What happens if you single out? An experiment

We present an experiment investigating the effects of singling out an individual on trust and trustworthiness. We find that (a) trustworthiness falls if there is a singled out subject; (b) non-singled out subjects discriminate against the singled out subject when they are not responsible of the distinct status of this person; (c) under a negative frame, the singled out subject returns significantly less; (d) under a positive frame, the singled out subject behaves bimodally, either selecting very low or very high return rates. Overall, singling out induces a negligible effect on trust but is potentially disruptive for trustworthiness

Open science, communal culture, and women’s participation in the movement to improve science

Science is undergoing rapid change with the movement to improve science focused largely on reproducibility/replicability and open science practices. This moment of change—in which science turns inward to examine its methods and practices—provides an opportunity to address its historic lack of diversity and noninclusive culture. Through network modeling and semantic analysis, we provide an initial exploration of the structure, cultural frames, and women’s participation in the open science and reproducibility literatures (n = 2,926 articles and conference proceedings). Network analyses suggest that the open science and reproducibility literatures are emerging relatively independently of each other, sharing few common papers or authors. We next examine whether the literatures differentially incorporate collaborative, prosocial ideals that are known to engage members of underrepresented groups more than independent, winner-takes-all approaches. We find that open science has a more connected, collaborative structure than does reproducibility. Semantic analyses of paper abstracts reveal that these literatures have adopted different cultural frames: open science includes more explicitly communal and prosocial language than does reproducibility. Finally, consistent with literature suggesting the diversity benefits of communal and prosocial purposes, we find that women publish more frequently in high-status author positions (first or last) within open science (vs. reproducibility). Furthermore, this finding is further patterned by team size and time. Women are more represented in larger teams within reproducibility, and women’s participation is increasing in open science over time and decreasing in reproducibility. We conclude with actionable suggestions for cultivating a more prosocial and diverse culture of science

Perceiving Race Relevance in Everyday Events: Target Race Matters, Perceiver Race Does Not

Perceptions of the relevance of race in everyday situations may matter for intergroup relations. Extending previous research, this work examines Blacks’ and Whites’ perceptions of race relevance in positive versus negative everyday situations affecting Black or White individuals. It also examines whether Black and White participants expect more intergroup disagreement regarding those perceptions than actually exists (i.e., interracial pluralistic ignorance). In Study 1, White participants saw significantly more race relevance in negative situations affecting Black (rather than White) individuals, whereas positive events seemed only marginally more race relevant when they featured Blacks. Study 2 replicated this pattern among White and Black participants. Furthermore, Study 2 uncovered interracial pluralistic ignorance: both Black and White participants expected to agree with their racial ingroup more than their racial outgroup, even though both groups reported similar race relevance perceptions. Participants’ own race relevance ratings and symbolic racist attitudes moderated the degree of expected disagreemen

Gender Stereotype Threat Among Women and Girls

Stereotype threat occurs when a situation raises concern that one will be judged in terms of group stereotypes (Steele, 2010). This can affect all kinds of people in many situations, but its impact women’s under-representation in mathematics and science fields is of particular importance. Stereotype threat research makes us rethink the way we frame gender gaps in these fields. Rather than blaming women’s personal preferences, whether socialized of ‘hard-wired,’ threat suggests that responsibility may lie with environmental influences. It demonstrates how the most unsuspecting situations can impact women and girls’ performance, interests, and self-views. This focus on external rather than internal influences also paves the way for solutions, ways that we can shape environments to foster women’s and girls’ interests and talents. This chapter will benefit anyone who wonders why there are more men than women in science and engineering programs, anyone who wants to see more female students pursue non-traditional passions for math, computer science, military, or law enforcement careers, and anyone who questions whether existing gender divides really reflect some inevitable natural order. Recognizing the relevance of stereotype threat to the lives of women and girls, this chapter aims to connect theory and laboratory experiments with real-world consequences. We first outline the theory, including its necessary and sufficient conditions. We then catalogue threat effects observed in women of different ages, considering how girls’ social-cognitive development maps onto the development of stereotype threat. We review evidence for threat’s presence in real evaluative situations and detail interventions that can reduce it. Finally, we discuss how stereotype threat research is currently being shared and applied in educational settings