The Role of Self-Efficacy and Identity in Mediating the Effects of STEM Support Experiences

We report results from two studies testing the Mediation Model of Research Experiences (MMRE), which posits that science (or engineering) self-efficacy and identity as a scientist (or engineer) mediate the association between support programs and students' commitment to science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) careers. Study 1 included 502 matriculated and recently graduated undergraduate STEM students. Structural equation modeling analyses indicated that research experience, instrumental mentoring, and involvement in a community of scientists were associated with commitment to a STEM career, mediated through science/engineering self-efficacy and identity as a scientist/engineer. There were few interactions with ethnicity and none with gender. In Study 2, 63 undergraduate students in science/engineering support programs were surveyed with a similar instrument at the beginning and end of their programs. Pre-post analyses indicated that increases over time in community involvement were associated with increases in science/engineering self-efficacy, and increases over time in science/engineering identity were associated with increased commitment to a STEM career. Taken together, these two studies show the importance of psychological processes such as identity and self-efficacy in understanding the specific ways in which science/engineering support programs lead to enhanced commitment to a career in STEM among white and underrepresented minority undergraduate students.

Research mentoring and scientist identity: insights from undergraduates and their mentors

BACKGROUND

Mentored research apprenticeships are a common feature of academic outreach programs that aim to promote diversity in science fields. The current study tests for links between three forms of mentoring (instrumental, socioemotional, and negative) and the degree to which undergraduates psychologically identify with science. Participants were 66 undergraduate-mentor dyads who worked together in a research apprenticeship. The undergraduate sample was predominantly composed of women, first-generation college students, and members of ethnic groups that are historically underrepresented in science.

RESULTS

Findings illustrated that undergraduates who reported receiving more instrumental and socioemotional mentoring were higher in scientist identity. Further, mentors who reported engaging in higher levels of negative mentoring had undergraduates with lower scientist identity. Qualitative data from undergraduates' mentors provided deeper insight into their motivation to become mentors and how they reason about conflict in their mentoring relationships.

CONCLUSIONS

Discussion highlights theoretical implications and details several methodological recommendations.

Connections Between the Ivory Tower and the Multicolored World: Linking Abstract Theories of Social Justice to the Rough and Tumble of Affirmative Action

This article seeks to combine the social psychologist's interest in articulating and testing concepts with the public policymaker's interest in the effective implementation of specific policies and programs. The first part of the article applies knowledge about distributive and procedural justice to understanding some of the opposition to affirmative action. The application also reveals some lacunae—specifically concerning rule change—in how social psychologists have looked at procedural justice issues. In the second part of the article, we discuss the problem of rule change and propose a set of conceptualizations about the conditions that govern people's reactions to rule change. We end by reflecting on some changes in our studies of procedural justice.

White Guilt and Racial Compensation: The Benefits and Limits of Self-Focus

In two studies, the authors investigated guilt as a response to group-based advantage. Consistent with its conceptualization as a self-focused emotion, White guilt was based in self-focused beliefs in racial inequality. Thus, guilt was associated with belief in White privilege (Study 1) and resulted from seeing European Americans as perpetrators of racial discrimination (Study 2). Just as personal guilt is associated with efforts at restitution, White guilt was predictive of support for affirmative action programs aimed at compensating African Americans. White guilt was not, however, predictive of support for noncompensatory efforts at promoting equality, such as affirmative action programs that increase opportunities (Study 2). In contrast, the other-focused emotion of group-based sympathy was a more general predictor of support for different affirmative action policies. Our findings demonstrate the benefits and limits of group-based guilt as a basis of support for social equality and highlight the value of understanding the specific emotions elicited in intergroup contexts.

Fragments of Wholeness

Breaking the Mold: Women, Men, and Time in the New Corporate World, Lotte Bailyn. New York: Free Press, 1993. 189 pp., $22.95., ISBN: 0-02-901281-3.

