Does the follow-your-passions ideology cause greater academic and occupational gender disparities than other cultural ideologies?

Abstract

Five preregistered studies (N = 1934) demonstrate that the prevalent U.S. ideology to “follow your passions” perpetuates academic and occupational gender disparities compared to some other cultural ideologies. Study 1 shows that the follow-your-passions ideology is commonly used by U.S. students in making academic choices. Studies 2–5 find that making the follow-your-passions ideology salient causes greater academic and occupational gender disparities compared to the resources ideology (i.e., the idea that one should pursue a field that leads to high income and job security). In Study 4, the follow-your-passions ideology causes greater gender disparities even when compared to a cultural ideology that aligns more with the female gender role (i.e., communal ideology). In Study 5, a moderated mediation analysis supports the hypothesis that gender disparities are explained by women’s versus men’s greater tendency to draw upon female role-congruent selves when the follow-your-passions ideology is salient compared to when the resources ideology is salient. Drawing upon female role-congruent selves remains a significant mediator even when accounting for alternative mediators (e.g., appropriateness of ideology for one’s gender). The follow-your-passions ideology may not seem explicitly gendered, but it causes greater academic and occupational gender disparities compared to some other cultural ideologies.

Feeling joy × feeling competent: Predicting math-related occupational aspirations from math grades, gender, and parents’ occupational background via motivational beliefs.

“…In contrast, female participants had lower intentions of pursuing STEM careers relative to male participants when a “follow your passion” ideology was indicated. The “follow your passion” ideology refers to the belief that “occupational choices should be determined by one’s strong interests, preferences, and positive feelings” (Siy et al, 2023, p. 2), which means that the perceived intrinsic value of a subject or occupation is more influential. As gender differences in intrinsic value have been observed repeatedly (e.g., Lazarides & Lauermann, 2019), including in the present study, another path to reducing gender differences may be to deemphasize this ideology and discuss other arguments for or against occupational options when advising youth (e.g., job security).…”

“…Interestingly, gender differences in intrinsic value may be particularly harmful when students believe that they should "follow their passion" in their career (Siy et al, 2023). Siy et al (2023) showed experimentally that when following a resource ideology that focuses on job security and income, male and female participants indicated equal (hypothetical) intentions of pursuing STEM careers. In contrast, female participants had lower intentions of pursuing STEM careers relative to male participants when a "follow your passion" ideology was indicated.…”

“Who’s Better at Math, Boys or Girls?”: Changes in Adolescents’ Math Gender Stereotypes and Their Motivational Beliefs from Early to Late Adolescence

“…The current findings suggest that adolescence is a period characterized by changes in math ability stereotype beliefs and that individuals' more traditional beliefs may emerge by late adolescence and persist well into adulthood. Gender stereotypes about math, paired with cultural values that emphasize "following your passions", may result in adolescents relying on stereotypes to choose majors and careers, resulting in STEM gender gaps [61]. However, it is important to note that although math gender stereotypes moved toward being more traditional for all racial/ethnic groups, Black and Latina girls did not hold traditional stereotypes in late adolescence.…”