The cost of social influence: Own-gender and gender-stereotype social learning biases in adolescents and adults.

Pervasive gender gaps in academic subject and career choices are likely to be underpinned by social influences, including gender stereotypes of competence in academic and career domains (e.g., men excel at engineering, women excel at care), and model-based social learning biases (i.e., selective copying of particular individuals). Here, we explore the influence of gender stereotypes on social learning decisions in adolescent and adult males and females. Participants (Exp 1: N = 69 adolescents; Exp 2: N = 265 adults) were presented with 16 difficult multiple-choice questions from stereotypically feminine (e.g., care) and masculine (e.g., engineering) domains. The answer choices included the correct response and three incorrect responses paired with a male model, a female model, or no model. Participants' gender stereotype knowledge and endorsement were measured, and adolescents (Exp. 1) listed their academic subject choices. As predicted, there was a bias towards copying answers paired with a model (Exp.1: 74%, Exp. 2: 65% ps < .001). This resulted in less success than would be expected by chance (Exp. 1: 12%, Exp. 2: 16% ps < .001), demonstrating a negative consequence of social information. Adults (Exp 2) showed gender stereotyped social learning biases; they were more likely to copy a male model in masculine questions and a female model in feminine questions (p = .012). However, adolescents (Exp 1) showed no evidence of this stereotype bias; rather, there was a tendency for male adolescents to copy male models regardless of domain (p = .004). This own-gender bias was not apparent in female adolescents. In Exp 1, endorsement of masculine stereotypes was positively associated with selecting more own-gender typical academic subjects at school and copying significantly more male models in the male questions. The current study provides evidence for the first time that decision-making in both adolescence and adulthood is impacted by gender biases.

Investigating Effectiveness and Predicting Outcome and Dropout From Systems Training for Emotional Predictability and Problem Solving for Emotional Intensity Difficulties (STEPPS EI) in UK Primary Care.

Systems Training for Emotional Predictability and Problem Solving (STEPPS) for borderline personality disorder (BPD) has been adapted for a primary care setting into a 13-week group treatment for emotional intensity difficulties (STEPPS EI). This is the first study to examine the effectiveness and potential outcome and dropout predictors of STEPPS EI in a primary care setting. Severity of BPD, depression, and anxiety symptoms were measured pre- and postintervention for 148 participants. Treatment completers showed improvements in depression, anxiety, and BPD symptoms with medium to large effect sizes. A predictor of symptom improvement was higher baseline severity for each of the symptom measures. Attending a psychoeducational group prior to STEPPS EI was associated with lower odds of dropout. The findings support the use of STEPPS EI in a primary care setting, with the potential to alleviate the burden from other local services.