Esmaeel Saemi , Laura Gray , Sara Jalilinasab , Ebrahim Moteshareie , Maxime Deshayes
{"title":"Cognitive dual-task does not annihilate the negative effects of gender stereotype threat on girls' motor learning","authors":"Esmaeel Saemi , Laura Gray , Sara Jalilinasab , Ebrahim Moteshareie , Maxime Deshayes","doi":"10.1016/j.psychsport.2024.102771","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Stereotype threat, a key concept in social psychology, occurs when individuals fear they may confirm negative stereotypes about their social group (Steele, 1997). This phenomenon can significantly impair motor learning, particularly in children. Given the robust nature of stereotype threat, research it is now focused on mitigating these negative effects. According to the explicit monitoring hypothesis, it is suggested that distracting individual’s attention can lead to an annihilation of stereotype threat effects, however, to date, this hypothesis has not been examined in children. The present study examined the effect of stereotype threat in a dual task condition on children’s motor learning. One hundred and fifty girls (mean age = 10.96 ± .80 years) were randomly assigned into 3 groups; 1- explicit gender stereotype threat; 2- explicit gender stereotype threat + dual task; 3- control. The task consisted of a soccer-kicking task in which the participants had to score the most points by kicking the soccer ball towards the goals on the wall. This study included three phases; 1- pretest (10 trials); 2- practice phase (5 blocks of 10 trials); 3- retention test (10 trials). During the practice phase, the results indicated that participants in the control condition performed better (M = 1.46, SD = .19) than participants in the gender stereotype threat condition (M = 1.25, SD = .16, p < .001), and, than participants in the gender stereotype threat + dual task paradigm condition (M = .92, SD = .19, p < .001). However, participants in the gender stereotypes + dual task paradigm condition performed worse than participants in the gender stereotype threat condition (p < .001). In addition, the results of the retention test showed that participants in the control condition performed better (M = 1.51, SD = .34) than participants in the gender stereotype threat condition (M = 1.24, SD = .35, p = .001), and participants in the gender stereotype threat + dual task paradigm condition (M = 1.15, SD = .49, p < .001). In conclusion, these results do not support the potential neutralizing effect of a cognitive dual task in a stereotype threat condition in children.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54536,"journal":{"name":"Psychology of Sport and Exercise","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychology of Sport and Exercise","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1469029224001821","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HOSPITALITY, LEISURE, SPORT & TOURISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Stereotype threat, a key concept in social psychology, occurs when individuals fear they may confirm negative stereotypes about their social group (Steele, 1997). This phenomenon can significantly impair motor learning, particularly in children. Given the robust nature of stereotype threat, research it is now focused on mitigating these negative effects. According to the explicit monitoring hypothesis, it is suggested that distracting individual’s attention can lead to an annihilation of stereotype threat effects, however, to date, this hypothesis has not been examined in children. The present study examined the effect of stereotype threat in a dual task condition on children’s motor learning. One hundred and fifty girls (mean age = 10.96 ± .80 years) were randomly assigned into 3 groups; 1- explicit gender stereotype threat; 2- explicit gender stereotype threat + dual task; 3- control. The task consisted of a soccer-kicking task in which the participants had to score the most points by kicking the soccer ball towards the goals on the wall. This study included three phases; 1- pretest (10 trials); 2- practice phase (5 blocks of 10 trials); 3- retention test (10 trials). During the practice phase, the results indicated that participants in the control condition performed better (M = 1.46, SD = .19) than participants in the gender stereotype threat condition (M = 1.25, SD = .16, p < .001), and, than participants in the gender stereotype threat + dual task paradigm condition (M = .92, SD = .19, p < .001). However, participants in the gender stereotypes + dual task paradigm condition performed worse than participants in the gender stereotype threat condition (p < .001). In addition, the results of the retention test showed that participants in the control condition performed better (M = 1.51, SD = .34) than participants in the gender stereotype threat condition (M = 1.24, SD = .35, p = .001), and participants in the gender stereotype threat + dual task paradigm condition (M = 1.15, SD = .49, p < .001). In conclusion, these results do not support the potential neutralizing effect of a cognitive dual task in a stereotype threat condition in children.
期刊介绍:
Psychology of Sport and Exercise is an international forum for scholarly reports in the psychology of sport and exercise, broadly defined. The journal is open to the use of diverse methodological approaches. Manuscripts that will be considered for publication will present results from high quality empirical research, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, commentaries concerning already published PSE papers or topics of general interest for PSE readers, protocol papers for trials, and reports of professional practice (which will need to demonstrate academic rigour and go beyond mere description). The CONSORT guidelines consort-statement need to be followed for protocol papers for trials; authors should present a flow diagramme and attach with their cover letter the CONSORT checklist. For meta-analysis, the PRISMA prisma-statement guidelines should be followed; authors should present a flow diagramme and attach with their cover letter the PRISMA checklist. For systematic reviews it is recommended that the PRISMA guidelines are followed, although it is not compulsory. Authors interested in submitting replications of published studies need to contact the Editors-in-Chief before they start their replication. We are not interested in manuscripts that aim to test the psychometric properties of an existing scale from English to another language, unless new validation methods are used which address previously unanswered research questions.