Racial-ethnic self schemas

Delivered by Ingenta toUNIVERSITY OF NEVADARENODate 200606170106

Race-ethnicity like gender is used byothers to define the self and is consideredfixed whether or not one chooses to self-define in these terms Indeed racial-ethnicminorities almost universally are targets ofnegative stereotyping about their academicabilities (Birenbaum and Kraemer 1995) andunderperform academically Over the lastdecade or two this problem has receivedincreasing attention from social scientists

who demonstrated that low status (egLovaglia et al 1998 Ogbu 1986 1992) andthe mere presence of stereotypes can havedebilitating effects on minoritiesrsquo academicperformance (eg Steele 1997)

It is becoming clear however that indi-viduals who are the targets of stereotyping donot merely incorporate these stereotypes andthe accompanying negative attributes intotheir identity and behavior Rather they

Social Psychology Quarterly2003Vol 66 No 4 333ndash347

Racial-Ethnic Self-SchemasDAPHNA OYSERMAN

University of Michigan

MARKUS KEMMELMEIERUniversity of Nevada

STEPHANIE FRYBERGStanford University

HEZI BROSHBard College

TAMERA HART-JOHNSONUniversity of Michigan

Racial-ethnic minorities are at risk of academic disengagement pulling back effort inschool Our model focuses on implications of content of racial-ethnic self-schemas(RES) for disengagementWe postulate that risk increases when individuals are eitherldquoaschematicrdquo (do not have an RES) or ldquoin-group onlyrdquo RES schematic (when RESincorporates only the in-group without reference to membership in larger society) andthat risk decreases when RES contains both in-group and larger societyThis latter REScan take the form of a ldquodual identityrdquo in which one is a member of both in-group andlarger society or a ldquominority identityrdquo in which one is a member of an in-group thatmust fight to overcome obstacles to attain larger societal resources Three studiesinvolving African American Hispanic American Indian and Arab-Palestinian Israeliscorroborate the positive effect of dual and minority RES versus in-group only RES orRES aschematic status

333

For Study 1 we would like to thank Kathy TerryJohnesa Dimicks and Carol Carlin for obtainingschool records and all the staff members atPathways for Youth for interviewingdata entry andcoding For Study 2 we would like to thank SarahTownsend Brook Hooper Brooke Swaney SereneCutcha Baldy Kahlil Gearon and Shauna Cruz forinterviews and data collection Brad Myles andCaryn Moya-Cowdrey for their assistance in codingopen-ended data and Brad Myles for data entry ForStudy 3 we would like to thank Yookyong Lee forassistance with the data entry and Lubna AtiliNomik Adullah Ohad Ludomirsky and AraNorenzayan for their help in translating the open-ended data We are also very grateful to Norbert

Schwarz Judith Harackiewicz Eliot Aronson RussFazio Anthony Manstead Heather Coon andMischa Thompson for their comments on earlierversions of this article Support for this project fromthe Center for Advanced Studies in the BehavioralSciences and a WT Grant Faculty Scholar award toOyserman are gratefully acknowledged as is sup-port from an ISR Founders Dissertation grant toKemmelmeier and from the Research Institute forComparative Studies in Race and Ethnici tyStanford University to Fryberg Address correspon-dence concerning this article to Daphna OysermanInsti tute for Social Research Universi ty ofMich igan Ann Arbor MI 48106-1248daphnaoysermanumichedu


334 SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY QUARTERLY

develop strategies to handle situations inwhich stereotyping may occur (Oysermanand Swim 2001) Given individual differencesin choices of strategies members of the samegroup are likely to differ in their vulnerabili-ty to stereotypes and in their success in navi-gating the larger society (Crocker and Major1989) Here we outline a model for under-standing individual differences in response tothese stereotypes with emphasis on the rela-tionship between engagement with schooland the content of racial-ethnic self-schemas(RES)

Much of the racial-ethnic identityresearch is based on a social identityapproach that postulates buffering effects ofpositive identification with the in-group (egTajfel and Turner 1986) In contrast we pro-pose a self-schema framework as a broaderencompassing model that provides novelhypotheses about how racial-ethnic self-schemas can reduce disengagement and pro-mote engagement with school Our modelpredicts when minority youths will be able topreserve motivation and focus on academicperformance and when they are likely to dis-engage and stop trying in school

To foreshadow our argument wehypothesize that when studentsrsquo RES takeboth the in-group and the larger society intoaccount the students will be more academi-cally engaged and will fare better in schoolWe provide support for our racial-ethnicschema model using varied samples andmethods First we show that RES significant-ly predict change in school grades amongAfrican American Hispanic and AmericanIndian middle school students Next using asalience manipulation we show that contentof RES influences persistence on a mathe-matical task in two separate studies involvingAmerican Indian and Arab-PalestinianIsraeli junior high school and high school stu-dents

RACIAL-ETHNIC IDENTITY AS ASELF-SCHEMA

Self-schemas are organized generaliza-tions about the self They are dimensionsalong which individuals hold clear and dis-tinct perceptions about themselves and theyinclude personally defining and important

attributes (Montepare and Clements 2001)Individuals are not schematic for all of thecharacteristics traits skills and abilities thatare true or observable about them (Markus1977) Instead self-schemas reflect domainsthat are valued in onersquos social context(Oyserman and Markus 1993) When adomain becomes self-schematic it becomesimportant to maintain a particular view ofthe self within this domain Individuals aremore likely to challenge disbelieve or try torefute negative or disconfirming schema-rel-evant rather than schema-irrelevant feed-back (Markus 1977) Negat ive ordisconfirming feedback that is schema-irrele-vant is unlikely to result in mobilization ofeffort and resources to combat it

As cognitive structures self-schemasdirect attention to self-relevant informationthoughts feelings and memories (Markus1977) Information is assimilated into existingschemas where possible Individuals processschema-relevant information more quicklyand more efficiently (Markus Smith andMoreland 1985) They are likely to misre-member information in ways that reflecttheir own schemas (Markus Crane et al1982 for a review see Markus and Wurf1987) Information irrelevant to self-schemasis likely to be disregarded (Markus Hamilland Sentis 1987) ambiguous information islikely to be framed in ways relevant to self-schemas (Catrambone and Markus 1987)

Although we know of no other researchfocused on race-ethnicity as a self-schemaresearchers have studied other ascribed iden-tity groups including age gender and heavyweight This research shows that not all menand women have gender self-schemas(Markus Crane et al 1982) not all heavyweight people have ldquofatrdquo self-schemas(Markus et al 1987) and not everyone isschematic for his or her age (Montepare andClements 2001) Across each of thesedomains however those who are schematicare more likely to organize information interms of these schemas and are better ablethan aschematic individuals to defend the selffrom negative schema-relevant feedback

Following this logic we assume that notall members of racial-ethnic minority groupswill be schematic for their race-ethnicityRES aschematics make sense of who they are


