{"title":"男孩很聪明(而且真的很迟钝,很普通):测试聪明刻板印象的复制和有效性","authors":"Yue Li , Timothy C. Bates","doi":"10.1016/j.paid.2025.113111","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>A Brilliance Stereotype associating high intellectual ability with men and not women with possible downstream impacts on interests or work has been reported. Here, we report five replications and extensions testing this finding (total <em>N</em> = 737). Studies 1 and 2 were direct replications and found no support for the male brilliance stereotype: Instead, 10-year-old boys and girls both chose own-gender targets as smartest. Study 3 tested stereotyping of the opposite of brilliance – being very dull. Contrary to the brilliance stereotype model, males were stereotyped as dull by both girls and boys (<em>OR</em> = 0.22, <em>p</em> < .001). Study 4 added additional validity checks, but no difference in brilliance stereotype was found between boys and girls (<em>p</em> = .517). We also tested the causal claim that brilliance stereotypes impact career interests. Large gender differences were found for occupational interests (e.g. nursing (<em>β</em> = 0.73 <em>CI</em><sub>95</sub> [0.48, 0.98], <em>t</em> = 5.68, <em>p</em> < .001, scientist/engineer (<em>β</em> = −0.61 <em>CI</em><sub>95</sub> [−0.88, −0.35], <em>t</em> = −4.60, <em>p</em> < .001). Despite this, the brilliance stereotype showed no relationship to any occupational interests (<em>p</em>-values 0.523 to 0.999). Brilliance stereotype, and effects of brilliance stereotype lack internal coherence and predictive validity.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48467,"journal":{"name":"Personality and Individual Differences","volume":"239 ","pages":"Article 113111"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Boys are smart (and really dull and pretty average): Testing replication and validity of the Brilliance Stereotype\",\"authors\":\"Yue Li , Timothy C. Bates\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.paid.2025.113111\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>A Brilliance Stereotype associating high intellectual ability with men and not women with possible downstream impacts on interests or work has been reported. Here, we report five replications and extensions testing this finding (total <em>N</em> = 737). Studies 1 and 2 were direct replications and found no support for the male brilliance stereotype: Instead, 10-year-old boys and girls both chose own-gender targets as smartest. Study 3 tested stereotyping of the opposite of brilliance – being very dull. Contrary to the brilliance stereotype model, males were stereotyped as dull by both girls and boys (<em>OR</em> = 0.22, <em>p</em> < .001). Study 4 added additional validity checks, but no difference in brilliance stereotype was found between boys and girls (<em>p</em> = .517). We also tested the causal claim that brilliance stereotypes impact career interests. Large gender differences were found for occupational interests (e.g. nursing (<em>β</em> = 0.73 <em>CI</em><sub>95</sub> [0.48, 0.98], <em>t</em> = 5.68, <em>p</em> < .001, scientist/engineer (<em>β</em> = −0.61 <em>CI</em><sub>95</sub> [−0.88, −0.35], <em>t</em> = −4.60, <em>p</em> < .001). Despite this, the brilliance stereotype showed no relationship to any occupational interests (<em>p</em>-values 0.523 to 0.999). Brilliance stereotype, and effects of brilliance stereotype lack internal coherence and predictive validity.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48467,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Personality and Individual Differences\",\"volume\":\"239 \",\"pages\":\"Article 113111\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Personality and Individual Differences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S019188692500073X\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/2/20 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Personality and Individual Differences","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S019188692500073X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
据报道,一种将高智力与男性而非女性联系在一起的“光辉刻板印象”可能对兴趣或工作产生下游影响。在这里,我们报告了5个重复和扩展测试这一发现(总N = 737)。研究1和研究2是直接重复的,没有发现支持男性聪明刻板印象的证据:相反,10岁的男孩和女孩都认为自己的性别目标是最聪明的。研究3测试了对聪明的反面的刻板印象——非常无趣。与才华刻板印象模型相反,男生和女生都认为男生沉闷(OR = 0.22, p <;措施)。研究4增加了额外的效度检验,但在男生和女生之间没有发现才华刻板印象的差异(p = .517)。我们还测试了“才华刻板印象影响职业兴趣”这一因果论断。在职业兴趣方面存在较大的性别差异(如护理)(β = 0.73 CI95 [0.48, 0.98], t = 5.68, p <;措施,科学家/工程师(β=−0.61 CI95(−0.88−0.35),t =−4.60,p & lt;措施)。尽管如此,才华刻板印象与职业兴趣没有任何关系(p值为0.523 ~ 0.999)。卓越刻板印象及其效应缺乏内在一致性和预测效度。
Boys are smart (and really dull and pretty average): Testing replication and validity of the Brilliance Stereotype
A Brilliance Stereotype associating high intellectual ability with men and not women with possible downstream impacts on interests or work has been reported. Here, we report five replications and extensions testing this finding (total N = 737). Studies 1 and 2 were direct replications and found no support for the male brilliance stereotype: Instead, 10-year-old boys and girls both chose own-gender targets as smartest. Study 3 tested stereotyping of the opposite of brilliance – being very dull. Contrary to the brilliance stereotype model, males were stereotyped as dull by both girls and boys (OR = 0.22, p < .001). Study 4 added additional validity checks, but no difference in brilliance stereotype was found between boys and girls (p = .517). We also tested the causal claim that brilliance stereotypes impact career interests. Large gender differences were found for occupational interests (e.g. nursing (β = 0.73 CI95 [0.48, 0.98], t = 5.68, p < .001, scientist/engineer (β = −0.61 CI95 [−0.88, −0.35], t = −4.60, p < .001). Despite this, the brilliance stereotype showed no relationship to any occupational interests (p-values 0.523 to 0.999). Brilliance stereotype, and effects of brilliance stereotype lack internal coherence and predictive validity.
期刊介绍:
Personality and Individual Differences is devoted to the publication of articles (experimental, theoretical, review) which aim to integrate as far as possible the major factors of personality with empirical paradigms from experimental, physiological, animal, clinical, educational, criminological or industrial psychology or to seek an explanation for the causes and major determinants of individual differences in concepts derived from these disciplines. The editors are concerned with both genetic and environmental causes, and they are particularly interested in possible interaction effects.