Shifting Standards Model Research Articles

Shifting Standards When Judging Male and Female Majority and Minority Students’ Non-Suitability for the Academic Track?

Abstract: Because tracking recommendations can be impactful for students’ educational paths, it is important to understand how they may be influenced by students’ social group memberships. The Shifting Standards Model predicts that teachers show both negative and positive biases toward students belonging to stereotyped groups, and that this depends on the framing of the context. In a 2 (student’s ethnicity: Turkish vs. German) × 2 (student’s gender: male vs. female) × 2 (standard: minimum vs. confirmatory) between-subjects design, n = 185 student teachers indicated how much evidence of learning-detrimental behavior they needed to see from a student before suspecting vs. being certain (minimum vs. confirmatory standards) that the student was not suitable for the academic track. The predictions of the Shifting Standards Model were unexpectedly not supported. We discuss these results in relation to the usefulness of parsimonious theoretical arguments as well as an intersectional analysis of tracking recommendations.

(Men)tal health: Perceptions of depression in men and women

Despite evidence indicating that depression is prevalent in men, gender stereotypes persist that position the disorder as feminine. This misperception may contribute to men's underdiagnosis with and undertreatment for depression. We applied the shifting standards model (SSM) to advance predictions about gender differences in the evaluation of individuals described as experiencing depression. These predictions took the form of objective and subjective evaluations, as well as minimum and confirmatory standards. We randomly assigned participants (N = 430) in a 3 (target gender: man, woman, control) x 2 (judgment standards: minimum, confirmatory) between-subjects experiment. Participants read a vignette describing a woman, man, or individual of unspecified gender and provided the evidence they would need to suspect or confirm depression in the target individual consistent with minimum and confirmatory judgment standards. Results from the pilot and main studies indicate more gender similarities than differences. We discuss the findings with respect to the SSM and how the increase in mental health salience during the COVID-19 pandemic may have mitigated gender stereotypical views of depression.

Choosing sides: CEO gender and investor support for activist campaigns.

Recent evidence suggests that female-led firms are more likely to be targeted by activist investors. We examine how Chief Executive Officer (CEO) gender influences retail investors' responses to proxy contests. We find that these investors are more likely to support-through their proxy voting behavior-campaigns that target female-led versus male-led firms, despite the fact that retail investors evaluate female and male CEOs similarly. We show that this apparent discrepancy is a function of how subjective ratings mask stereotype-influenced judgments, consistent with the shifting standards model (SSM). Respondents use lower standards to evaluate female versus male CEOs. This difference becomes apparent when externally-anchored judgments are employed, such as when investors are asked to choose sides in a proxy contest. Correspondingly, activists are judged as relatively more competent when targeting female-led firms. Our findings contribute to research on CEO gender and activism. In doing so, our research also introduces the SSM to the investor decision-making literature, thereby enriching the discussion about what mechanisms underpin the less favorable investment outcomes female-led firms can experience. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

When ethnic minority students are judged as more suitable for the highest school track: a shifting standards experiment

When students are grouped into school tracks, this has lasting consequences for their learning and later careers. In Germany to date, some groups of students (boys, ethnic minority students) are underrepresented in the highest track. Stereotypes about these groups exist that entail negative expectations about their suitability for the highest track. Based on the shifting standards model, the present research examines if and how stereotypes influence tracking recommendations. According to this theory, members of negatively stereotyped groups will be judged more leniently or more strictly depending on the framing of the judgment situation (by inducing minimum or confirmatory standards). N = 280 teacher students participated in a vignette study in which they had to choose the amount of positive evidence for suitability they wanted to see before deciding to recommend a fictitious student to the highest track. A 2 (judgment standard: minimum vs. confirmatory) × 2 (target student’s gender: male vs. female) × 2 (target student’s ethnicity: no migration background vs. Turkish migration background) between-subjects design was used. No effects of target gender occurred, but the expected interaction of target’s ethnicity and judgment standard emerged. In the minimum standard condition, less evidence was required for the ethnic minority student to be recommended for the highest track compared to the majority student. In the confirmatory standards condition, however, participants tended to require less evidence for the ethnic majority student. Our experiment underlines the importance of the framing of the recommendation situation, resulting in a more lenient or stricter assessment of negatively stereotyped groups.