SELF-SCHEMAS 335

without spontaneously thinking about race ifasked however they would know the catego-ry membership ascribed to them by othersIndeed it is likely that race may not be a par-ticularly important self-defining characteris-tic for many individuals unless pertinent lifeexperiences make it central (Cross andFhagen-Smith 1996) RES aschematic indi-viduals are aware of minority-group mem-bership and membership in larger society associal ldquofactsrdquo but have not formed an RESmdasha coherent cognitive structure integratingthoughts feelings and beliefs about thesememberships as part of the self-conceptFollowing the self-schema model our firsthypothesis is that those who are RESaschematic will be more vulnerable to nega-tive feedback based on race-ethnicity includ-ing stereotypes or s ituational factorsemphasizing their otherness because theylack a cognitive structure to automaticallyprocess and fend off the negative self-relevant implications of this racially tingedinformation

CONTENT OF RES

Hypothesis 1 states that RES aschemat-ics are vulnerable to stereotypes We nextaddress predictions about the content ofRES drawing on status characteristics socialidentity and self-categorization theories toask when RES are likely to buffer fromstereotypes and therefore to promote acade-mic success

Using these approaches as a base wepropose Hypothesis 2 being RES ldquoin-grouponlyrdquo schematic also increases vulnerabilityto stereotypes Why would this be First fromthe perspective of status characteristics theo-ry (Lovaglia et al 1998) when members ofgroups have both a social identity and a spe-cific task to perform (eg doing well inschool) those in low-status groups performmore poorly on the task than those in high-status groups because members of both low-and high-status groups view success as incon-gruent with group status Ogbu (1986 1992)in his ldquooppositional culturerdquo theory makes aparallel argument focusing explicitly on theexperiences of minorities in America Heargues that low-status caste-like minoritiesare expected by others to perform poorly in

school indeed they do not put forth suffi-cient effort to succeed because they do notexpect success to pay off for them They mayeven police other in-group members to pre-vent them from academic success behaviorsthat are regarded as ldquoacting whiterdquo

In a review of the situation of migrantyouths in America Zhou (1997) argues that agrowing oppositional culture is presentamong American youths especially amongthose who feel socially isolated and identifyonly with their in-group Such youths per-ceive as an out-group middle-class Americaand its goals of achievement and upwardmobility Once the in-group is defined asopposed to the middle-class achieving out-group then in-group high achiever s areviewed as sellouts and efforts to attain acad-emic success are seen as acting white In thisway the in-group-focused RES by acceptingthe notion that academic success is an out-group activity may reinforce the notion thatacademics are not an in-group focus and thusmay make youths vulnerable to rejection ofacademic pursuits

Second social identity theories (Tajfeland Turner 1986) also support the notion thatbeing RES in-group schematic can increasethe risk of withdrawing effort from schooland being vulnerable to negative views aboutin-group academic success According to thisperspective social groups vie to claim posi-tive domains as group-defining Because ofmajority groupsrsquo greater power minoritiesare unlikely to claim domains valued by themajority and thus must develop alternativemeans of maintaining positive in-group iden-tity in the face of a denigrating out-group(eg Lemaine 1974 Mummendey et al 1999for reviews see Blanton Christie and Dye2002 Branscombe and Ellemers 1998) Thissimultaneous disengagement from onedomain and engagem ent with another istermed ldquocompensation by substitutionrdquo(Allport 1954) or ldquosocial creativity strate-giesrdquo (Tajfel and Turner 1986) Because themajority is likely to claim academic perfor-mance as group-defining minoritiesrsquo acade-mic disengagement and underperformanceare likely to be coupled with engagement andsuperior performance in alternative domains(eg sports music)



Thus according to social identity theo-ries one strategy that racial-ethnic minoritiescan use to maintain positive identities and toavoid incorporating negat ive out-groupappraisals stigmas or prejudices is to devaluethe domains that define the out-group whilerelying on the feedback and ref lectedappraisals of close and trusted in-groupmembers who use in-group rather than out-group definitions of success Social identitytheorists have identified several such strate-gies (eg Branscombe Schmitt and Harvey1999 Crocker and Major 1989 CrockerVoelkl et al 1991 Osborne 1995 Rosenberg1965 1979 Tajfel and Turner 1986) In-groupmembers can discount negative feedbackfrom out-group members as evidence of prej-udice and they can devalue and disengagefrom domains that provide such feedbackOn the basis of this analysis our secondhypothesis is that an RES schema focusedsolely on the in-group will (paradoxically)increase disengagement with school andengagement with alternative domains as aform of compensation by substitution

We hypothesize that being either RESaschematic or RES in-group schematicincreases risk of disengagement from schooland vulnerability to negative stereotypesabout the in-grouprsquos academic ability Whatalternatives remain then for the content ofRES schemas Our third hypothesis is thatbeing RES schematic for both the in-groupand the larger society will reduce risk of dis-engagement and vulnerabil ity to negativestereotypes Below we summarize ourhypotheses about the effect of each of theseRES types on academic disengagement

Individuals who are aschematic for RESdo not define themselves automatically inracial-ethnic terms Following a self-schemaframework RES aschematics are more likelyto be influenced by situationally salient race-stereotypic cues because they have not devel-oped a self-schema to buffer them (seeSwann and Ely 1984) and are not chronicallysensitized to the fact that others hold particu-lar stereotyped beliefs about them (Hiltonand Darley 1985) Aschematics are more vul-nerable to the subtle negative effects of race-ethnic stereotypes about academic abilityinterest in school and likely success in acade-mic tasks when these stereotypes are

brought to mind aschematics do not have anautomatic schematized response Thus theyare more likely to respond simply by disen-gaging from academic domains

Individuals with ldquoin-grouprdquo RES areschematic for race-ethnicity they definethemselves in terms of their positive connec-tion to the in-group as described by socialidentity theories We propose that the per-spective shaped by in-group RES tacitlyaccepts the stereotypical notion that certainpositive attributes such as academic successldquobelongrdquo to majority-group not minority-group membersThus in-group RES inadver-tently make individuals vulnerable todisengagement from mainstream institutionsviewed as not self-defining Examples of therelationship between in-group self-schemasand disengagement are found in researchwith African American adolescents there afocus on in-group only in racial-ethnic identi-ty promotes disengagement by reducing theperceived relevance of larger societal institu-tions such as school (Graham Taylor andHudley 1998) and by setting up a contrastbetween being and acting black or whiteldquoActing blackrdquo involves being cool ldquoactingwhiterdquo involves working hard to achieveschool success (eg Fordham and Ogbu1986)

In regard to those with in-group and larg-er society RES we propose that RES canreduce risk of disengagement and bufferfrom stereotypes when they focus both onpositive connection to the in-group and onconnection with the larger society An indi-vidual may feel that he or she is either amember of both the in-group and the largersociety or a member of an in-group that muststruggle to overcome obstacles and barriersto success in larger society We term the firstway of including the larger society in RESldquodualrdquo RES and the second way ldquominorityrdquoRES

ldquoDualrdquo RES focus attention on onersquos sta-tus as both an in-group member and a mem-ber of the larger society (Moran et al 1999)and promote focus on the positive conse-quences of this dual status (Gaertner et al1999) We hypothesize that dual RES providea more effective buffer from the negativeeffects of stereotypes about the in-group thando in-group RES because dual RES connect


SELF-SCHEMAS 337

the individuals to positive larger societalroles and values as well as to in-group rolesand values Because dual RES define the selfas a member of the larger society personswith such RES can dismiss stereotypes aboutthe in-group as not self-relevant because theself is a member of the larger society forwhich these stereotypes do not apply (seeHornsey and Hogg 2000)

