Did Descriptive and Prescriptive Norms About Gender Equality at Home Change During the COVID-19 Pandemic? A Cross-National Investigation.

Using data from 15 countries, this article investigates whether descriptive and prescriptive gender norms concerning housework and child care (domestic work) changed after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Results of a total of 8,343 participants (M = 19.95, SD = 1.68) from two comparable student samples suggest that descriptive norms about unpaid domestic work have been affected by the pandemic, with individuals seeing mothers' relative to fathers' share of housework and child care as even larger. Moderation analyses revealed that the effect of the pandemic on descriptive norms about child care decreased with countries' increasing levels of gender equality; countries with stronger gender inequality showed a larger difference between pre- and post-pandemic. This study documents a shift in descriptive norms and discusses implications for gender equality-emphasizing the importance of addressing the additional challenges that mothers face during health-related crises.

Investigating Cortisol in a STEM Classroom: The Association Between Cortisol and Academic Performance.

Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education can be stressful, but uncertainty exists about (a) whether stressful academic settings elevate cortisol, particularly among students from underrepresented racial/ethnic groups, and (b) whether cortisol responses are associated with academic performance. In four classes around the first exam in a gateway college STEM course, we investigated participants' (N = 271) cortisol levels as a function of race/ethnicity and tested whether cortisol responses predicted students' performance. Regardless of race/ethnicity, students' cortisol, on average, declined from the beginning to the end of each class and across the four classes. Among underrepresented minority (URM) students, higher cortisol responses predicted better performance and a lower likelihood of dropping the course. Among non-URM students, there were no such associations. For URM students, lower cortisol responses may have indicated disengagement, whereas higher cortisol responses may have indicated striving. The implication of cortisol responses can depend on how members of a group experience an environment.

Does the follow-your-passions ideology cause greater academic and occupational gender disparities than other cultural ideologies?

Five preregistered studies (N = 1934) demonstrate that the prevalent U.S. ideology to "follow your passions" perpetuates academic and occupational gender disparities compared to some other cultural ideologies. Study 1 shows that the follow-your-passions ideology is commonly used by U.S. students in making academic choices. Studies 2-5 find that making the follow-your-passions ideology salient causes greater academic and occupational gender disparities compared to the resources ideology (i.e., the idea that one should pursue a field that leads to high income and job security). In Study 4, the follow-your-passions ideology causes greater gender disparities even when compared to a cultural ideology that aligns more with the female gender role (i.e., communal ideology). In Study 5, a moderated mediation analysis supports the hypothesis that gender disparities are explained by women's versus men's greater tendency to draw upon female role-congruent selves when the follow-your-passions ideology is salient compared to when the resources ideology is salient. Drawing upon female role-congruent selves remains a significant mediator even when accounting for alternative mediators (e.g., appropriateness of ideology for one's gender). The follow-your-passions ideology may not seem explicitly gendered, but it causes greater academic and occupational gender disparities compared to some other cultural ideologies. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Do Diversity Awards Discourage Applicants From Marginalized Groups From Pursuing More Lucrative Opportunities?

Four studies reveal that offering diversity awards (i.e., awards for applicants from marginalized groups) has unintentionally negative implications for equity. Across the four studies, applicants from marginalized groups were more likely to select the more lucrative award when two unrestricted awards were offered (Study 1: adults from racial groups underrepresented in U.S. colleges who were recruited from Amazon Mechanical Turk, N = 168; Studies 2-4: college women, N range = 152-628). However, the presence of a less lucrative diversity award caused applicants to apply for and prioritize diversity awards over more lucrative unrestricted awards. Fit, or how much applicants felt the award was for someone like them, mediated their increased likelihood of applying for diversity awards over unrestricted awards. These findings suggest that diversity awards may inadvertently siphon applicants from marginalized groups out of application pools for unrestricted awards. Greater examination of unrestricted awards is needed to increase their attractiveness and fit, especially in instances when diversity awards are also offered.

Leveraging cultural differences to promote educational equality.

This paper theorizes that academic interventions will be maximally effective when they are culturally grounded. Culturally grounded interventions acknowledge cultural differences and validate multiple cultural models in a given context. This review highlights the importance of considering culture in academic interventions and draws upon the culture cycle framework to provide a blueprint for those interested in building more efficacious interventions. Specifically, the paper reviews literature in education and psychology to argue: first, when working-class and racial minority students' cultural models are not valued in mainstream academic domains, these students underperform; and second, many current academic interventions intended to improve working-class and racial minority students' academic outcomes could be further enhanced by cultural grounding.

An Exploratory Investigation of Social Stigma and Concealment in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis.

OBJECTIVE: We conducted a preliminary investigation into dimensions of stigma and their relation to disease concealment in a sample of American adults living with multiple sclerosis (MS). METHODS: Fifty-three adults with MS in the United States completed an online survey assessing anticipated, internalized, and isolation stigma, as well as concealment. RESULTS: Responses to all the scales were relatively low, on average, but above scale minimums (P < .001). Ratings of isolation stigma and concealment were highest. Anticipated stigma strongly predicted concealment. CONCLUSIONS: Many adults living with MS may be concerned that they will be the target of social stigma because of their illness. These concerns are associated with disease concealment. More research is needed to investigate how MS stigma and concealment may be independent contributors to health in patients with MS.