Using the shifting standards model of stereotype‐based judgments to examine the impact of race on compensation decisions

AbstractThe Shifting Standards Model (SSM) of stereotypic judgments is presented as a model of implicit bias that produces a psychological mechanism contributing to continued racial wage disparities. The SSM is used to explain race‐based differences in subjective evaluations of compensation decisions. We report three experimental studies in which research participants made compensation decisions for either a White or Black employee. Across three studies, participants judged a Black employee's raise as subjectively better than a comparably described White employee's raise. Participants who work in Human Resources fields (Study 3) and those with experience making compensation decisions (Study 2) were as likely as other participants to show evidence of the shifting standards effect. The findings are discussed in the context of individual implicit biases contributing to continued wage disparities and potential organizational practices to ameliorate these influences.

The influence of gender on the evaluation of anorexia nervosa

A stereotype exists that anorexia nervosa (AN) is a "female" disorder. As a result, men with AN may face harsher stigmatization from their peers or go undiagnosed. The shifting standards model provides a framework to explore how gender stereotypes impact perceptions of AN. Participants (N = 438) were given a vignette of a person with symptoms of AN labeled as either male or female. Assessments were experimentally manipulated according to the shifting standards perspective: participants were asked if they were concerned (or convinced) that the target had AN and then indicated the severity of behavioral symptoms (calorie reduction, pounds lost per week, and hours of exercise) needed to make them concerned (or convinced) of AN. Participants were more likely to state that the male target had AN compared to the female target (p = .036) whereas women were more likely to believe an individual had AN than men, regardless of the target gender (p < .001). In addition, men required that the male target have more severe symptoms to assign an AN diagnosis than women (p = .005). In general, severity ratings for symptoms were quite high, indicating a normalization of unhealthy weight loss practices. These results confirm that gender affects the perception of AN, though they do not conform to expectations within the shifting standards model. Instead, they suggest that a male target is more readily identified as having AN than a female target with AN when exhibiting identical symptoms.

Socioeconomic status is not judged equally: Target race shifts standards in interpersonal judgments of SES

AbstractAcross three studies, respondents made SES judgments of targets varying in Race (White or Black) and SES (Low or High), including global subjective SES, financial success, and educational attainment. As Whites and Blacks are stereotypically associated with upper and lower SES, respectively, the Shifting Standards Model (SSM) of stereotype judgments predicted the pattern of interpersonal objective and subjective judgments. In Study 1, in a between‐subjects design, respondents rated Black targets significantly higher on subjective measures than White targets, even as the targets were rated as comparable on objective measures. Study 2 replicated these effects with a broader range of stimulus materials. In Study 3, the shifting standards effect was replicated using a within‐subjects design, further supporting the effect. The findings support the application of the SSM to race‐based shifts in interpersonal judgments of SES and are discussed regarding their implications for intergroup relations and workplace evaluations.

Leveling the Playing Field? Perspectives and Observations of Coed Intramural Flag Football Modifications

Although sport is regarded as a bastion of male hegemony, coed settings offer females the opportunity to compete alongside males. Coed environments, however, often include rule modifications that intend to facilitate female participation, which promote female inferiority assumptions. This study sought to critique modifications in the divisive world of coed flag football through the lens of benevolent sexism and the shifting standards model. Observational field notes and interview data gathered over a season revealed that the equity perceived to be legislated by rule modifications was overshadowed by negative outcomes, as modifications perpetuated stereotypes and reinforced an environment of male domination. We discuss the ubiquity of male superiority beliefs within coed flag football and implications of the unintended consequences of rule modifications.

An experimental investigation into judgment and behavioral implications of disability‐based stereotypes in simulated work decisions: Evidence of shifting standards

AbstractWe investigated the explanatory relevance of the shifting standards model to the role of employee disability in two simulated organizational processes: (a) job performance appraisal and (b) resource allocation. Two experimental studies found evidence of the shifting standards effect—employees with and without a disability received similar ratings when subjective judgment standards were employed, but those without a disability received significantly higher performance ratings than their counterparts with a disability when rated with objective standards. Furthermore, the analysis of the ranking process on the dimension of deservingness of limited resources yielded evidence that disability‐related stereotypes can differentially affect perceptions of deservingness through the allocation of organizational resources.