The Dynamics of Service: Reflections on the Changing Nature of Customer/Provider Interactions, Barbara A. Gutek. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1995. 304 pp., $29.95, ISBN: 0-7879-0101-6.

The Perceived Importance of Developmental Relationships on Women Undergraduates' Pursuit of Science

Using a survey of women science majors, we tested the assumption that women mentors and other women guides help women students pursue the sciences. The survey explicitly distinguished among three types of guides: mentors (who provide psychosocial support), sponsors (who provide instrumental support), and role models (who act as examples) encountered before and during college. We found that over 90% of the women had a guide of one type or another, that mentors were most influential to women's pursuit of science, and that guides during college were more influential than guides prior to college. Participants reported having more female than male guides overall, but that some of the most influential guides were men.

Organization of Information and the Detection of Gender Discrimination

This report examines several factors that influence the detection of gender discrimination in organizations We presented subjects with information about the qualifications and salaries of women and men in 10 departments of a hypothetical company The information was created so that one or the other gender was undercompensated relative to its qualifications Subjects rated the fairness of salaries and recalled the average qualifications of the women and men Ordinal inequity, which occurred when the gender with the better qualifications received a lower salary within a department, was easily detected Discrimination that did not violate ordinal equity within a department was more difficult to detect The results indicate that the way information is presented to subjects influences the processing of the information and the ease with which unfairness is perceived In addition, subjects judged the discrimination to be more unfair when women, rather than men, were disadvantaged

Understanding Affirmative Action

Affirmative action is a controversial and often poorly understood policy. It is also a policy that has been widely studied by social scientists. In this review, we outline how affirmative action operates in employment and education settings and consider the major points of controversy. In addition, we detail the contributions of psychologists and other social scientists in helping to demonstrate why affirmative action is needed; how it can have unintended negative consequences; and how affirmative action programs can be most successful. We also review how psychologists have examined variations in people's attitudes toward affirmative action, in part as a means for testing different theories of social behavior.

White guilt and racial compensation: the benefits and limits of self-focus

In two studies, the authors investigated guilt as a response to group-based advantage. Consistent with its conceptualization as a self-focused emotion, White guilt was based in self-focused beliefs in racial inequality. Thus, guilt was associated with belief in White privilege (Study 1) and resulted from seeing European Americans as perpetrators of racial discrimination (Study 2). Just as personal guilt is associated with efforts at restitution, White guilt was predictive of support for affirmative action programs aimed at compensating African Americans. White guilt was not, however, predictive of support for noncompensatory efforts at promoting equality, such as affirmative action programs that increase opportunities (Study 2). In contrast, the other-focused emotion of group-based sympathy was a more general predictor of support for different affirmative action policies. Our findings demonstrate the benefits and limits of group-based guilt as a basis of support for social equality and highlight the value of understanding the specific emotions elicited in intergroup contexts.

Trends in the social psychological study of justice

Justice is one of the most basic and potentially important social psychological areas of inquiry. The assumption that others will be fair is what makes social cooperation possible. This article provides a brief review of trends, both historical and current, in the social psychological study of justice, and provides an introduction for a special issue of Personality and Social Psychology Review devoted to social psychological theorizing and research on the role that justice plays in human affairs. This overview highlights some exciting new directions in justice theorizing and research, including new uses of identity's ties to justice reasoning, increased attention to negative justice and moral emotion, as well as a greater emphasis on integrative and contingent, rather than competing, social psychological models of justice.

Affirmative action. Psychological data and the policy debates

The authors bring psychological research to bear on an examination of the policy of affirmative action. They argue that data from many studies reveal that affirmative action as a policy has more benefits than costs. Although the majority of pro-affirmative action arguments in the social sciences stress diversity, the authors' argument focuses on issues of merit. The merit-based argument, grounded in empirical studies, concludes that the policy of affirmative action conforms to the American ideal of fairness and is a necessary policy.