2012
DOI: 10.1080/00461520.2011.611368
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Unleashing Latent Ability: Implications of Stereotype Threat for College Admissions

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
15
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 49 publications
0
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As of September 2012, over 200 empirical studies exist illustrating the deleterious effects of ST on students’ performance (for reviews see Appel & Kronberger, 2012; Logel, Walton, Spencer, Peach, & Zanna, 2012; Nadler & Clark, 2011; Nguyen & Ryan, 2008; Walton & Spencer, 2009), although some still question the robustness of these findings (Sackett, Hardison, & Cullen, 2004; Stoet & Geary, 2012). Much is known about the moderators (for a review see Nguyen & Ryan, 2008) and mediating processes of ST effects on performance (for reviews see Smith, 2004; Schmader et al, 2008).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As of September 2012, over 200 empirical studies exist illustrating the deleterious effects of ST on students’ performance (for reviews see Appel & Kronberger, 2012; Logel, Walton, Spencer, Peach, & Zanna, 2012; Nadler & Clark, 2011; Nguyen & Ryan, 2008; Walton & Spencer, 2009), although some still question the robustness of these findings (Sackett, Hardison, & Cullen, 2004; Stoet & Geary, 2012). Much is known about the moderators (for a review see Nguyen & Ryan, 2008) and mediating processes of ST effects on performance (for reviews see Smith, 2004; Schmader et al, 2008).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This approach to affirmative action we call “affirmative meritocracy.” It extends past models by emphasizing changing organizational practice to combat stereotype threat (see also Logel, Walton, Peach, Spencer, & Zanna, 2012). It involves two steps.…”
mentioning
confidence: 78%
“…In addition, some research questions remain unanswered regarding whether boundary conditions found in the lab apply in the field. As previously stated, stereotype threat does not affect all minority groups equally ( Schmader et al, 2008 ; Logel et al, 2012 ) as there are many moderating variables reflecting aspects of the situation and the person. Some of the features of the situation, such as task difficulty and task diagnosticity, or the person such as high domain identification, may not be present in non-lab settings such as the workplace ( Sackett and Ryan, 2012 ).…”
Section: Summary Limitations and Future Directionsmentioning
confidence: 90%