Group-Based Biases in Moral Judgment: The Role of Shifting Moral Standards

Moral judgments are often biased against members of groups stereotyped as immoral (e.g., gay men, African Americans). We propose that these biases can be influenced by the framing of moral judgments. Building on the shifting standards model, we hypothesized that minimum (vs. confirmatory) standards judgments, which may elicit lower expectations for groups stereotyped as immoral, would induce people to make more lenient moral judgments for these groups. Furthermore, we predicted that people higher in Social Dominance Orientation, who tend to express negative attitudes toward stigmatized groups, would be more likely to demonstrate such group-based biases in moral judgments. Across three studies, framing judgments in terms of minimum (vs. confirmatory) standards influenced moral judgments regarding gay (vs. straight) men and Black (vs. White) men, and this effect was observed primarily among higher-SDO participants. However, leading people to develop a more expansive circle of moral regard eliminated these group-based moral biases.

The Impact of Social Roles on Trait Judgments

Consistent with social role theory's assumption that the role behavior of men and women shapes gender stereotypes, earlier experiments have found that men's and women's occupancy of the same role eliminated gender-stereotypical judgments of greater agency and lower communion in men than women. The shifting standards model raises the question of whether a shift to within-sex standards in judgments of men and women in roles could have masked underlying gender stereotypes. To examine this possibility, two experiments obtained judgments of men and women using measures that do or do not restrain shifts to within-sex standards. This measure variation did not affect the social role pattern of smaller perceived sex differences in the presence of role information. These findings thus support the social role theory claim that designations of identical roles for subgroups of men and women eliminate or reduce perceived sex differences.

Gender Bias in Leader Selection? Evidence from a Hiring Simulation Study

The present research investigated factors that might affect gender discrimination in a hiring simulation context from the perspectives of social role theory and the shifting standards model. Specifically, the experimental study investigated whether gender biases are evident in the screening and hiring stage of the personnel selection process depending on the applicants’ social role and evaluators’ gender. A sample of German undergraduate business students (54 women, 53 men) was asked to make a personnel selection decision (short-listing or hiring) about a fictitious applicant (man or woman) in a specific role (leader or non-leader) for a managerial position. Consistent with social role theory’s assumption that social role information is more influential than gender information, participants selected applicants described as leaders over applicants described as non-leaders, regardless of applicant gender. In addition, in the presence of role information, female applicants portrayed as leaders were similarly short-listed and hired as male applicants with the same credentials. In the absence of role information, female applicants were similarly short-listed as male applicants; however, male applicants were hired over female applicants, albeit by male participants only. This is consistent with the shifting standards model’s assumption that group members are held to a higher standard to confirm traits on which they are perceived to be deficient: Male participants hired female applicants portrayed as non-leaders with less certainty than their male counterparts possibly due to higher confirmatory standards for leadership ability in women than men. The research and practice implications of these results are discussed.

Sexual Double Standards: Bias in Perceptions of Cyber-Infidelity

The current study compared the predictions of two socio-cultural theories, shifting standards and intergroup bias, to predict sexual double standards that occur in reactions to computer-mediated infidelity. Shifting standards theory (Biernat In The shifting standards model: Implications of stereotype accuracy for social judgment, APA, Washington DC, 1995) suggests that individuals will judge female targets more harshly than male targets, based on culturally ingrained stereotypes regarding sexual behavior. On the contrary, intergroup bias theory (Brewer In Psychol Bull 86:307–324, 1979) predicts that individuals will judge outgroup targets, or members of the opposite sex, more harshly than ingroup targets, or members of the same sex. Participants were shown a hard copy of presumable evidence that extradyadic computer-mediated behavior had occurred, engaged in by one of two members of a couple. The two groups differed only by the sex of the target, the female “Colleen” or the male “Bill”. Then participants reported their attitudes toward the target’s behavior, resulting distress, and likelihood to terminate the relationship. Results showed support for the intergroup bias theory, suggesting that individuals altered their attitudes toward the behavior based on whether the target was an ingroup or outgroup member.

Workforce Segregation and the Gender Wage Gap: Is “Women's” Work Valued as Highly as “Men's”?1

This study focuses on gender segregation and its implications for the salaries assigned to male- and female-typed jobs. We used a between-subjects design to examine whether participants would assign different pay to 3 types of jobs wherein the actual responsibilities and duties carried out by men and women were the same, but the job was situated in either a traditionally masculine or traditionally feminine domain. We found pay differentials between jobs defined as “male” and “female,” which suggest that gender-based discrimination, arising from occupational stereotyping and the devaluation of the work typically done by women, influences salary allocation. The ways in which the results fit with contemporary theorizing about sexism and with the shifting standards model (Biernat, 1995, 2003) are discussed.

