Gendered beliefs about mathematics ability transmit across generations through children’s peers

Eble, Alex; Hu, Feng

doi:10.1038/s41562-022-01331-9

Cited by 20 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Specifically, we calculated two class-specific measures of the proportion of peers who believe that boys have innately superior abilities in math, one for girl peers and one for boy peers. As children with the same gender identity are more likely to interact in this age group, peers of the same gender should be more influential in transmitting beliefs than peers of different gender (Currarini et al, 2009; Eble & Hu, 2022). According to Models 4 and 5 in Table 1, same-gender peers’ beliefs had a smaller impact on math performance than beliefs of peers of a different gender.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Coinciding with the underrepresentation of women is the prevailing notion that men are inherently better than women at learning mathematics. This stereotypical belief persists in many countries despite the fact that women often perform as well as or better than men in K–12 math assessments (Eble & Hu, 2022; Gong et al, 2018; Jayachandran, 2015). The gender gap in STEM has clear unfavorable consequences: First, it is highly relevant to gender wage inequality in the workforce because STEM jobs tend to be more lucrative; second, it reflects the underutilization of talents in today’s increasingly high demand for STEM workers (Liu, 2018; Perry et al, 2012).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Adding Up Peer Beliefs: Experimental and Field Evidence on the Effect of Peer Influence on Math Performance

Cai

2023

Psychol Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We studied how gendered beliefs about intellectual abilities transmit through peers and differentially impact girls’ academic performance relative to boys’. Study 1 ( N = 8,029; 208 classrooms) exploited randomly assigned variation in the proportion of a child’s middle school classmates who believe that boys are innately better than girls at learning math. An increase in exposure to peers who report this belief generated losses for girls and gains for boys in math performance. This peer exposure also increased children’s likelihood of believing the gender–math stereotype, increased the perceived difficulty of math, and reduced aspirations among girls. Study 2 ( N = 547) provided proof of concept that activating a gender–math performance gap among college students reduces women’s math performance but not verbal performance. Men’s task performance was not affected. Our findings highlight how the prevalence of stereotypical beliefs in one’s ambient and peer environment, even when readily contradictable, can shape children’s beliefs and academic ability.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Adding Up Peer Beliefs: Experimental and Field Evidence on the Effect of Peer Influence on Math Performance

Cai

2023

Psychol Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Interventions under this barrier fell into roughly three categories: those that provided “girl‐friendly schools” and often a number of other amenities or program components (Bagby et al, 2017; Kazianga et al, 2012; Kazianga et al, 2019; Meller & Litschig, 2015); those that provided teacher training in participatory, learner‐centered pedagogies, and in one instance also included teacher support groups (Aber et al, 2017; Morrell et al, 2014); and those that assessed the effects of having female teachers (Asadullah & Chaudhury, 2013; Eble & Hu, 2019; Muralidharan & Sheth, 2013; Sukontamarn, 2005). Study quality was mixed: four studies had low risk of bias (Bagby et al, 2017; Eble & Hu, 2019; Muralidharan & Sheth, 2013; Sukontamarn, 2005), four had some concerns (Aber et al, 2017; Asadullah & Chaudhury, 2013; Kazianga et al, 2012; Kazianga et al, 2019; Meller & Litschig, 2015) and one had high risk of bias due primarily to the risk of confounding (Morrell et al, 2014). Nine studies (10 papers) provided estimates of effects on girls (GRADE Summary 1, Figure 4.5.1), and five studies (six papers) estimated the overall effect for girls and boys combined, and interactions by sex (GRADE Summary 2, Figure 4.5.2).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Policies and interventions to remove gender‐related barriers to girls' school participation and learning in low‐ and middle‐income countries: A systematic review of the evidence

