“I’m Not a Science Nerd!”

Abstract

Stereotypes reduce women's identification with science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM), which can decrease their motivation to enter STEM domains. Stereotypes may be gender-based (e.g., STEM is for men) or trait-based (e.g., STEM is for geniuses). In this study, I explored two primary research questions: First, would stereotyping STEM as a domain for nerdy geniuses negatively relate to women's STEM identity? Second, would STEM identity mediate the relation between stereotypes and STEM motivation? Nerd-genius stereotypes and gender stereotypes negatively contributed to women's STEM identity. STEM identity positively contributed to women's STEM motivation (including expectancy-value beliefs). Participants were a diverse sample of undergraduate women (N ¼ 195, mean age was 19.8; 30% of participants were Latina, 30% European, 24% Asian). Stereotype measures were (1) implicit gender-STEM associations, (2) explicit gender associations about STEM, and (3) a new scale that measured nerd-genius stereotypes. The results highlight the unique contribution different stereotypes make toward women's identification with STEM and, in turn, their motivation to pursue STEM pathways. Practice implications include addressing nerd-genius stereotypes in STEM interventions and reducing classroom artifacts that might be reminiscent of these stereotypes.

A Single-Item Measure for Assessing STEM Identity

“…Consistent with Starr's (2018) rationale for assessing STEM typicality, Carlone and Johnson (2007) made the strong case that students from under-represented groups in science fields may be especially likely to struggle with feeling that they are recognized by others as belonging to a field of science professionals. In their qualitative analysis of science identity, Carlone and Johnson proposed that, in order for individuals to have a strong science identity, they must feel (1) confident that they have (or are capable of acquiring) the knowledge necessary to understand science concepts (i.e., competence), (2) confident in their ability to showcase their science skills in public settings (i.e., performance), and (3) that othersparticularly those within the scientific community-recognize their competence and performance (i.e., recognition).…”

“…This approach to social identity can be broadly construed as identity centrality (Leach et al, 2008). However, other research has suggested that social identity is multi-faceted, and includes a facet of typicality (referred to as self-stereotyping by Leach et al, 2008;Starr, 2018). This perspective recognizes that two elements are essential for developing a social identity: (1) seeing oneself as a member of the group, and (2) feeling that the members of the group accept you as a member (Kim et al, 2018).…”

“…match those of a highly identified professional, because otherwise students tend to assume a higher level of identification development than is warranted based on their actual characteristics. Starr (2018) suggested that a focus on typicality may be especially important when people possess stereotypes about a group that do not match their own self-concept -such as an African American female student who possesses the stereotype that scientists are White men.…”

“…However, qualitative approaches are of limited utility to assess the effectiveness of large-scale interventions aimed at increasing science identity. Efforts to quantify the construct have resulted in a number of author-generated and adapted measures of science identity, most of which have not been validated (e.g., Young et al, 2013;Starr, 2018). As research continues to grow in this area, it is important to develop measures that are validated and which can promote consistency of measurement across research samples.…”

The Influence of New Socio-Cultural Environment on Self-Esteem in Connection with Physique Traits in the Group of International Students in Russia

“…We suppose that these results manifest two currently widespread gender stereotypes. One of them is associated with the ideas about intellectual superiority of males compared with females (Gálvez et al 2019;Starr 2018).…”