Minority RES focus attention on onersquosstatus as both an in-group member and amember of a group that is discriminatedagainst or obstructed by larger society andpromote focus on ways to prevent or avoidlikely negative consequences of minority sta-tus in the larger society We hypothesize thatminority RES provide a more effectivebuffer from negative effects of stereotypesabout the in-group than do in-group RESbecause minority RES provide automaticstrategies for noticing and handling stereo-typic and prejudicial responses while remain-ing engaged in the larger society

STUDY 1

We first explored the hypothesized linkbetween RES and academic success in a mid-dle school sample Insofar as RES includeboth in-group and larger society they helpbuffer students from negative stereotypesThese students should be more deeplyengaged and therefore should do better inschool We investigated this possibility byassessing RES in the fall and examiningschool success as measured by grade pointaverage (GPA) at the end of the school year(last marking period) assuming that theinfluence of RES would unfold over the yearTo control for differences in academic abilityunrelated to RES we included gender andfall marking period GPA as covariates

Method

Sample As part of a larger three-schoolstudy of academic experiences of low-incomeurban minority middle school youths 94eighth grade pupils (50 male 44 female) com-pleted an open-ended question about racial-ethnic identity Of these pupils 58 identifiedthemselves as African American 25 asHispanic and 11 as American Indian

Measures Race-ethnicity Students wereasked ldquoPeople have different ways ofdescribing their race or ethnicity Whichdescribes you bestrdquo

Racial-ethnic self-schemas Studentswere asked ldquoWhat does it mean to you to bea member of your race or ethnic group Youcan use examples from your everyday life ofthings you do that make you feel like a mem-ber of this grouprdquo Responses were enteredinto a database and were double coded bytwo coders who were blind to the respon-dentsrsquo race-ethnicity and the studyrsquos researchhypothesis Disagreements between coderswere resolved by discussion to obtain con-sensus Responses were coded as in-group(59) aschematic (15) or taking the larg-er society into account (15) 12 percent ofthe responses could not be coded in one ofthese categories because the response wasfocused on individual idiosyncratic traits notlinked by the respondent to either the in-group the larger society or both (eg ldquoStaysmart and use your brainrdquo) was unclear (egldquoLots of freedomrdquo) or focused on a moreuniversal outlook (eg ldquoI feel like we are allthe same no matter if wersquore white blackChinese etc We are all still Godrsquos people andGod loves all of usrdquo)

In-group responses focused only on thein-group (eg friendships language musicfood customs and behavior) and did notmention the larger society Examples includeldquoIt means the world to me Irsquom glad of myethnicity I wouldnrsquot want to be anythingelserdquo and ldquoEating the foods talking to myfriends and the color of my complexion inthe mirrorrdquo

Aschematic responses focused on theindividual rather than on group membershipor explained that groups are not importantExamples include ldquoReally my race does notmatter to merdquo ldquoNothingrdquo ldquoIt means nothingto me I think it does not matter how you feelabout your ethnic grouprdquo

Including both the in-group and the larg-er society responses showed concern aboutavoiding problems of racism or focused onconnections between the in-group and thelarger society Examples of the formerinclude ldquoEvery time that I step out of myhouse I feel as though someone is waiting forme to screw up So I feel that as a black male



I have a responsibility to set a good examplefor me in the world and for the people of myracerdquo Examples of the latter include ldquoBeing amember of this race helps me strive on to bea successful person in a world [where] weAfrican Americans are minorities but alsomembersrdquo ldquoI am good at things most whitepeople are good at and proud because ofwhat African Americans did for the worldrdquo

Grades We obtained mean grade pointaverage from records for first and last quar-ters from each school with parental permis-sion Missing data on grades reduced samplesize in reported analyses

Results

Above we hypothesized that only RESschemas which include both in-group andlarger society would provide a buffer fromnegative stereotypes and social representa-tions of the in-group Therefore we expectedbetter grades at the end of middle school foryouths with these RES than for RESaschematic or RES in-group only schematicyouths To assess the relationship betweencontent of RES and academic outcomes weused an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA)examining end-of-year (last-quarter) GPA asa function of RES (aschematic in-group onlyschematic and larger society schematic) withcontrols for fall grades We also partialed outthe effects of gender because this variablepredicts achievement in middle school (seeeg Catsambis 1994) As expected the effectfor RES type was significant F(278) = 328 plt 05 Youths with RES that included both in-group and larger society received higher last-quarter grades (M = 286 sd = 80) than dideither RES aschematics (M = 227 sd = 99)or RES in-group only schematics (M = 217sd = 93) A planned contrast analysis com-paring the aschematic and the ldquoin-grouprdquo cat-egories with the larger society schematicscorroborated this finding p lt 03

Discussion

Study 1 supports the RES model in afield study that uses outcomes with real-world meaning namely academic records Inthis initial study one goal was to learnwhether youths discuss racial-ethnic identityin terms of RESThe findings were encourag-

ing the RES coding captured most youthsrsquoresponses A second goal was to test themodel Indeed the hypothesized bufferingeffect of RES that include both in-group andlarger society was significant Though less fre-quent these RES were associated withimproved grades over the course of theschool year even with controls for fall gradesThis finding corroborates our central hypoth-esis regarding the potential for positiveeffects of RES on academic performancewhen RES include both the in-group and thelarger society Although these findings sug-gest real-world differences in outcomes foryouths who differ in RES further research isneeded to clarify how well these findings gen-eralize across various methods and samples

STUDY 2

Study 2 was designed to provide a con-ceptual replication of Study 1 using a differ-ent population and a different researchmethodmdashexperimental manipulation Ourgoal was first to assess whether the RESmodel could apply to a very different socialcontext and racial-ethnic group namely ruralAmerican Indian youths and second toassess whether the predicted positive effectof RES could be demonstrated by using anexperimental manipulation to clarify causali-ty Finally given the predominance of in-group RES in Study 1 a third goal was toverify whether the distribution of RES typeswe found in Study 1 could be generalized to avery different sample and setting

In Study 1 we examined the cumulativeeffects of RES on academic engagement overthe course of the school year In Study 2 toclarify the causal influence of RES on behav-ior we manipulated the salience of RES andpredicted that the effects of RES on behaviorwould be pronounced when RES was madesalient By showing the presence of an effectwhen RES is brought to mind we confirmthat RES influenced the outcome The ratio-nale for manipulating RES salience comesfrom social cognition research which docu-ments that behavior is not a product of allpossibly relevant knowledge but only ofwhatever knowledge is salient (on the actorrsquosmind) when the actor is making a behavioraldecision In other words only accessible


SELF-SCHEMAS 339

information shapes behavior (for reviews seeBargh and Chartrand 1999 Higgins 1996)

We predicted that RES content influ-ences studentsrsquo academic behavior only whenthe RES is brought to mindWe hypothesizedthat youths with RES that included both thein-group and the larger society would remainengaged in a mathematical task even whenin-group membership was brought to mindbut that RES aschematics and RES in-grouponly schematics would disengage when RESwas brought to mind

Method

Sample As part of a larger study of socialrepresentations of American Indians 65junior high school and high school AmericanIndian youths (30 female 35 male) attendingrural and reservation schools in WashingtonState participated in this study

