The Stereotyped Task Engagement Process: The Role of Interest and Achievement Motivation Jessi L. Smith Montana State University Carol Sansone and Paul H. White University of Utah Competence-based stereotypes can negatively affect women’s performance in math and science (referred to as stereotype threat), presumably leading to lower motivation. The authors examined the effects of stereotype threat on interest, a motivational path not necessarily mediated by performance. They predicted that working on a computer science task in the context of math– gender stereotypes would negatively affect undergraduate women’s task interest, particularly for those higher in achievement motivation who were hypothesized to hold performance-avoidance goals in response to the threat. Compared with when the stereotype was nullified, while under stereotype threat an assigned perfor- mance-avoidance (vs. -approach) goal was associated with lower interest for women higher in achieve- ment motivation (Study 1), and women higher (vs. lower) in achievement motivation were more likely to spontaneously adopt performance-avoidance goals (Study 2). The motivational influence of perfor- mance-avoidance goals under stereotype threat was primarily mediated by task absorption (Study 3). Implications for the stereotyped task engagement process (Smith, 2004) are discussed. Keywords: achievement motivation, achievement goals, motivation, stereotype threat, gender Women continue to be less likely to select and persist in science, mathematics, and related fields despite gains in preparation and increased requirements for both girls and boys prior to college. A number of hypotheses have been proposed as to why these gender differences occur, including both biological limitations and social- ization pressures (e.g., Eccles, Adler, & Meece, 1984). The focus of our research is on the role competence-based stereotypes may play. Whether or not there are real intrinsic ability differences between men and women in math and science (e.g., Benbow & Stanley, 1980; Mullis et al., 1998; Spelke, 2005), stereotypes about these differences exist and are frequently made salient (e.g., com- ments by Summers, as cited in the Harvard Crimson, 2005). 1 The stereotype threat literature is centered on the finding that awareness of a competence-related stereotype can, in and of itself, lead to poorer task performance (e.g., Smith & White, 2002; Spencer, Steele, & Quinn, 1999; C. M. Steele & Aronson, 1995; Yopyk & Prentice, 2005; see also Wicherts, Dolan, & Hessen, 2005). Members of stereotyped groups feel threatened because their performance may confirm to themselves, other people, or both the negative performance expectations about the group. The resulting negative effects on performance can occur even when women report that they do not believe the stereotypes are true (cf. Schmader, Johns, & Barquissau, 2004). As illustrated on the left side of Figure 1, the stereotype–per- formance path suggests negative competence-based stereotypes associated with women in math and science lead directly to an impairment of their performance (e.g., Shih, Pittinsky, & Ambady, 1999; Smith & White, 2002; Spencer et al., 1999), which, in turn, negatively affect their likelihood of selecting or persisting in the stereotyped domain (e.g., Crocker, Major, & Steele, 1998). The majority of stereotype threat research to date has focused almost exclusively on performance or anticipated performance as the main outcome of study (e.g., Inzlicht & Ben-Zeev, 2003; Smith & White, 2002; Stangor, Carr, & Kiang, 1998; C. M. Steele & Aronson, 1995; cf. Schmader et al., 2004; Smith & Johnson, 2006; Wicherts et al., 2005). A focus on performance outcomes, although important, misses a critical issue. That is, even when performance is high, a person’s motivation to choose or persist at a task may be affected by stereotypes in the situation (e.g., Bleeker & Jacobs, 2004; Seymour & Hewitt, 1997). Certainly, repeated negative performance outcomes may contribute to lower motivation to select or persist in math- and science-related tasks, but we believe that there are potential alternative pathways between knowledge of competence-related stereotypes and negative motivational out- comes (Schmader et al., 2004). In the next sections, we review the stereotyped task engagement process (STEP), whether and how the 1 While addressing the National Bureau of Economic Research, Law- rence Summers (President of Harvard University) stated, “in the special case of science and engineering, there are issues of intrinsic aptitude [between men and women], and particularly of the variability of aptitude, and . . . those considerations are reinforced by what are in fact lesser factors involving socialization and continuing discrimination” (comments by Sum- mers, as cited in the Harvard Crimson, 2005). Jessi L. Smith, Department of Psychology, Montana State University; Carol Sansone and Paul H. White, Department of Psychology, University of Utah. A portion of this project was supported by a Spencer Foundation American Education Research Association Fellowship awarded to Jessi L. Smith. Data collection was made possible by an invaluable team of research assistants. We are grateful to Andrew Elliot, Kathleen Fuegen, Carol Werner, and Robert Arkin for their comments on a draft of the article. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Jessi L. Smith, Department of Psychology, Montana State University, 304 Trapha- gen Hall, Bozeman, MT 59717-3440. E-mail: jsismith@montana.edu Journal of Educational Psychology Copyright 2007 by the American Psychological Association 2007, Vol. 99, No. 1, 99 –114 0022-0663/07/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/0022-0663.99.1.99 99