Does Stereotype Threat Deteriorate Academic Performance of High School Students With Learning Disabilities? The Buffering Role of Psychological Disengagement

Stress, resilience, and emotional well-being in children and adolescents with specific learning disabilities

This article reviews the prevalence of stress and explores resilience factors in children and adolescents with specific learning disabilities (SLDs). We show that the increased stress and emotional challenges faced by this group are likely due to societal pressures and stigma. Recent findings on neuroendocrine changes in this population are discussed, suggesting a predisposition to psychiatric disorders. This review advocates for a societal shift towards the neurodiversity paradigm, which recognizes SLDs as natural variations in brain function, emphasizing individual strengths and promoting a more inclusive approach that values cognitive diversity. Such advocacy is likely important to combat stress and stigma in those with SLDs. This article also reviews recent work identifying resilience-promoting factors, such as perception of self and peer/teacher relationships, for enhancing emotional well-being and mental health for children and adolescents with SLD.

A Systematic Review of the Consequences of Stigma and Stereotype Threat for Individuals With Specific Learning Disabilities

Exposure to stigma and stereotype threat is detrimental for numerous marginalized groups. Research has demonstrated that individuals with specific learning disabilities (SLDs) are vulnerable to stigmatization. The purpose of this systematic review was to summarize the studies investigating associations between SLD-related stigma and stereotype threat and psychological and academic outcomes in individuals with SLDs, as well as examine the overall effect size of these associations across studies. A total of 16 studies met inclusion criteria-12 studies (52 effect sizes) examined SLD stigma with psychological adjustment or academic outcomes, and six studies (eight effect sizes) examined SLD stereotype threat. Greater SLD stigma scores had a medium-sized and significant correlation with less self-esteem across nine effect sizes (r = -.39, p = .002). Other outcomes were not powered enough for meta-analyses, although studies generally showed that greater SLD stigma and stereotype threat was related to less optimal psychological adjustment. These results suggest that these negative experiences should be a target of intervention and support efforts for individuals with SLDs. The associations between SLD stigma and stereotype threat and academic performance outcomes were comparatively more heterogeneous and less robust. These findings highlight the need for more research on SLD-related stigma and stereotype threat.

How the term “white privilege” affects participation, polarization, and content in online communication

The language used in online discussions affects who participates in them and how they respond, which can influence perceptions of public opinion. This study examines how the term white privilege affects these dimensions of online communication. In two lab experiments, US residents were given a chance to respond to a post asking their opinions about renaming college buildings. Using the term white privilege in the question decreased the percentage of whites who supported renaming. In addition, those whites who remained supportive when white privilege was mentioned were less likely to create an online post, while opposing whites and non-whites showed no significant difference. The term also led to more low-quality posts among both whites and non-whites. The relationship between question language and the way participants framed their responses was mediated by their support or opposition for renaming buildings. This suggests that the effects of the term white privilege on the content of people’s responses is primarily affective. Overall, mention of white privilege seems to create internet discussions that are less constructive, more polarized, and less supportive of racially progressive policies. The findings have the potential to support meaningful online conversation and reduce online polarization.