Experimental manipulation On the basisof very similar experimental manipulationsby Steele (1997) Shih Pittinsky and Ambady(1999) and Oyserman Sakamoto andLauffer (1998) we used order of presentationas a manipulation of salience of RES weassumed that bringing RES to mind shouldhave differential effects on task persistencedepending on the content of the RES Weused the same question as in Study 1 askingparticipants what being AmericanIndianNative American meant to thembefore they worked the mathematical task(high-salience condition) or after (low-salience condition)

Measures Racial-ethnic self-schemas Weentered into a database the responses to thequestion ldquoWhat does it mean to you to be amember of your race or ethnic group Youcan use examples from your everyday life ofthings you do that make you feel like a mem-ber of this grouprdquo The responses were doublecoded by two research assistants who wereblind to the respondentsrsquo race-ethnicity andto the study hypothesi s After coding wascompleted disagreements were resolved bydiscussion to obtain consensus Responseswere coded as in-group (68) aschematic(15) or bridging the in-group and the larg-er society (15) Only 15 percent ofresponses were not codable in one of thesecategories As in Study 1 in-group responses

focused only on the in-group (eg friend-ships language music food customs andbehavior) and did not mention the largersociety Aschematic responses focused on theindividual rather than on group membershipor explained that groups are not importantResponses including both in-group and larg-er society focused either on membership inboth in-group and larger society or on avoid-ing racismstereotypes

Task persistence We used a simple butnovel mathematical task previouslyemployed by Oyserman Gant and Ager(1995) to assess academic engagement (per-sistence) Participants were given a sheet ofpaper with the numbers 2 3 and 7 written onthe top They were asked to use these num-bers to obtain the number 36 by adding sub-tracting multiplying or dividing and usingeach number as many times as they likedThis was described as a new task not taughtpreviously participants were asked to writedown as many ways as they could of combin-ing the numbers to solve the problem using anew line for each attempt Thirty blank lineswere provided Analyses were based on thenumber of attempts made to solve the prob-lem

Results

Recall our hypothesis Only individualswith RES including both in-group and largersociety will be buffered from negative stereo-types and social representations of their in-group Therefore we expected that youthswith this RES would persist more strongly onthe mathematical task and that this greaterpersistence would be especially pronouncedwhen racial-ethnic group was made salientbefore completion of the task To assess therelationship between content of RES andacademic persistence outcomes we used anANCOVA controlling for gender and forgrade in school Because we found no signifi-cant effects of either variable we omittedthem and used a two-factorial ANOVA toexamine the effect of RES on persistenceThe two between-groups factors were RES(aschematic schematic in-group only orschematic in-group and larger society) andsalience of RES (salient vs not salient)



We found a significant main effect ofRES F (2 57) = 409 p lt 03 Academic per-sistence was greater among students withRES that focused on in-group and largersociety than among students with in-grouponly RES or among RES aschematics (M =590 sd = 173 vs M = 380 sd = 278 and M =290 sd = 304 respectively) For a more sensi-tive test of our hypothesis we used a plannedcontrast analysis to examine whether theeffects of RES content would be strongerwhen race-ethnicity was salient than when itwas not

We focused first on the high-saliencecondition comparing the in-group and larg-er-society schematics (M = 557 sd = 190)with both in-group schematics (M = 347 sd=278) and RES aschematics (M = 217 sd =223) and excluding the low-salience condi-tion This contrast was significant t(57) =246 p lt 02 Next we excluded the highsalience condition and repeated this compar-ison within the low-salience group compar-ing aschematics (M = 400 sd = 408) andin-group schematics (M = 371 sd =231) within-group and larger-society schematics (M =667 sd = 115) This comparison was not sta-tistically significant t(57) = 175 p gt 08although it was in the same direction as thehigh-salience condition

Discussion

In real-world settings RES may bebrought to mind rarely frequently or con-stantly Because it is not clear what an indi-vidual is thinking at any given pointcognitive priming provides a direct means oftesting the consequences of RES Thereforewe used an experimental manipulat ion tomake RES salient before assigning a mathe-matical task In our experiment we primed(brought to mind) respondentsrsquo racial-ethnicself-schemas in the experimental conditionbut not in the control condition We predictedthat RES should influence behavior (persis-tence on the mathematical task) when theyare brought to mind

In conceptually replicating Study 1 wefound positive effects of being RES in-group and larger society schematic signifi-cant effects occurred when RES were madesalient through the priming manipulation

As in Study 1 however few students pos-sessed an RES that included both the in-group and the larger society this pointsuggests that such RES may be difficult toestablish or once established difficult tomaintain In view of the consistency of find-ings across samples within the UnitedStates our goal in Study 3 was to conceptu-ally replicate the findings from Studies 1 and2 using a racial-ethnic group outside theUnited States and to obtain a larger sampleso that the two elementsmdashbeing RES in-group and larger-society schematic (dualand minority RES)mdashcould be studied ingreater detail

STUDY 3

Study 3 involved the same saliencemanipulation as described in Study 2 butused a different racial-ethnic groupPalestinian Arab Israelis Palestinian Arabsare Israelrsquos largest minority group about 19percent of the population and are primarilyMuslim (CIA 2001) Further the stereotypeof less academic ability is true for this minor-ity group Arab Israeli students perceive thatJewish Israelis view them as less knowledge-able more primitive and less smart than theyview themselves (Kurman and Eshel 1999)Palestinian Arab Israelis are targets of affir-mative action efforts at Israeli universitiesand have experienced chronic diffuse dis-crimination in domains such as employment(see Rouhana and Fiske 1995)

As in Study 2 we did not expect that thesalience manipulation would change the con-tent of racial-ethnic ident ity rather weexpected that the salience manipulationwould influence whether racial-ethnic identi-ty was brought to mind when subjectsworked on the mathematical task Wehypothesized that racial-ethnic identitywould influence engagement in the academictask only when it was brought to mind (high-salience) before engagement in the task

Method

Sample A sample of Palestinian-ArabIsraeli high school students (N = 524 225boys and 299 girls) completed this study aspart of a larger questionnaire administered inclass In collaboration with the Tel Aviv


SELF-SCHEMAS 341

School of Education data were collected atseven high schools during a regular class ses-sion Questionnaires were in Arabic the lan-guage of instruction and the respondents rsquofirst language

Experimental procedure As in Study 2 inthe high-salience condition students firstdescribed their RES and then completed amathematical task In the low-salience condi-tion we reversed the order so that studentsfirst completed the task and then describedtheir RES

Measures Racial-ethnic self-schemas Weused the same open-ended questions inStudy 3 as in Studies 1 and 2 We coded foreach of the identity schema types Because ofthe larger sample size however two of theauthors content coded 180 randomly chosenresponses rather than double coding all ques-tionnaires We obtained a 92 percent agree-ment level one coder coded the remainingresponses In contrast to Studies 1 and 2 sam-ple size in Study 3 was sufficient to allow cod-ing and separate analysis of the RESin-group and larger society responses with adual versus a minority focus Twenty-eightpercent of the responses were dual RES in-group and larger society responses that isthey made positive mention of both Israeland being Arab or Palestinian within IsraelThirty-two percent of the responses wereminority RES in-group and larger societyresponses they mentioned both being Araband negative aspects of Israel and beingIsraeli In addition 21 percent of the respons-es were aschematic they focused only onfacts highlighting the idea that citizenship isldquoa fact of liferdquo not an aspect of identityTwenty percent were RES in-group onlyresponses focusing only on the in-group Afinal 7 percent of responses did not fit any ofthe RES types described above

