Shifting Standards Model

Concept and origins

Biernat and colleagues (1991) showed participants photos of men and women and asked them to estimate height. On objective units such as feet and inches, men were judged taller, revealing the stereotype. On subjective scales from very short to very tall, however, the difference shrank or disappeared, because women were judged relative to women and men relative to men. Biernat and Manis (1994) showed the phenomenon across stereotype domains such as competence, aggressiveness and athletic ability.

Minimum and ability standards

Biernat and Kobrynowicz (1997) showed that two standards operate at once for groups devalued by stereotypes, such as women for managerial posts or Black applicants. Because expectations are low, the standard for meeting minimum qualifications is lower; but more evidence is demanded before concluding that the person truly has ability, so that standard is higher. Biernat and Vescio (2002) reported in a softball team-selection task that female players received more praise for good plays but were passed over for men in actual selection, a mismatch between verbal evaluation and behavior.

Implications for measurement and organizational evaluation

Biernat (2003) argued that no difference on subjective ratings does not mean no stereotyping and that stereotype research should take a broader view of measurement. Biernat and colleagues (2010) showed that informal, subjective evaluation tools are more susceptible to shifting standards, with implications for designing performance appraisal. Biernat (2012) summarized that the model explains not only impression formation but also how impressions are communicated in words and reinterpreted. It is also used to understand discrimination that does not show on the surface, as in aversive racism.

FAQ

What is the shifting standards model in simple terms?

Because expectations differ by group, as in "good for a girl," the same praise can mean different actual levels for different groups.

Why is bias hard to see on subjective ratings?

Because each group is judged against its own standard, score differences look smaller, but they appear in objective units and actual choices.

Sources reviewed: 2026-10-26

References

1. Biernat, M., Manis, M., & Nelson, T. E. (1991). Stereotypes and standards of judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(4), 485–499. The founding demonstration of shifting standards.
2. Biernat, M., & Manis, M. (1994). Shifting standards and stereotype-based judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(1), 5–20. Extends the model across stereotype domains.
3. Biernat, M., & Kobrynowicz, D. (1997). Gender- and race-based standards of competence: Lower minimum standards but higher ability standards for devalued groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(3), 544–557. Lower minimum but higher confirmatory standards.
4. Biernat, M., & Vescio, T. K. (2002). She swings, she hits, she's great, she's benched: Implications of gender-based shifting standards for judgment and behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(1), 66–77. Praise vs. selection in a softball paradigm.
5. Biernat, M. (2003). Toward a broader view of social stereotyping. American Psychologist, 58(12), 1019–1027. Argues for a broader view of stereotyping.
6. Biernat, M., Fuegen, K., & Kobrynowicz, D. (2010). Shifting standards and the inference of incompetence: Effects of formal and informal evaluation tools. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36(7), 855–868. Formal vs informal evaluation tools and shifting standards.
7. Biernat, M. (2012). Stereotypes and shifting standards: Forming, communicating, and translating person impressions. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 1–59. A comprehensive review of the shifting standards model.