Literature DB >> 31308226

Girls' comparative advantage in reading can largely explain the gender gap in math-related fields.

Thomas Breda1,2, Clotilde Napp2,3.   

Abstract

Gender differences in math performance are now small in developed countries and they cannot explain on their own the strong underrepresentation of women in math-related fields. This latter result is however no longer true once gender differences in reading performance are also taken into account. Using individual-level data on 300,000 15-y-old students in 64 countries, we show that the difference between a student performance in reading and math is 80% of a standard deviation (SD) larger for girls than boys, a magnitude considered as very large. When this difference is controlled for, the gender gap in students' intentions to pursue math-intensive studies and careers is reduced by around 75%, while gender gaps in self-concept in math, declared interest for math or attitudes toward math entirely disappear. These latter variables are also much less able to explain the gender gap in intentions to study math than is students' difference in performance between math and reading. These results are in line with choice models in which educational decisions involve intraindividual comparisons of achievement and self-beliefs in different subjects as well as cultural norms regarding gender. To directly show that intraindividual comparisons of achievement impact students' intended careers, we use differences across schools in teaching resources dedicated to math and reading as exogenous variations of students' comparative advantage for math. Results confirm that the comparative advantage in math with respect to reading at the time of making educational choices plays a key role in the process leading to women's underrepresentation in math-intensive fields.

Entities:  

Keywords:  comparative advantage; gender gap; math-intensive fields; students’ achievement

Year:  2019        PMID: 31308226      PMCID: PMC6681723          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1905779116

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A        ISSN: 0027-8424            Impact factor:   11.205


  15 in total

1.  National hiring experiments reveal 2:1 faculty preference for women on STEM tenure track.

Authors:  Wendy M Williams; Stephen J Ceci
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-04-13       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Contrasting intellectual patterns predict creativity in the arts and sciences: tracking intellectually precocious youth over 25 years.

Authors:  Gregory Park; David Lubinski; Camilla P Benbow
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2007-11

3.  Diversity. Culture, gender, and math.

Authors:  Luigi Guiso; Ferdinando Monte; Paola Sapienza; Luigi Zingales
Journal:  Science       Date:  2008-05-30       Impact factor: 47.728

4.  Expectations of brilliance underlie gender distributions across academic disciplines.

Authors:  Sarah-Jane Leslie; Andrei Cimpian; Meredith Meyer; Edward Freeland
Journal:  Science       Date:  2015-01-16       Impact factor: 47.728

5.  Not lack of ability but more choice: individual and gender differences in choice of careers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.

Authors:  Ming-Te Wang; Jacquelynne S Eccles; Sarah Kenny
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2013-03-18

6.  The Science of Sex Differences in Science and Mathematics.

Authors:  Diane F Halpern; Camilla P Benbow; David C Geary; Ruben C Gur; Janet Shibley Hyde; Morton Ann Gernsbacher
Journal:  Psychol Sci Public Interest       Date:  2007-08-01

7.  Gender Wage Disparities among the Highly Educated.

Authors:  Dan A Black; Amelia Haviland; Seth G Sanders; Lowell J Taylor
Journal:  J Hum Resour       Date:  2008

8.  Trends in gender segregation in the choice of science and engineering majors.

Authors:  Allison Mann; Thomas A Diprete
Journal:  Soc Sci Res       Date:  2013-07-15

9.  Feeding the pipeline: Gender, occupational plans, and college major selection.

Authors:  Stephen L Morgan; Dafna Gelbgiser; Kim A Weeden
Journal:  Soc Sci Res       Date:  2013-04-08

10.  The More Things Change, the More They Stay the Same? Examining Gender Equality in Prior Achievement and Entry into STEM College Majors over Time.

Authors:  Catherine Riegle-Crumb; Barbara King; Eric Grodsky; Chandra Muller
Journal:  Am Educ Res J       Date:  2012-12-01
View more
  3 in total

1.  Gender stereotypes can explain the gender-equality paradox.

Authors:  Thomas Breda; Elyès Jouini; Clotilde Napp; Georgia Thebault
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2020-11-23       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  "Where will I belong more?": The role of belonging comparisons between STEM fields in high school girls' STEM interest.

Authors:  Jenny Veldman; Colette Van Laar; Dustin B Thoman; Carolien Van Soom
Journal:  Soc Psychol Educ       Date:  2021-08-30

3.  Gender differences in the pathways to higher education.

Authors:  Gijsbert Stoet; David C Geary
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2020-06-08       Impact factor: 11.205

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.