Abstract
This paper explores a social psychology study that reports on results from research conducted on negative stereotypes and the effects it has on certain types of people. The study focuses on the phenomenon social psychologist call the “stereotype threat” or the concern of being at risk of confirming a negative stereotype about one’s social group (Stone et al., 1999). Similar studies have shown that when people are confronted with negative stereotypes about their social identity they tend to perform poorly on a task. On the other hand people tend to do well on tasks when the threat to their social identity is not present. This paper examines Stone’s, Sjomeling’s, Lynch’s and Darley’s experiment focused on whether traditionally non-stigmatized groups such as white college students would also experience distress when their social identity is threatened.

Stereotype Threat
The anxiety or concern of confirming negative stereotypes about one’s social group in any situation is referred to as the stereotype threat by social psychologist. Ever since it was first introduce by psychologist Claude Steele, the stereotype threat has become one of the most researched topics in the field of psychology, academics, and recently in athletics. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to critically analyze the study: “Stereotype Threat Effects on Black and White Athletic Performance,” conducted by Jeff Stone, Mike Sjomeling, Christian Lynch, and John Darley. The second experiment in the study focused on whether traditionally non-stigmatized groups such as white college students would also experience distress when their social identity is threatened by racial negative stereotypes.
The nature of generalized stereotypes among black and white athletic performance dates back to the 1800’s and continues to be a heated debate among social scientist, coaches, sportswriters, etc. Historically, people made the assumption that if black athletes performed well in sports it was because they had better physical endowment and if white athletes performed well in sports it was due to superior sports intelligence (Stone et al., 1999). Other explanations that were referenced in the study to why black and white athleticism differs included the nature versus nurture debate. According to a reference in the study, the average black athlete possesses superior physical athletic abilities due to the genetic material of the fittest that was passed down from generations that endured enslavement” (1999). The other side of argument was the traditional proposed 1970’s theory that whites have superior intellectual then blacks (1999). Such attributions between black and white athletes have been depicted in sports films such as “White Men Can’t Jump.”
The assumptions of athletic performance between whites and blacks have caused our society to hold certain racial stereotypes directed towards athletes. As reported by Stone et al., (1999) the available data from studies conducted on racial athletic stereotypes suggest that; “white participants rated black athletes significantly less academically prepared, less intelligent, and more temperamental while black participants rated white athletes as significantly less competitive and as exhibiting less athletic ability.” The evidence that is available also reflects the negative and positive racial stereotypes portrayed by some people and the sports media. The positive sports attribute perceived for white athletes includes their intelligence and “harder working” regiment. While their negative sport attribute is the lack of natural athletic ability. In contras the positive sports attribute perceived for black athletes includes their natural athletic physical abilities and the negative sport attribute is the lack of intelligence (1999).
The study states that it is not currently known whether the racial stereotyped beliefs influence how athletes perceive themselves. Thus, the study conducted by Stone and colleagues attempts to provide an insight into the disruptive consequences and anxiety behaviors created by racial stereotypes among certain athletes (1999). The researchers evaluated the concept of the stereotype threat, suggesting that reminders of a negative stereotype about racial identity can prevent athletes from performing at their highest possible level. In the second experiment the researchers predicted that if a negative stereotype about white athletes were made salient during the sport task, they would become concern over confirming the stereotype. Therefore, the racial stereotype would cause the white participants performance to suffer. Detail description of the concepts that were present in the study included the participation of 104 white college students from the University of Arizona who participated for partial course credit. The participants were recruited on the basis of their athleticism and golf experience. A self-rating measure was used to collected data for a mass pretesting participant pool. Those individuals that reported playing no more than one round of golf and scored their athleticism above the 50th percentile were selected to participate in the study. The white participants were exposed to a manipulated situation in which they had to complete an eight hole golf course built in a laboratory. Another concept present in the study was the use of a straight forward manipulation. Some of the participants were provided with a “plausible external attribution” to address any arousals created by the high threat of the experiment. The random participants were provided with letters stating that the laboratory had recently been remodel and the participant needed to note any emotional feelings created by the renovation. Randomized participants completed the golf task under a high-threat or “natural athletic ability frame” and other under a low-threat meaning a “golf sport test” (1999). In this case the researchers used self-report measures such as a pre-test and post-test questionnaire packet that included questions pertaining to anxiety levels on a rating scale of one to four; with four being the high level of anxiety. Another measure used in the experiment was a self-attribution questionnaire pertaining to athletic performance and environmental impact factors experienced in the laboratory golf course. The design of the experiment was a 2x2x2 factorial design, in which it had three variables and each of three variables included two measures, with the primary dependent measure being the performance on the golf test. The design measures included 2 (athletic disengagement: engaged vs. disengaged), x 2 (test frame: high threat vs. low threat) x 2 (misattribution: high vs. low). The study included the concept of debriefing the participants in the experiment but did not provide specific information how the participants were debriefed. The study did state that because of the debriefing process the number of participants was lowered to 94 because eight of the participants expressed suspicions about the validity of the experiment and two participants were eliminated because they failed to complete several of the posttest measures. As predicted by the researchers, the white athletes most negatively affected by the threat of confirming a negative stereotype about their natural athletic ability were those whose self-worth was contingent upon the outcome of their athletic performance (p