Task engagement or persistence We usedthe same mathematical task as in Study 2Again the number of attempts was used asthe dependent variable in this case the dis-tribution of the variable was skewed so weperformed a log transformation using theformula loge(1 + number of attempts)

Results

As stated above we expected that onlythose with RES containing both the in-groupand the larger society would remain engagedin the mathematical task in the RES salientcondition and that aschematics and in-grouponly RES schematics would disengage Incontrast to Studies 1 and 2 we were able toanalyze dual and minority in-group and larg-er society schemas separately because a larg-er number of participants reported thosetypes of RESTherefore we analyzed engage-ment using a 2 (identity salience high vs low)x 4 (RES aschematic in-group minoritydual) x 2 (gender) x 2 (grades 8 and 9 vsgrades 10 and 11) ANOVA

As hypothesized academic disengage-ment was moderated by a two-way RES-by-salience interaction F (3 404) = 330 p lt 03RES influenced behavior when brought tomind (see Figure 1) As predicted RESaschematic and RES in-group youthsreduced their effort while youths with REScontaining both in-group and larger society(whether dual or minority) did not Pairwisecomparisons were s ignificant for RESaschematic F(1 404) = 893 p lt 01 youthsand (at trend level ) RES in-group onlyschematic youths F(1 404) = 343 p lt 07 Nodisengagement occurred for dual or minorityRES schematic youths (both pairwise com-parisons F lt 1)

Discussion

Study 3 results corroborate the influenceof RES on academic engagement shown inStudy 2 That is an RES focused on the in-group and the larger society buffers youthsfrom academic disengagement whereasbeing RES aschematic or focused only on thein-group does not Like Study 2 Study 3 usedan experimental manipulation of salience ofrace-ethnicity thereby it increased confi-dence in causality such that the result can betaken to mean that salient content of RESinfluences academic engagement Moreoversample size in Study 3 allowed for separateanalyses of dual and minority RES in-groupand larger-society schematics corroboratingour assumption that either would bufferyouths from academic disengagement Although this study corroborated the effects



of RES that include both the in-group andthe larger society this type of RES was muchmore common in Study 3 than in Studies 1 or2 Thus we cannot yet state confidently howoften each form of RES occurs among racial-ethnic minority youths cross-nationally

Although the data used in Study 3 didnot allow us to comprehensively examineantecedents of RES type we were able toexplore possible effects of age (grade level)on the content of studentsrsquo RES The distrib-ution of racial-ethnic identity self-schemasdiffered between younger and older studentschi-square (3 n = 436) = 2377 p lt 001 Thespecific pattern of differences between olderand younger students suggested a systematicdevelopmental shift we found feweraschematic older (14) than younger stu-dents (24) markedly more minority self-schematic older (48) than youngerstudents (28) and fewer dual self-schemat-ic older (18) than younger (30) studentsWe saw no differences in frequency of in-group schema by age (older youths 20

younger youths 19) Thus older teens weremore likely to be minority RES schematicand less likely to be aschematic or dual RESschematic

It is possible that as youths mature theyfind themselves increasingly in contexts thatare inexplicable if race-ethnicity is not takeninto account thus the possibility of remainingRES aschematic is reduced The realizationthat race influences othersrsquo responses toonersquos self and onersquos life chances is likely todraw attention to the ways in which the larg-er society creates obstacles for onersquos groupthus increasing a minority RES focus

This preliminary finding on age as anantecedent of RES schema types raises aquestion do RES affect the academic moti-vation of older and younger minority stu-dents differentially As shown in theANOVA reported previously the answer tothis question is ldquoNordquo (the three-way interac-tion of the salience manipulation age andcontent of RES F(3 404) = 134 p gt 26) Thebuffering effect of dual and minority RES

Note Vertical bars reflect one standard error above and below the mean

Figure 1 Academic Persistence of Arab Israeli High School Students as a Function of RES Salience and RESSchema (Study 3)


SELF-SCHEMAS 343

applies equally for older and younger youthsBeing in-group RES schematic or RESaschematic is equally detrimental to engage-ment in school for younger and for olderyouths

GENERAL DISCUSSION ANDCONCLUSIONS

The large comparative self-esteem litera-ture makes quite clear that racial identity canprovide a buffer against out-group stereo-types This research shows either no differ-ence (Frable 1997) in self-esteem betweenminorities (specifically African Americans)and white Americans or reveals differencesfavoring the minority group (CrockerLuhtanen et al 1994 Crocker and Major1989 van Laar 2000) The only exceptionoccurs in comparisons of Asian Americanswith white Americans Asian Americans onaverage have more modest self-esteemScholars suggest that this difference is likelyto reflect a cultural difference in definition ofthe self (Coon and Kemmelmeier 2001Oyserman Coon and Kemmelmeier 2002)rather than self-denigration In developingour model of RES we asked ldquoHow can racialidentity buffer from a particularly perniciousconsequence of out-group stereotypes name-ly academic disengagement in light of stereo-types about academic abilityrdquo

Our model frames racial-ethnic identityas a self-schema We began with the assump-tion that social context can mark identities bymaking salient onersquos membership in particu-lar groups We then suggested that the con-tent of onersquos social group identi ties canprovide a buffer from the negative conse-quences of salient stereotypes about the in-grouprsquos academic engagement Weconceptualized racial-ethnic minority identi-ty as potentially a schematic component ofself-concept a racial-ethnic self-schema(RES) We proposed that onersquos RES makescertain social roles (eg good student) self-relevant along with the normative rules andbehavioral routines attached to those rolesBy making some social roles but not othersself-relevant RES frames and organizesexperience recruits and maintains motiva-tion and promotes positive affect (seeOyserman et al 1995)

In the studies reported here we firstdemonstrated the ecological validity of ourRES model by showing a relationship withgrades during an academic year (Study 1)Then we examined the motivational conse-quences of situationally cuing RES (Studies 2and 3) using both American and non-American samples Our analysis showed thatRES influenced disengagement whethermeasured over the course of the school yearor in an experimental manipulat ion ofsalience Youths with in-group focused RESand youths who were RES aschematic madeworse grades in school than youths with RESfocused on both the in-group and the largersociety Moreover when manipulated experi-mentally making RES salient resulted in dis-engagement only for youths who were RESaschematic or RES in-group only schematicIn combination these findings suggest thatthe content of individualsrsquo RES moderatesthe impact of stereotypes about onersquos racial-ethnic group

In both our urban multiracial sample andour rural American Indian sample we foundthat the most common RES was in-groupfocused Because such a focus can have rami-fications that increase risk there is a need forfurther research on the frequency of RESthat includes the in-group and the larger soci-ety (whether dual or minority focused) andon the conditions which increase the likeli-hood that such an RES will emerge