Translating subjective language in letters of recommendation: the case of the sexist professor

AbstractLetters of recommendation typically use subjective language that is open to interpretation. In three studies, participants “translated” letters of recommendation for female and male applicants written by sexist, anti‐sexist, or “control” professors. Predictions were based on the shifting standards model [Biernat, Manis, &amp; Nelson, 1991], the attributional principle of augmentation [Kelley, 1971, and models of “correction” for contamination [e.g., Wilson &amp; Brekke, 1994]. Participants translated equivalent letters as indicating lesser ability in female than male applicants, particularly when the letter writer was described as sexist, but own impressions of the candidate diverged from those of the sexist writer. Differential standard use and attributional augmentation did not appear to be responsible for these effects. Instead, writer sexism triggered dislike and corrective processes in impression formation. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd.

Mothers and Fathers in the Workplace: How Gender and Parental Status Influence Judgments of Job‐Related Competence

We investigated the influence of gender and parental status on employment decisions. The shifting standards model predicts that parenthood polarizes judgments of women and men such that mothers are held to stricter employment standards than fathers. Social role theory predicts that parenting role, rather than gender, guides judgments of mothers and fathers. One hundred ninety‐six undergraduates at two universities evaluated a job applicant; the applicant was either male or female and was either single or married with two children. Results showed that parents were judged less agentic and less committed to employment than non‐parents. Parental status also interacted with gender, indicating that fathers were held to more lenient standards than mothers and childless men. We discuss theoretical and practical implications.

Race, Color-Blind Racial Attitudes, and Judgments About Mental Health: A Shifting Standards Perspective.

A fictitious counseling center intake report was given to a sample of 158 White graduate students in counseling and clinical psychology to examine the impact of reported client race (Black or White) on perceptions of clients' symptom severity. As predicted by the shifting standards model of social judgment (M. Biernat, M. Manis, & T. E. Nelson, 1991), participants judged the Black target to be significantly less symptomatic than the White target. After controlling for social desirability (measured as motivation to respond without prejudice; E. A. Plant & P. G. Devine, 1998), a significant interaction effect showed that color-blind racial attitudes (H. A. Neville, R. L. Lilly, G. Duran, R. M. Lee, & L. Browne, 2000) were positively related to symptom perception for the Black target but not the White target. The shift in assessment (rating the Black target more favorably than an identical White target) was more evident for participants with lower levels of color-blind attitudes. Implications for counseling and future research are discussed.

Stereotypes and Shifting Standards: Some Paradoxical Effects of Cognitive Load

Four studies tested a prediction derived from the shifting‐standards model (Biernat, Manis, &amp; Nelson, 1991) regarding the role stereotypes play in judgments of individual group members. Previous research has documented that stereotyping effects are stronger on objective than on subjective response scales, and the present studies found that these effects were intensified when participants were under heavy cognitive load. Stereotyping effects increased on objective judgment scales, but decreased on subjective scales. The latter is a paradoxical effect: By relying on stereotypes, one may increasingly use them as within‐category comparative standards, which leads to the apparent reduction of stereotyping effects.

Toward a broader view of social stereotyping.

Stereotyping effects are typically considered to be assimilative in nature: A member of a group stereotyped as having some attribute is judged to have more of that attribute than a member of some comparison group. This article highlights the fact that stereotyping effects can also occur in the direction of contrast--or even null effects-- depending on the nature and form of the outcome being assessed (from the researcher's perspective, the dependent variable of interest). Relying on theory and research from the shifting standards model (M. Biernat, M. Manis, & T. F. Nelson, 1991), this review highlights the different ways in which and the factors that determine how stereotypes influence judgment and behavior toward individual group members.

Processes in Racial Discrimination: Differential Weighting of Conflicting Information

The present research explored how White college students may exhibit response patterns associated with a subtle and rationalizable contemporary bias, aversive racism. In the study, higher and lower prejudice-scoring participants evaluated applicants for admission to their university, for whom information about high school achievement and college board scores (aptitude and achievement test scores) was independently varied as strong or weak. As predicted, discrimination against Black applicants relative to White applicants did not occur when the credentials were consistently strong or weak; however, discrimination by relatively high prejudice-scoring participants did emerge when the credentials were mixed and hence ambiguous. Moreover, relatively high prejudice-scoring participants weighed the different, conflicting criteria in ways that could justify or rationalize discrimination against Black applicants. The implications of these data for understanding contemporary racism and their relation to the shifting standards model of bias are considered.