In 2016, women earned 57% of bachelor degrees awarded in the U.S. but only 42% of bachelor’s degrees in the field of mathematics and statistics (U.S. Department of Education, 2018). Math-related careers tend to have higher salaries than other careers (Hira, 2010), meaning that the lower proportion of women receiving mathematics and statistics bachelor’s degrees may be contributing to the gender wage gap. One potential explanation for this lower proportion may be the perception of math as valuing speed over accuracy. Societally, many speed-focused characteristics and activities, such as impulsivity and racing, are associated with masculinity. If this leads women to believe that they are less speed-focused and more accuracy-focused than men, women may avoid a field they view as emphasizing speed more than accuracy. In an ongoing study (target N = 100), undergraduate women and men will be presented with two different student reviews for a math class - one emphasizing the importance of having speed and the other the importance of having accuracy. We predict that women, but not men, will have greater interest in the class emphasizing accuracy than the class emphasizing speed. We also predict that when asked to make a choice between which class to take, women will be more likely to choose the class emphasizing accuracy and men will be more likely to choose the class emphasizing speed. Results will have important implications about the causes of gender gaps in participation in mathematics and possible interventions to reduce these gaps. Future research should investigate the impacts of the perceived value of speed and accuracy on gender gaps in other STEM fields.

Racial stereotypes can promote and reinforce racial discrimination. While racial stereotypes are often conceptualized along an inferior-to-superior axis, research suggests that in addition to this axis, perceptions of racial groups can also be placed along a foreign-to-American axis, with different racial groups at different levels on each axis. If stereotypes of foreignness are viewed differently than those of inferiority, this model may explain why views on discrimination against racial groups vary based on the specific racial group. We hypothesize that Americans will view stereotypes of perceived cultural foreignness as more acceptable and less discriminatory than stereotypes of perceived inferiority. In two studies (N = 70, 103), UW undergraduates reported that stereotyping someone as foreign because of their race is viewed as more acceptable than stereotyping them as inferior (ps < .05). However, undergraduates did not report discrimination based on perceived foreignness as less discriminatory than discrimination based on perceived inferiority. These results suggest that while racial stereotypes about foreignness are considered more acceptable than racial stereotypes about inferiority, they are viewed as equally discriminatory. However, minority groups may view racial stereotypes differently than Whites, skewing these results. A third study (N = 100) found Whites rated racial stereotypes of foreignness as more acceptable (p < .001), less harmful (p < .001), and more fair (p < .001) than racial stereotypes of inferiority. Understanding how inferior- and foreign-based stereotypes are viewed differently from each other may allow us to understand why some forms of racial discrimination might be viewed as more acceptable to engage in.

Thinking that women are very similar to or very different from men may affect how we judge masculine work cultures and whether women fit well in such places. In study 1, participants (N= 703) primed with gender-similarities showed that women would fit relatively well in a very masculine work culture compared to those primed with gender-differences. Then in study 2, we used the minimal group paradigm to test whether thinking about group-similarities would affect how much people perceive a non-inclusive culture to be problematic. Compared to participants primed with group differences participants primed with group similarities considered the non-inclusive company's culture significantly less problematic. A mediation analysis showed that the perceived fit (for the low-status group) mediates the relationship between similarity beliefs and judgments about the culture. Using the minimal group paradigm as a proxy for gender, this research suggests that thinking about gender-similarities can make people consider masculine work cultures to be less problematic for women. In study 3, we test whether perceived gender similarities for employees in the company will affect how people judge the culture to be problematic for women and people’s support for culture changes. We predict that participants who read the perceived gender similarities will rate the culture to be less problematic and show less support. The potential findings will generate meaningful insights into creating more welcoming work space for different genders in the real world.

Ability has long been an attributed reason as to why certain groups of people are more represented in some STEM fields than others. However, ability is likely not the only factor influencing group representation. In fact, there is an increasing body of literature describing how interest levels may have a larger impact on representation in STEM. The current study used a minimal groups design to investigate how individuals perceive interest and ability between two made up groups (Omes and Veps) as they relate to various STEM fields. This study collected data from University of Washington undergraduate students (N=100) and was administered through an online survey. Participants read one of two made up articles. One article discussed the Omes and Veps as having equal ability by showing equal scores on a standard test in Chemistry or Biology, while the other article portrayed an ability gap between the two groups by showing a lower score for the Veps. In both conditions, the Veps’ significant underrepresentation in the presented field was emphasized. Participants then answered a series of questions to access their opinions about interest and ability relating to the respective field. We predict that participants in the ability gap condition will report both groups as having equal interest in the field. We also predict that participants in the equal ability condition will report the Veps as less interested. Implications of expected findings could be used to explore potential mechanisms explaining unequal gender representation in STEM fields.