Experiment: The Dumb Jock

There were ii groups in their experiment. The experimental group was receptive to hints of negative stereotypes through a questionnaire to begin with the examination while the control was open(a) to the negative stereotypes after the raise. The questionnaire brought to their attention the chess opening that they may gravel been tending(p) additional treatment and considerations due to the fact that they be athletes. Somehow, the experiment proved that there is a negative correlation between the scene of the athletes to negative stereotypes and their performance in pickings tribulations.More exposure to negative stereotypes brought depressioner loads while slight exposure to these stereotypes brought higher(prenominal) scores. For the experimental group, it is possible that answering the questionnaire that undefend equal to(p) them to the dumb suspensor stereotype lower their self-regard that lead them to getting low test results. The questionnaire gave them the idea that they ar and real in the university because of their athletic skills and non because of their academic skills.With this kind of thinking, they might have exerted less effort in nswering the questions of the test because they do non believe that they get out get a high grade. He might probably think that the societys expectations regarding his test scores wont be high and that he, himself, is led to believe that he is accepted in the university as an athlete rather than a student. Similar to the placebo effect, the subject immerses himself to the popular flavor and concept of a dumb assistant that might have led him to betray the test unconsciously when he was given the idea through the questionnaire.The dumb Jock stereotype probably started when the pack playacting sanitary in thletics ruleed to be less educated because they spend most of their term honing their athletic abilities rather than their mental abilities. Because of this, people expected less from these athletes and these athletes tend to flummox unto mediocrity and expect special considerations because of their situation. I think the athletes, themselves, try to fit their definition to the societys norms. This observation came from years of experience in an NCAA school where a large muckle of the population is comprised of athletes.Although IVe seen some who perform well n academics and athletics, it can non be denied that there are lots of student-athletes who refuse to exert much effort into their academics scarce because they think it is not expected of them to do so. In my chivalric school, they nave tried to explain to us like a shot there are several kinds ot smarts and that each and every one of us simply has our own fortes. I think that whats authoritative is that they are reminded that they are good students who happen to play for the school and not athletes who are required to study while they play.Not solely does this straighten their focus, notwithstanding the y are too given the idea that they are accepted as a student not as an athlete. There were instances wherein prestigious schools spurned great athletes not because they werent good seemly in their field of sports but because they werent able to pass the entrance examination. It is important for them to sleep with that they are in their position not entirely because of their athletic prowess but because they are students first and that representing the school comes second.