism, and by attributions. Results largely supported these conjectures, revealing that even after controlling for constructs related to successful dieting (e.g., dieting self-confidence, trait self-control), believing more strongly that weight is changeable was related to lower reported use of avoidance when coping with setbacks and more effort. Additionally, feelings of helplessness and optimism mediated the implicit theories-self-regulatory relations. Results are discussed in terms of how implicit theories create the structure in which meaning is assigned to events and are therefore important for achievement and motivation. Implications and avenues for future research are presented

Coping in the time of COVID-19: Mindsets and the stories we tell

Across two studies (N = 803), we explored how meaning-making systems (i.e., mindsets and narrative identity) are related to each other as well as to coping in the wake of challenges faced during the COVID-19 pandemic. In Study 1, we find that struggle-is-enhancing, relative to struggle-is-debilitating, mindsets predicted stories defined by elements of personal control with opportunities for growth (agency) and an emphasis on the positive, rather than on the suffering (redemptive). Stronger enhancing mindsets and agentic as well as redemptive narratives predicted more adaptive coping, including less negative affect, less avoidance, and positive expectations for future success. In Study 2, we replicated these fundamental findings and explored relations with wellbeing. Struggle-is-enhancing, relative to debilitating, mindsets related to greater wellbeing as did agency and redemptive stories. Overall, creating meaning from struggle, crafting tales with more positive themes, and using active coping show promise for future work focused on enhancing social, emotional, and psychological wellbeing

Understanding Sexual Prejudice: The Role of Political Ideology and Strategic Essentialism

Despite the increased visibility and acceptance of the LGBTQ community, sexual minorities continue to face prejudice and discrimination in many domains. Past research has shown that this prejudice is more prevalent among those holding conservative political views. In two studies, we merge strategic essentialism and motivated ideology theoretical perspectives to empirically investigate the link between political orientation and sexual prejudice. More specifically, we examine how conservatives strategically use different forms of essentialism to support their views of gay individuals and their reactions to messages aimed at changing essentializing beliefs. In Study 1 (N = 220), we demonstrate that conservatives endorse social essentialism (i.e. the belief that gay and straight people are fundamentally different from each other) more than liberals do. In turn, they blame gay individuals more for their sexual orientation and show more prejudice towards them. At the same time, conservatives endorse trait essentialism (i.e. the belief that sexual orientation is a fixed attribute that cannot be changed) less than liberals do, which in turn predicts greater levels of blame and prejudice for conservatives relative to liberals. In Study 2 (N = 217), we additionally show that conservatives, but not liberals, are resistant to messages aimed at increasing trait essentialism and reducing prejudice toward sexual minorities. We discuss theoretical and practical implications of these findings

I Can Do That: The Impact of Implicit Theories on Leadership Role Model Effectiveness

This research investigates the role of implicit theories in influencing the effectiveness of successful role models in the leadership domain. Across two studies, we test the prediction that incremental theorists (‘leaders are made’) compared to entity theorists (‘leaders are born’) will respond more positively to being presented with a role model before undertaking a leadership task. In Study 1, measuring people’s naturally occurring implicit theories of leadership, we showed that after being primed with a role model, incremental theorists reported greater leadership confidence and less anxious-depressed affect than entity theorists following the leadership task. In Study 2, we demonstrated the causal role of implicit theories by manipulating participants’ theory of leadership ability. We replicated the findings from Study 1 and demonstrated that identification with the role model mediated the relationship between implicit theories and both confidence and affect. Additionally, incremental theorists outperformed entity theorists on the leadership task

The obesity stigma asymmetry model: The indirect and divergent effects of blame and changeability beliefs on anti-fat prejudice

The American Medical Association (AMA) hoped that labeling obesity a disease would not only highlight the seriousness of the epidemic and elicit resources but also reduce stigma against obese individuals. In the current work, we tested the consequences of this decision for prejudice against obese individuals. In doing so, we highlighted the complicated link between messages stressing different etiologies of obesity and prejudice. More specifically, we conducted three experimental studies (nStudy1= 188; nStudy2=111; nStudy3=391), randomly assigning participants to either an obesity is a disease message or a weight is changeable message. Our results indicated that messages focused on obesity as a disease, relative to those focused on the changeable nature of weight, both (a) decreased blame and via this mechanism, decreased anti-fat prejudice and (b) increased, or strengthened the belief in the unchangeable nature of weight and via this mechanism, increased anti-fat prejudice. We call these opposing effects the stigma asymmetry model. We conclude with theoretical and practical implications of this model

Growth mindsets of anxiety: Do the benefits to individual flourishing come with societal costs?

Believing anxiety can change is a predictor of wellbeing, in part, because such beliefs – known as growth mindsets – predict weaker threat appraisals, which in turn improves psychological functioning. However, feeling a sense of personal threat facilitates social activism, and thus growth mindsets may undermine such action. Across six studies (N = 1761), including cross-sectional and experimental approaches (3 pre-registered), growth mindsets predict flourishing, including wellbeing, resilience, and grit. We find that growth mindsets indirectly predict reduced activism against social threats through reduced threat appraisals, which are critical motivators of activism. The total effect linking growth mindsets to activism was not robust. Overall, Bayesian meta-analytic summary effects reveal that growth mindsets of anxiety are critical components of psychological flourishing, broadly defined. Mindsets are also consistently linked to weakened threat appraisals across a variety of social threats from gun violence to natural disasters. Although helpful for resilience, these dampened threat appraisals impair social action

Weight Beliefs and Messages: Mindsets Predict Body-Shame and Anti-Fat Attitudes via Attributions

In two samples (N=247, N= 291), we examined the link between beliefs and messages about the changeable (incremental theory) vs. fixed (entity theory) nature of weight, attributions for weight, and body shame. We recruited participants using online sampling, employing a correlational design in Study 1 and an experimental design in Study 2. Across both studies, we found evidence for the stigma-asymmetry effect—incremental, relative to entity beliefs/messages of weight predicted both (a) stronger onset responsibility attributions, indirectly increasing body shame and (b) stronger offset efficacy attributions, indirectly decreasing body shame. Study 2 replicated the stigma-asymmetry effect with anti-fat attitudes. We discuss implications for public health obesity messages with the goal of reducing stigma

Wealth inequality and activism: Perceiving injustice galvanizes social change but perceptions depend on political ideologies

What motivates people to engage in activism against wealth inequality? The simple answer is, perceiving injustice. However, the current work demonstrates that these perceptions depend on political ideologies. More specifically, for political liberals who frequently question the fairness of the economic system, messages simply describing the extent of the inequality (distributive injustice) are enough to motivate activism (Study 1). For political conservatives, who are inclined to believe that inequality results from fair procedures, messages must also detail how the system of economic forces is unjust (procedural injustice; Studies 2 and 3). Together, these studies suggest perceiving injustice can galvanize social change, but for conservatives, this means more than simply outlining the extent of the inequality