residing on a different Indian reservation than in Study 1,

the image, although positive and achievement related, was coupled with text that primed invisibility

In our conceptual framework, we draw on four theories: stereotype accessibility (Dijksterhuis & van Knippenberg, [15]; Kawakami, Dion, & Dovidio, [33]; Macrae, Mitchell, & Pendry, [39]), stereotype threat (Spencer, Steele, & Quinn, [62]; Steele, [65]; Steele & Aronson, [66]), social representation (Deaux & Philogène, [13]; Moscovici, [46], [47]), and social identity (Hogg & Abrams, [31]; Tajfel, [70]; Tajfel & Turner, [71]).

We suggest that American Indian mascots are harmful because they remind American Indians of the limited ways others see them and, in this way, constrain how they can see themselves.

American Indians, for example, are relatively invisible in mainstream media

sport team mascot names]

salient

Social representation theory focuses less on the bias and accuracy of the representations and more on their role as mechanisms in the establishment and maintenance of a common ground and/or a shared reality (Clark, [ 5]; Hardin & Higgins, [29]). Take Chief Illiniwek, the University of Illinois mascot, as an example. When the Chief paraded around the gym,[ 1] he communicated at least two kinds of meaning. His explicit goal was to generate enthusiasm for the game and to heighten hopes of impending victory. Implicitly, however, the Chief communicated and strengthened the association between the categories of "American Indian" and Hollywood's idea of an "American Indian chief," with particular emphasis on dress and ceremonial practices. Chief Illiniwek's performance provided a code for defining and identifying American Indians. It communicated to the audience, including those who identified as American Indian, that this is how an American Indian looks and acts. A social representation perspective considers both content and process, and as such suggests that the Chief could indeed convey pride and simultaneously a limited societal role for American Indians. In this way, the perspective suggests that the Chief could produce negative consequences for American Indians' sense of themselves.

If, however, the mascots are regarded as positive, then the expected effects are less certain. One might reasonably expect that positive stereotypes would have positive consequences, but research suggests that this supposition is not always accurate. Fiske and colleagues (Glick & Fiske, [25]; Fiske, Cuddy, Glick, & Xu, [18]) found, for example, that seemingly positive stereotypes of women, such as affectionate and warm, are also associated with the view of women as less competent, and thus can serve to subordinate women. Similarly, when the positive "model minority" stereotype was invoked to explain the superior performance of Asian Americans in mathematics, Asian American students, when compared to those not exposed to the stereotype, were more likely to "choke" under the pressure of these high expectations (Cheryan & Bodenhausen, [ 4]). In these cases, positive stereotypes also have negative effects.

In a composite week of U.S. prime-time television in 1996, no American Indian television characters were identified

Four studies examined the consequences of American Indian mascots and other prevalent representations of American Indians on aspects of the self-concept for American Indian students. When exposed to Chief Wahoo, Chief Illinwek, Pocahontas, or other common American Indian images, American Indian students generated positive associations (Study 1, high school) but reported depressed state self-esteem (Study 2, high school), and community worth (Study 3, high school), and fewer achievement-related possible selves (Study 4, college). We suggest that American Indian mascots are harmful because they remind American Indians of the limited ways others see them and, in this way, constrain how they can see themselves