Sex Differences in Math-Intensive Fields

Ceci, Stephen J.; Williams, Wendy M.

doi:10.1177/0963721410383241

Cited by 237 publications

(219 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

203

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Although we feel that more nuanced research needs to be done to truly understand whether stereotype threat impacts girls' mathematics performance, we also believe that too much focus on this one explanation may deter researchers from investigating other key factors that may be involved in gender differences in mathematics performance. For example, there are a number of factors (e.g., mathematics anxiety, mathematics interest, spatial skills; see Ceci & Williams, 2010) that have been shown to be consistently related to mathematics performance and mathematics-and science-related career choices and may warrant more research attention than does stereotype threat.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

An examination of stereotype threat effects on girls’ mathematics performance.

Ganley¹,

Mingle²,

Ryan³

et al. 2013

Developmental Psychology

110

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Stereotype threat has been proposed as 1 potential explanation for the gender difference in standardized mathematics test performance among high-performing students. At present, it is not entirely clear how susceptibility to stereotype threat develops, as empirical evidence for stereotype threat effects across the school years is inconsistent. In a series of 3 studies, with a total sample of 931 students, we investigated stereotype threat effects during childhood and adolescence. Three activation methods were used, ranging from implicit to explicit. Across studies, we found no evidence that the mathematics performance of school-age girls was impacted by stereotype threat. In 2 of the studies, there were gender differences on the mathematics assessment regardless of whether stereotype threat was activated. Potential reasons for these findings are discussed, including the possibility that stereotype threat effects only occur in very specific circumstances or that they are in fact occurring all the time. We also address the possibility that the literature regarding stereotype threat in children is subject to publication bias.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

An examination of stereotype threat effects on girls’ mathematics performance.

Ganley¹,

Mingle²,

Ryan³

et al. 2013

Developmental Psychology

110

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although acknowledging that various lifestyle choices likely contribute to the gender imbalance in science (9)(10)(11), the present research is unique in investigating whether faculty gender bias exists within academic biological and physical sciences, and whether it might exert an independent effect on the gender disparity as students progress through the pipeline to careers in science. Specifically, the present experiment examined whether, given an equally qualified male and female student, science faculty members would show preferential evaluation and treatment of the male student to work in their laboratory.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some research suggests that these lifestyle choices (whether free or constrained) likely contribute to the gender imbalance (9)(10)(11), but because the majority of these studies are correlational, whether lifestyle factors are solely or primarily responsible remains unclear. Still, some researchers have argued that women's preference for nonscience disciplines and their tendency to take on a disproportionate amount of child-and family-care are the primary causes of the gender disparity in science (9)(10)(11), and that it "is not caused by discrimination in these domains" (10). This assertion has received substantial attention and generated significant debate among the scientific community, leading some to conclude that gender discrimination indeed does not exist nor contribute to the gender disparity within academic science (e.g., refs.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students

Moss‐Racusin

Dovidio²,

Brescoll

et al. 2012

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

2,460

1,878

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite efforts to recruit and retain more women, a stark gender disparity persists within academic science. Abundant research has demonstrated gender bias in many demographic groups, but has yet to experimentally investigate whether science faculty exhibit a bias against female students that could contribute to the gender disparity in academic science. In a randomized double-blind study ( n = 127), science faculty from research-intensive universities rated the application materials of a student—who was randomly assigned either a male or female name—for a laboratory manager position. Faculty participants rated the male applicant as significantly more competent and hireable than the (identical) female applicant. These participants also selected a higher starting salary and offered more career mentoring to the male applicant. The gender of the faculty participants did not affect responses, such that female and male faculty were equally likely to exhibit bias against the female student. Mediation analyses indicated that the female student was less likely to be hired because she was viewed as less competent. We also assessed faculty participants’ preexisting subtle bias against women using a standard instrument and found that preexisting subtle bias against women played a moderating role, such that subtle bias against women was associated with less support for the female student, but was unrelated to reactions to the male student. These results suggest that interventions addressing faculty gender bias might advance the goal of increasing the participation of women in science.

show abstract

“…Despite widespread support for equality [1], women and many racial and ethnic minorities are under-represented in academia relative to their proportion in the general population [2]. Numerous studies have uncovered evidence for historical and continuing gender-and ethnicity-based differences in academia, attributed to various causes such as innate differences between the sexes [3], differences in career goals and interests [4][5][6], and explicit and implicit bias against female or minority academics [7][8][9]. The scale of these differences and their quantifiable impact on the demographic composition of academia remain controversial [10 -13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Leaks in the pipeline: separating demographic inertia from ongoing gender differences in academia

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Identification of the causes underlying the under-representation of women and minorities in academia is a source of ongoing concern and controversy. This is a critical issue in ensuring the openness and diversity of academia; yet differences in personal experiences and interpretations have mired it in controversy. We construct a simple model of the academic career that can be used to identify general trends, and separate the demographic effects of historical differences from ongoing biological or cultural gender differences. We apply the model to data on academics collected by the National Science Foundation (USA) over the past three decades, across all of science and engineering, and within six disciplines (agricultural and biological sciences, engineering, mathematics and computer sciences, physical sciences, psychology, and social sciences). We show that the hiring and retention of women in academia have been affected by both demographic inertia and gender differences, but that the relative influence of gender differences appears to be dwindling for most disciplines and career transitions. Our model enables us to identify the two key non-structural bottlenecks restricting female participation in academia: choice of undergraduate major and application to faculty positions. These transitions are those in greatest need of detailed study and policy development.

show abstract

Sex Differences in Math-Intensive Fields

Cited by 237 publications

References 18 publications

An examination of stereotype threat effects on girls’ mathematics performance.

An examination of stereotype threat effects on girls’ mathematics performance.

Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students

Leaks in the pipeline: separating demographic inertia from ongoing gender differences in academia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About