Although we did not test this possibilityin the current studies we believe that ourmodel of the moderating effect of racial-eth-nic identity schemas on academic disengage-ment can provide a bridge between researchon disengagement and on the related phe-nomenon of stereotype threat (Steele 1997)Research in both areas focuses on how mem-bers of stigmatized groups deal with academ-ic situations both types of research seek tounderstand why stigmatized status relates topoorer performance and why students ldquodis-engagerdquo or stop trying Stereotype threatresearchers focus on highly motivated stu-dents disengagement researchers ask whymotivation often lags Stereotype threatresearchers suggest that performance onintellectually challenging tasks suffers whenthe experimenter makes salient a personrsquosstigmatized status because of the affective



arousal that comes with that personrsquos effortsto disconfirm the stereotypes (eg Shih et al1999 Spencer Steele and Quinn 1999 Steele1997) Disengagement researchers relatestigmatized status to withdrawal from schoolin their view withdrawal means that neitheronersquos personal failure (or success) in schoolnor onersquos grouprsquos negative (or positive) acad-emic reputation is self-defining (SchmaderMajor and Gramzow 2001 Steele 1997)

Stigma can be arousing motivatingeither a fight or a flight response One ques-tion has not yet received much attentionWhat factors determine when participantswill increase their effort in the face of stigma(fight) and when they will withdraw theirefforts and leave the field (flight) In ourview future research with a self-schemamodel can help to address this importantquestion We speculate that race aschematicsare most vulnerable to stereotype threateffects and that in-group self-schematics aremost vulnerable to disengagement Dual andminority self-schematics are buffered fromboth stereotype threat and disengagementand respond by fighting rather than fleeing

We reason that dual self-schematicsdefine themselves in terms of both the in-group and the larger society thus when iden-tity is made salient positive images of the selfas a member of both an in-group and thelarger society should come to mind Thesepositive images should buffer from stereo-types Minority identity schematics on theother hand define themselves in terms ofboth in-group and action to overcomeracism thus when identity is made salientthey should think of themselves positivelyboth as in-group members and as overcom-ing obstaclesThese images also should bufferfrom stereotypes Therefore we speculatethat both dual and minority schemas protectindividuals from withdrawal of effort in tasksthat simply require persistence and bufferthem from effects of stereotype threat indemanding tasks by reducing affectivearousal

This is not the case for in-group RESschematics and RES aschematics In-groupschemas make disengagement and withdraw-al of effort more likely because the domain ofschool is not regarded as relevant to the in-group In-group schematics do not fear per-

petuating a stereotype through their failurenor do they view school as self-defining Thusone could argue that the phenomenon whichthe concept of stereotype threat was devel-oped to clarify is not relevant to in-groupschematics These individuals withdrawbefore they have a chance to experiencedesire to succeed academically and beforesuch a desire can cause affective arousal dueto fear that they may not succeed and thusmay confirm stereotypes about their group

RES aschematics are the group at mostrisk of stereotype threat These individuals donot chronically self-define in terms of race-ethnicity but have other sources of self-defin-ition Aschematics will be most disconcertedwhen confronted with a negative racial-eth-nic stereotype they lack automatic schema-based responses that can defuse theheightened affective response and arousalwhich accompany the effort to disconfirm thestereotype

Taken together these studies affirm theimportance of taking RES into account inunderstanding self-regulation in minorityyouths We raise the possibility that RESengage fight or flight responses documenta-tion of the mediational process is still need-ed

REFERENCES

Allport Gordon 1954 The Nature of PrejudiceReading MAAddison-Wesley

Bargh John A and Tanja L Chartrand 1999 ldquoTheUnbearable Automaticity of BeingrdquoAmerican Psychologist 54462ndash79

Birenbaum Michael and Roberta Kraemer 1995ldquoGender and Ethnic-Group Differences inCausal Attributions for Success and Failurein Math ematics and LanguageExaminationsrdquo Journal of Cross-CulturalPsychology 26342ndash59

Blanton Hart Charlene Christie and MaureenDye 2002 ldquoSocial Identity Versus ReferenceFrame Comparisons The Moderating Roleof Stereotype Endorsementrdquo Journal ofExperimental Social Psychology 38253ndash67

Branscombe Nyla R and Naomi Ellemers 1998ldquoCoping With Group-Based DiscriminationIndividual ist ic Versus Group-LevelStrategi esrdquo Pp 243ndash66 in Prejudice TheTargetrsquos Perspective edited by Janet K Swimand Charles Stangor San Diego AcademicPress

Branscombe Nyla R Michael T Schmitt and


SELF-SCHEMAS 345

Richard D Harvey 1999 ldquoPerceivingPervasive Discrimination Among AfricanAmericans Implications for GroupIdentification and Well-Beingrdquo Journal ofPersonal ity and Socia l Psychology77135ndash49

Catrambone Richard and Hazel Markus 1987ldquoThe Role of Self-Schemas in Going Beyondthe Information Givenrdquo Social Cognition5349ndash68

Catsambis Sophia 1994 ldquoThe Path to MathGender and Racial-Ethnic Differences inMathematics Participation from MiddleSchool to High Schoolrdquo Socio logy ofEducation 67199ndash215

Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) 2001 TheWorld Fact Book Washington DC CentralIntelligence Agency (httpwwwodcigovciapublicationsfactbook)

Coon Heather M and Markus Kemmelmeier2001 ldquoCultural Orientations in the UnitedStates (Re-)Examining Differences AmongEthnicRacial Groupsrdquo Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 32348ndash64

Crocker Jennifer Riiha Luhtanen Bruce Blaineand Stephanie Broadnax 1994 ldquoCollectiveSelf-Esteem and Psychological Well-BeingAmong White Black and Asian CollegeStudentsrdquo Personality and Social PsychologyBulletin 20503ndash13

Crocker Jennifer and Brenda Major 1989 ldquoSocialStigma and Self-Esteem The Self-ProtectiveProperties of Stigmardquo Psychological Review96608ndash30

Crocker Jennifer Kristen Voelkl Maria Testa andBrenda Major 1991 ldquoSocial Stigma TheAffective Consequences of AttributionalAmbiguityrdquo Journal of Personality andSocial Psychology 60218ndash28

Cross William and Peony Fhagen-Smith 1996ldquoNigre scence and Ego-Identi tyDevelopment Accounting for DifferentialBlack Identity Pattern srdquo Pp 108ndash23 inCounseling Across Cultures 4th ed editedby Paul Pederson Juris Draguns WalterLonner and Joseph TrimbleThousand OaksCA Sage

Fordham Signithia and John U Ogbu 1986ldquoBlack Studentsrsquo School Success CopingWith the lsquoBurden of ldquoActingrdquoWhitersquordquo UrbanReview 18176ndash206

Frable Deborah 1997 ldquoGender Racial EthnicSexual and Class Identitiesrdquo Annual Reviewof Psychology 48139ndash62

Gaertner Samuel L John F Dovidio Jason ANier Christine M Ward and Brenda SBanker 1999 ldquoAcross Cultural Divides TheValue of a Superordinate Identityrdquo Pp173ndash212 in Cultural Divides Understandingand Overcoming Group Conflict edited by

Deborah A Prentice and Dale T Miller NewYork Russell Sage Foundation

Graham Sandra April Z Taylor and CynthiaHudley 1998 ldquoExploring Achievem entValues Among Ethnic Minority EarlyAdolescen tsrdquo Journal of EducationalPsychology 90606ndash20

