tivated to excel who are the most vulnerable to the impact of negative stereo-
types. The studies we have described, however, demonstrate that changing
negatively stereotyped students’ motivational frameworks can alleviate their
vulnerability to negative stereotypes and thus, increase their grade point av-
erages (GPAs) and standardized test scores.
How is stereotype threat related to theories of intelligence? Aronson and
his colleagues have argued that individuals targeted by ability-impugning
stereotypes may adopt the same motivational mindset as entity theorists
when faced with a challenging academic task in which they are negatively
stereotyped. That is, stereotyped individuals may adopt performance goals in
an effort to disprove the stereotype about their group. Consistent with this
reasoning, past research has shown that stereotype threat elicits many of the
hallmark responses of entity theorists. For example, stereotype-threatened
individuals tend to choose tasks that ensure success (Good & Aronson,
2001), experience more performance pressure and anxiety (Blascovich, Spen-
cer, Steele, & Quinn, 2001; Steele & Aronson, 1995), and underperform in the
face of challenge (Aronson et al., 1999; Good & Aronson, 2001; Inzlicht &
Ben-Zeev, 2000; Quinn & Spencer, 2002; Spencer et al., 1999; Steele &
Aronson, 1995).
The performance goal mindset that stereotype threat elicits disrupts per-
formance, perhaps because of its effects on attention and cognition. For ex-
ample, Steele and Aronson (1995) found that African-American students un-
der stereotype threat conditions had more race-related thoughts than did
African Americans under no-threat conditions. These intrusive thoughts may
have directed attention away from the task at hand, resulting in decreased
performance. Furthermore, stereotype threat may interfere with cognitive
abilities in much the same way that an entity theory does. In a study by Quinn
and Spencer (2002), men and women completed a math test under stereotype
threat and no-threat conditions and their problem solving strategies were
coded. The results showed that under stereotype threat, women not only per-
formed worse than men on the math test, but also suffered from an inability
to formulate useful problem solving strategies. In contrast, the women in the
no-threat condition performed as well as the men and did not differ in their
problem solving strategies. Quinn and Spencer (2002) argued that women un-
der threat conditions may have tried to suppress the stereotype-related
thoughts that stereotype threat elicits, thereby experiencing an increase in
cognitive load. Furthermore, the increased cognitive load decreased cognitive
resources available to generate useful problem solving strategies, thus result-
ing in decreased performance.
The abundance of research on stereotype threat clearly illustrates its dele-
terious effects on performance. As Aronson et al. (2002) argued, these effects
may be due to the entity theory motivational mindset that the stereotype elic-
its, complete with all the hallmark responses of holding an entity theory: mis-
52 DWECK, MANGELS, GOOD