Domain Identification, Task Difficulty, and Stereotype Threat of Female Students Physics Performance

Literature Review
Negative stereotypes have the ability to disrupt the performance of individuals targeted by the stereotypes. This paper contributes to stereotype research by providing evidence that domain identification, task difficulty, and stereotype treats affect the performance of female students in the physics discipline. The study is designed to test theoretical
ideas derived from stereotype threat theory and provides evidence that there exist a non-linear relationship between task difficulty and performance for female students in the physics discipline. According to Keller, who researches the effects of moderate stereotypes on the performance of female students in mathematics, application of negative stereotypes increase negative performance among members of a stigmatized group. Appel, Kronberger, and Aronson argue that negative stereotypes are detrimental to the performance of target groups. Stereotypes result in an uncomfortable psychological state that impairs cognitive abilities in a natural environment.
When female students perform physics, unlike males, they are get risk of the negative stereotype that female have weaker physics ability. This predicament is stereotype threat and has the ability to disrupt female physics performance (spencer, steele, and Quinn, 1998). This negative stereotype targeting female students creates a predicament in any situation that the stereotype applies. Individual behavior and characteristics that fit this stereotype are possible explanations. The main cause of decline in performance is lowed expectation and the de-motivation that expose to stereotype threat causes. The stereotype threat reduces the female students willingness to identify with the domain and do not consider it a basis of evaluation. Although lowered expectations may mediate a stereotype threat, other factors, such as the duration of exposure to a stereotype threat. Other than lowered expectations, other processes that mediate stereotype threat include over cautiousness and anxiety.
Stereotype threat manifest when individuals are pushed to the limits of their ability. For female students, the threat is more likely to manifest when they encounter a new curriculum level or work unit. This may explain the high rate of attrition of women pursuing science and mathematics related disciplines. While generalizing the effects of stereotype threat of the performance of female students, it is important to note the parameters within which the stereotype threat operates. For stereotype threat to have an effect on the performance of an individual, she must value the skills required and the physics subject matter tested must be difficult. Stereotype threats are not evident when the exam is too easy or too hard. If the female student has already disidentified with physics, her lack of motivation is more likely to pull her performance down that stereotype (spencer, steele, and Quinn, 1998).
The analysis of female performance, and how the stereotype interacts with the student and environment offer new insight into how the female students can deal with underperformance. While the stereotype is propagated by the society and is deeply internalized, female students interact with the environment, which poses the threatening predicament. It is possible for the female students to deal with the threatening predicament than with the internalized cultural orientations. Unlike internal characteristics, predicaments are circumstantial and easy to change. Although most of the literature available does not describe strategies than may be used to change the predicament, they do indicate that it is possible to change it (spencer, steele, and Quinn, 1998).
It is clear from the available literature that stereotype depends on the level of difficulty of a test. This raises the possibility that the stereotype threat can be minimized or eliminated altogether by lowering the complexity of a test. Tests are tailored to match a takers ability. This ensures psychometrically optimal results.












Method
Participants -- who is your target population?
Procedure -- how will research be conducted?
Materials -- list of actual materials, equipment, instruments, budget, etc. -- provide copy of survey instrument.



  References
Appel, M., Kronberger, N., and Aronson, J. (2011). Stereotype threat impairs ability building: Effects on test preparation among women in science and technology. European Journal of Social Psychology, Eur. J. Soc. Psychol, 41, 904913.
Galdi, S., Cadinu, M., and Tomasetto, C. (2014). The Roots of Stereotype Threat: When Automatic Associations Disrupt Girls Math Performance, Child Development, 85(1): 250263.
Keller, J. (2007). Stereotype threat in classroom settings: The interactive effect of domain identification, task difficulty and stereotype threat on female students maths performance, British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 323338.
Spencer, S. J., Steele, C. M., and Quinn, D. M. (1999). Stereotype Threat and Womens Math Performance, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 35, 428.
Stroessner, S. and Good, C. (2008). Stereotype Threat: An Overview Excerpts and Adaptations
Tricker, L. and Bejar, I. I. (2004). Test Difficulty and Stereotype Threat on the GRE General Test1, Educational Testing Service Princeton, New Jersey Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34 (3): 563-597.
Tricker, L. and Ward, W. (2004). Stereotype Threat, inquiring About Test Takers Ethnicity and Gender, and Standardized Test Performance. Educational Testing Service Princeton, New Jersey. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34(4): 665-693.