Implicit measures of the gender-science stereotype are often better than explicit measures in predicting relevant outcomes. This finding could reflect a discrepancy between implicit and explicit stereotypes, but an alternative is that the implicit measure is sensitive to constructs other than the stereotype. Analyzing an archival data set (total N = 478,550), we found that self-reported liking of science versus liberal arts was the best predictor of the gender-science implicit association test (IAT). In a reanalysis of a previous study and a replication of another study, we found that evidence for the IAT’s advantage over explicit stereotypes in predicting relevant outcomes disappeared when controlling for self-reported liking. Therefore, perhaps the IAT has often outperformed the explicit stereotype because the gender-science IAT captures personal attraction, whereas the explicit stereotype does not. It is premature to conclude that implicit constructs are superior to explicit constructs in predicting science-related plans and behavior.

Does strong gender identity help or harm one’s well-being? Previous research suggests that acceptance of one’s social group and feelings of belongingness to the group are positively related to well-being, regardless of the group’s social status. However, there are inconsistent findings about the relation between well-being and how central the group is to one’s identity (centrality), especially among disadvantaged groups (e.g., women). In Studies 1 to 10 (total N = 5,955), we clarified these relations by controlling for shared variance between distinct gender identity aspects. Acceptance and belongingness were positively related to a range of well-being variables. Centrality was negatively related to well-being. These results were consistent across genders. Studies 11 to 14 (total N = 2,380) found that the negative relation between gender centrality and well-being might be mediated by perceived pressure to conform to the masculine role among men and perceived gender inequality among women. These results uncover a burden of strong gender identity.

Is it better for members of non-dominant social groups to have strong or weak identification with the group? Whereas previous research found consistent evidence that the affective aspects of social identity (e.g., feeling glad to belong to the group) are positively related to well-being, even when the group is socially oppressed, findings about the relation between cognitive aspects of social identity (e.g., considering the group central to one’s identity) and well-being are inconsistent. We tested these relations simultaneously in a framework of multidimensional gender identity among women. In six correlational studies (total N = 3,646) that included six well-being variables, and two sets of gender identity facets, we confirmed that affective facets had a positive relation with well-being. After controlling for the affective aspects, the cognitive aspects had a negative relation with well-being. Centrality of gender identity seems negative to women, perhaps because of their gender’s low social status.