American universities are increasingly opening their doors to first-generation college students—students whose parents do not have a 4-year degree. Once admitted, however, these students tend to struggle academically compared to continuing-generation students—students who have at least one parent with a four-year degree. We propose a cultural mismatch theory that identifies one important source of this social class achievement gap. Four studies test the hypothesis that first-generation students underperform because the interdependent norms from their mostly working-class backgrounds constitute a mismatch with the middle-class independent norms prevalent in universities. First, to assess university cultural norms, surveys of university administrators revealed that American universities focus primarily on norms of independence. Second, to identify the hypothesized cultural mismatch, a longitudinal survey revealed that universities’ focus on independence does not match first-generation students' relatively interdependent motives for attending college, and further, that this cultural mismatch is associated with lower grades. Finally, two experiments at both private and public universities created a match or mismatch for first-generation students and examined the performance consequences. Together these studies revealed that representing the university culture in terms of independence (i.e., paving one’s own paths) rendered academic tasks difficult and thereby undermined first-generation students’ performance. Conversely, representing the university culture in terms of interdependence (i.e., being part of a community) reduced this sense of difficulty and eliminated the performance gap without adverse consequences for continuing-generation students. These studies address the urgent need to recognize cultural obstacles that contribute to the social class achievement gap and to develop interventions to address them.

Models of agency—powerful implicit assumptions about what constitutes normatively “good” action—shaped how observers and survivors made meaning after Hurricane Katrina. Study 1 analyzes how 461 observers perceived survivors who evacuated (Leavers) or stayed (Stayers) in New Orleans. Observers described Leavers positively—as agentic, independent, and in control—and Stayers negatively—as passive and lacking agency. Observers’ perceptions reflected the disjoint model of agency, prevalent in middle-class White contexts, which defines “good” actions as those that emanate from within the individual and proactively influence the environment. Study 2 examines interviews with 79 survivors, revealing that Leavers and Stayers relied upon divergent models of agency. Leavers emphasized independence, choice, and control, whereas Stayers emphasized interdependence, strength, and faith. Although both Leavers and Stayers exercised agency, observers failed to recognize Stayers’ agency and derogated them because observers assumed that being independent and in control was the only way to be agentic.