Higgins E Tori 1996 ldquoKnowledge ActivationAccessibility Applicability and SaliencerdquoPp 133ndash68 in Social Psychology Handbookof Basic Principles edited by ArieKruglanski and E Tory Higgins New YorkGuilford

Hilton James L and John M Darley 1985 ldquoConstructing Other Persons A Limit to theEffectrdquo Journal of Experimental SocialPsychology 211ndash18

Hornsey Matthew J and Michael A Hogg 2000ldquoAssimilation and Diversity An IntegrativeModel of Subgroup Relationsrdquo Personalityand Social Psychology Review 4143ndash56

Kurman Jenny and Yohanan Eshel 1999 ldquoArabIsraeli Youthsrsquo Perceptions of StereotypesAbout Arab Israel isrdquo Departm ent ofPsychology Haifa Univer si ty Haifa Unpublished Manuscript

Lemaine Gerard 1974 ldquoSocial Differentiatio nand Social Originalityrdquo European Journal ofSocial Psychology 417ndash52

Lovaglia Michael J Jeffrey W Lucas Jeffrey AHouser Shane R Thye and BarryMarkovsky 1998 ldquoStatus Processes andMental Ability Test Scoresrdquo Americ anJournal of Sociology 104195ndash228

Markus Hazel R 1977 ldquoSelf -Schemata andProcessing Information About the SelfrdquoJournal of Personality and Social Psychology3563ndash78

Markus Hazel Marie Crane Stan Bernstein andMichael Siladi 1982 ldquoSelf-Schemas andGenderrdquo Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology 4238ndash50

Markus Hazel Ruth Hamill and Keith P Sentis1987 ldquoThinking Fat Self-Schemas for BodyWeight and the Proces sing of WeightRelevant Informationrdquo Journal of AppliedSocial Psychology 1750ndash71

Markus Hazel Jeanne Smith and Richard LMoreland 1985 ldquoRole of the Self-Concept inthe Perception of Othersrdquo Journal ofPersonal ity and Socia l Psychology491494ndash1512

Markus Hazel and Elissa Wurf 1987 ldquoTheDynamic Self -Concept A Socia lPsychological Perspectiverdquo Annual Reviewof Psychology 38299ndash337

Montepare Joann M and Amy E Clements 2001ldquo lsquoAge Schemasrsquo Guides to ProcessingInformation About the Selfrdquo Journal ofAdult Development 899ndash108



Moran James R Candace M Fleming PhilipSomervell and Spero M Manson 1999ldquoMeasu ring Bicultural Ethnic Identi tyAmong American Indian Adolescents AFactor Analysi s Studyrdquo Journal ofAdolescent Research 14405ndash26

Mummendey Amelie Thomas Kessler AndreasKlink and Rosemarie Mielke 199 9ldquoStrategies to Cope with Negative SocialIdentity Predictions by Social IdentityTheory and Relative Deprivation TheoryrdquoJournal of Personality and Social Psychology76229ndash45

Ogbu John U 1986 ldquoThe Consequences of theAmerican Caste Systemrdquo Pp 19ndash56 in TheSchool Achievement of Minority ChildrenNew Perspectives edited by Ulric NeisserHillsdale NJ Erlbaum

mdashmdashmdash 1992 ldquoUnderstanding Cultural Diversityand Learningrdquo Educational Researcher215ndash14

Osborne Jason W 1995 ldquoAcademics Self-Esteemand Race A Look at the UnderlyingAssumptions of the Dis identif icationHypothesi srdquo Personali ty and SocialPsychology Bulletin 21449ndash55

Oyserman Daphna Heather M Coon andMarkus Kemmelmeier 2002 ldquoRethinkingIndividualism and Collectivism Evaluationof Theoret ical Assumptions and Meta-Analysisrdquo Psychological Bulletin 1283ndash72

Oyserman Daphna Larry Gant and Joel Ager1995 ldquoA Socially Contextualized Model ofAfrican American Identity Possible Selvesand School Pers isten cerdquo Journal ofPersonal ity and Socia l Psych ology691216ndash32

Oyserman Daphna and Hazel R Markus 1993ldquoThe Sociocultural Selfrdquo Pp 187ndash220 in TheSelf in Social Perspective vol 4 edited byJerry Suls Hillsdale NJ Erlbaum

Oyserman Daphna Izumi Sakamoto and ArmanLauffer 1998 ldquoCultural Hybridity and theFraming of Social Obligationrdquo Journal ofPersonal ity and Socia l Psych ology741606ndash18

Oyserman Daphna and Jan et Swim 2001ldquoStigma An Insiderrsquos Viewrdquo Journal ofSocial Issues 571ndash14

Rosen berg Milton 1965 Society and the

Adolescent Self-Image Princeton PrincetonUniversity Press

mdashmdashmdash 1979 Conceiving the Self New YorkBasic Books

Rouhana Nadim N and Susan T Fiske 1995ldquoPerception of Power Threat and ConflictIntensity in Asymmetric Intergroup ConflictArab and Jewish Citizens of Israelrdquo Journalof Conflict Resolution 3949ndash81

Schmader Toni Brenda Major and Richard HGramzow 2001 ldquoCoping With Ethnic Stigmain the Academic Domain The Role ofPsychological Disengagementrdquo Journal ofSocial Issues 5793ndash112

Shelton J Nicole and Robert M Sellers 2000ldquoSituational Stability and Variabil ity inAfrican American Racial Identityrdquo Journalof Black Psychology 2627ndash50

Shih Margaret Thomas L Pittinsky and NaliniAmbady 1999 ldquoStereotype SusceptibilityIdentity Salience and Shifts in QuantitativePerformancerdquo Psychological Science1080ndash84

Spencer Steve J Claude M Steele and Diane MQuinn 1999 ldquoStereotype Threat andWomenrsquos Math Performancerdquo Journal ofExperimental Social Psychology 354ndash28

Steele Claude M 1997 ldquoA Threat in the Air HowStereotypes Shape Intellectual Identity andPerformancerdquo American Psychologis t52613ndash29

SwannWilliam B and Robin J Ely 1984 ldquoA Battleof Wills Self-Verification Versus BehavioralConfirmationrdquo Journal of Personality andSocial Psychology 461287ndash1302

Tajfel Henri and John C Turner 1986 ldquoThe SocialIdentity Theory of Intergroup Behaviorrdquo Pp33ndash 48 in The Social Psychology ofIntergroup Relatio ns 2nd ed edited byWilliam G Austin and Stephen WorchelChicago Nelson-Hall

van Laar Collette 2000 ldquoThe Paradox of LowAcademic Achievem ent but High Self-Esteem in African American Students AnAttributional Accountrdquo EducationalPsychology Review 1233ndash61

Zhou Min 1997 ldquoGrowing Up American TheChallenge Confronting Immigrant Childrenand Children of Immigra ntsrdquo AnnualReview of Sociology 2363ndash95

Daphna Oyserman is an associate professor at the University of Michigan with joint appoint-ments at the Department of Psychology the School of Social Work the Institute for SocialResearch and the Department of Sociology Her research focuses on the interface between iden-tity motivation self-regulation and behavior with particular interest in cultural differencesRecent publications have appeared in the Journal of Experimental Social PsychologyAdolescence and the Psychological Bulletin