Psaki

Haberland

Mensch

et al. 2022

Campbell Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Gender disparities in education continue to undermine girls' opportunities, despite enormous strides in recent years to improve primary enrolment and attainment for girls in low‐ and middle‐income countries (LMICs). At the regional, country and subnational levels gender gaps remain, with girls in many settings less likely to complete primary school, less likely to complete secondary, and often less likely to be literate than boys. The academic and policy literatures on the topic of gender‐related barriers to girls' education are both extensive. However, there remain gaps in knowledge regarding which interventions are most likely to work in contexts with different combinations of barriers. Objectives This systematic review identified and assessed the strength of the evidence of interventions and exposures addressing gender‐related barriers to schooling for girls in LMICs. Search Methods The AEA RCT Registry, Africa Bibliography, African Education Research Database, African Journals Online, DEC USAID, Dissertation Abstracts, EconLit, ELDIS, Evidence Hub, Global Index Medicus, IDEAS‐Repec, Intl Clinical Trials Registry, NBER, OpenGrey, Open Knowledge Repository, POPLINE, PsychINFO, PubMed, Research for Development Outputs, ScienceDirect, Sociological Abstracts, Web of Science, as well as relevant organization websites were searched electronically in March and April of 2019. Further searches were conducted through review of bibliographies as well as through inquiries to authors of included studies, relevant researchers and relevant organizations, and completed in March 2020. Selection Criteria We included randomized controlled trials as well as quasi‐experimental studies that used quantitative models that attempted to control for endogeneity. Manuscripts could be either published, peer‐reviewed articles or grey literature such as working papers, reports and dissertations. Studies must have been published on or after 2000, employed an intervention or exposure that attempted to address a gender‐related barrier to schooling, analyzed the effects of the intervention/exposure on at least one of our primary outcomes of interest, and utilized data from LMICs to be included. Data Collection and Analysis A team of reviewers was grouped into pairs to independently screen articles for relevance, extract data and assess risk of bias for each included study. A third reviewer assisted in resolving any disputes. Risk of bias was assessed either through the RoB 2 tool for experimental studies or the ROBINS‐I tool for quasi‐experimental studies. Due to the heterogeneity of study characteristics and reported outcome measures between studies, we applied the GRADE (Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach adapted for situations where a meta‐analysis is not possible to synthesize the research. Results Interventions rated as effective exist for three gender‐related barriers: inability to afford tuition and fees, lack of adequate food, and insufficient academic support. Promising inter...

show abstract

“…8 8 Recent research that exploit the same dataset and identification strategy include Eble and Hu (2020, 2022), Gong et al. (2019), Hu (2015, 2018), Huang and Zhu (2020), Xu et al.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Detailed discussion is available in footnote 28 on how responsive parenting could affect children's language development. For stronger spillover on Mathematics, one might think this could be related to beliefs on gender stereotypes of peer parents (Eble & Hu, 2022). However, we do not find evidence that high peer mother education would lead to a more gendered belief (i.e., male students are doing better than female students in math) of neither parents nor the student in the appendix Table A17.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding spillover of peer parental education: Randomization evidence and mechanisms

Chung

Zou

2023

Economic Inquiry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The educational background of peer parents is more than a proxy for peer quality. We utilize random classroom assignments in China middle schools to study the spillover of peer parental education on the student test score.Analyzing the China Education Panel Survey, we find a causal relationship between the average college attainment of classmates' mothers and a student's test score. Besides peer quality and teacher response, we identify the change in the mother's parenting style as a mediating factor. The parental responses (time, money, and parenting style) also differ by family background, leading to heterogeneous spillover on the test score.

show abstract

Gendered beliefs about mathematics ability transmit across generations through children’s peers

Cited by 20 publications

References 56 publications

Adding Up Peer Beliefs: Experimental and Field Evidence on the Effect of Peer Influence on Math Performance

Adding Up Peer Beliefs: Experimental and Field Evidence on the Effect of Peer Influence on Math Performance

Policies and interventions to remove gender‐related barriers to girls' school participation and learning in low‐ and middle‐income countries: A systematic review of the evidence

Understanding spillover of peer parental education: Randomization evidence and mechanisms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About