SELF-SCHEMAS 347

Markus Kemmelmeier is an assistant professor in the Interdisciplinary PhD Program in SocialPsychology and the Department of Sociology at the University of Nevada His current researchfocuses on the study of social issues cultural processes and the self Recent publications haveappeared in Basic and Applied Social Psychology and in Cross-Cultural Research

Stephanie Fryberg recently completed her PhD in social psychology at Stanford University Sheconducts research on sociocultural influences on self and identity with a focus on health andeducation disparities A recent publication is forthcoming in the Journal of Self and Identity

Hezi Brosh is an associate professor at Bard College His recent research focuses on motivationand attitudes affecting the learning of Arabic and Hebrew in US colleges and universities aswell as on the issue of native and nonnative language teachers

Tami Hart Johnson is a research associate at the Institute for Social Research University ofMichigan Her current work (with Daphna Oyserman) focuses on a preventive intervention topromote positive academic outcomes among minority youths



develop strategies to handle situations inwhich stereotyping may occur (Oysermanand Swim 2001) Given individual differencesin choices of strategies members of the samegroup are likely to differ in their vulnerabili-ty to stereotypes and in their success in navi-gating the larger society (Crocker and Major1989) Here we outline a model for under-standing individual differences in response tothese stereotypes with emphasis on the rela-tionship between engagement with schooland the content of racial-ethnic self-schemas(RES)

Much of the racial-ethnic identityresearch is based on a social identityapproach that postulates buffering effects ofpositive identification with the in-group (egTajfel and Turner 1986) In contrast we pro-pose a self-schema framework as a broaderencompassing model that provides novelhypotheses about how racial-ethnic self-schemas can reduce disengagement and pro-mote engagement with school Our modelpredicts when minority youths will be able topreserve motivation and focus on academicperformance and when they are likely to dis-engage and stop trying in school

To foreshadow our argument wehypothesize that when studentsrsquo RES takeboth the in-group and the larger society intoaccount the students will be more academi-cally engaged and will fare better in schoolWe provide support for our racial-ethnicschema model using varied samples andmethods First we show that RES significant-ly predict change in school grades amongAfrican American Hispanic and AmericanIndian middle school students Next using asalience manipulation we show that contentof RES influences persistence on a mathe-matical task in two separate studies involvingAmerican Indian and Arab-PalestinianIsraeli junior high school and high school stu-dents

RACIAL-ETHNIC IDENTITY AS ASELF-SCHEMA

Self-schemas are organized generaliza-tions about the self They are dimensionsalong which individuals hold clear and dis-tinct perceptions about themselves and theyinclude personally defining and important

attributes (Montepare and Clements 2001)Individuals are not schematic for all of thecharacteristics traits skills and abilities thatare true or observable about them (Markus1977) Instead self-schemas reflect domainsthat are valued in onersquos social context(Oyserman and Markus 1993) When adomain becomes self-schematic it becomesimportant to maintain a particular view ofthe self within this domain Individuals aremore likely to challenge disbelieve or try torefute negative or disconfirming schema-rel-evant rather than schema-irrelevant feed-back (Markus 1977) Negat ive ordisconfirming feedback that is schema-irrele-vant is unlikely to result in mobilization ofeffort and resources to combat it

As cognitive structures self-schemasdirect attention to self-relevant informationthoughts feelings and memories (Markus1977) Information is assimilated into existingschemas where possible Individuals processschema-relevant information more quicklyand more efficiently (Markus Smith andMoreland 1985) They are likely to misre-member information in ways that reflecttheir own schemas (Markus Crane et al1982 for a review see Markus and Wurf1987) Information irrelevant to self-schemasis likely to be disregarded (Markus Hamilland Sentis 1987) ambiguous information islikely to be framed in ways relevant to self-schemas (Catrambone and Markus 1987)

Although we know of no other researchfocused on race-ethnicity as a self-schemaresearchers have studied other ascribed iden-tity groups including age gender and heavyweight This research shows that not all menand women have gender self-schemas(Markus Crane et al 1982) not all heavyweight people have ldquofatrdquo self-schemas(Markus et al 1987) and not everyone isschematic for his or her age (Montepare andClements 2001) Across each of thesedomains however those who are schematicare more likely to organize information interms of these schemas and are better ablethan aschematic individuals to defend the selffrom negative schema-relevant feedback

Following this logic we assume that notall members of racial-ethnic minority groupswill be schematic for their race-ethnicityRES aschematics make sense of who they are


SELF-SCHEMAS 335


CONTENT OF RES
















SELF-SCHEMAS 337



STUDY 1


Method











Results


Discussion



STUDY 2




SELF-SCHEMAS 339



Method






Results






Discussion




STUDY 3



Method



SELF-SCHEMAS 341





Results



Discussion












SELF-SCHEMAS 343

















REFERENCES








SELF-SCHEMAS 345






















































SELF-SCHEMAS 347






SELF-SCHEMAS 335


CONTENT OF RES
















SELF-SCHEMAS 337



STUDY 1


Method











Results


Discussion



STUDY 2




SELF-SCHEMAS 339



Method






Results






Discussion




STUDY 3



Method



SELF-SCHEMAS 341





Results



Discussion












SELF-SCHEMAS 343

















REFERENCES








SELF-SCHEMAS 345






















































SELF-SCHEMAS 347















SELF-SCHEMAS 337



STUDY 1


Method











Results


Discussion



STUDY 2




SELF-SCHEMAS 339



Method






Results






Discussion




STUDY 3



Method



SELF-SCHEMAS 341





Results



Discussion












SELF-SCHEMAS 343

















REFERENCES








SELF-SCHEMAS 345






















































SELF-SCHEMAS 347









Results


Discussion



STUDY 2




SELF-SCHEMAS 339



Method






Results






Discussion




STUDY 3



Method



SELF-SCHEMAS 341





Results



Discussion












SELF-SCHEMAS 343

















REFERENCES








SELF-SCHEMAS 345






















































SELF-SCHEMAS 347






SELF-SCHEMAS 339



Method






Results






Discussion




STUDY 3



Method



SELF-SCHEMAS 341





Results



Discussion












SELF-SCHEMAS 343

















REFERENCES








SELF-SCHEMAS 345






















































SELF-SCHEMAS 347









Discussion




STUDY 3



Method



SELF-SCHEMAS 341





Results



Discussion












SELF-SCHEMAS 343

















REFERENCES








SELF-SCHEMAS 345






















































SELF-SCHEMAS 347






SELF-SCHEMAS 341





Results



Discussion












SELF-SCHEMAS 343

















REFERENCES








SELF-SCHEMAS 345






















































SELF-SCHEMAS 347















SELF-SCHEMAS 343

















REFERENCES








SELF-SCHEMAS 345






















































SELF-SCHEMAS 347














REFERENCES








SELF-SCHEMAS 345






















































SELF-SCHEMAS 347






SELF-SCHEMAS 345






















































SELF-SCHEMAS 347
































SELF-SCHEMAS 347





Racial-ethnic self schemas

Documents

Transcript of Racial-ethnic self schemas