Women scientist role models on screen: A case study of contact

Science Communication

Volumn 21, Issue 2, 1999, Pages 111-136

  Steinke, Jocelyn ^a  

^a WESTERN MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0033235491     PISSN: 10755470     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1075547099021002002     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Baker, D., and R. Leary. 1995. Letting girls speak out about science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 32 (1): 3-27.
2. Bem, S. L. 1981. Gender schema theory: A cognitive account of sex typing. Psychological Review 88 (4): 354-64.
3. _. 1983. Gender schema theory and its implications for child development: Raising gender-aschematic children in a gender-schematic society. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 8 (4): 598-616.
4. _. 1993. The lenses of gender: Transforming the debate on sexual inequality. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
5. Bem, S. L., and E. Lenney. 1976. Sex typing and the avoidance of cross-sex behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 33 (1): 48-54.
6. Bielby, W. T. 1991. Sex differences in careers: Is science a special case? In The outer circle: Women in the scientific community, edited by H. Zuckerman, J. R. Cole, and J. T. Bruer, 171-87. New York: Norton.
7. Chambers, D. W. 1983. Stereotypic images of the scientists: The draw-a-scientist test. Science Education 67:255-65.
8. Cole, J. 1979. Fair science: Women in the scientific community. New York: Free Press.
9. Cole, J., and H. Zuckerman. 1991. Marriage, motherhood, and research performance in science. In The outer circle: Women in the scientific community, edited by H. Zuckerman, J. R. Cole, and J. T. Bruer, 157-70. New York: Norton.
10. Comstock, G., and H. Paik. 1991. Television and the American child. New York: Academic Press.
11. Contact, 1998. 162 mins. Burbank, CA: Warner Brothers.
12. Elena, A. 1997. Skirts in the lab: Madame Curie and the image of the woman scientist in the feature film. Public Understanding of Science 6:269-78.
13. Erwin, L., and P. Maurutto. 1998. Beyond access: Considering gender deficits in science education. Gender and Education 10 (1): 52-69.
14. Evans, M. A., M. Whigham, and M. C. Wang. 1995. The effect of role model project upon the attitudes of ninth-grade science students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 32 (2): 195-204.
15. Film Box Office Database. September 11, 1998. Film database. Retrieved from the World Wide Web: http://boxofficeguru.com/c2.htm
16. Hanson, S. L. 1996. Lost talent: Women in the sciences. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
17. Hoffner, C. 1996. Children's wishful identification and parasocial interaction with favorite television characters. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 40:389-402.
18. Humphreys, S. M. 1982. Effectiveness of science career conferences. In Women and minorities in science: Strategies for increasing participation, edited by S. M. Humphreys, 165-86. Boulder, CO: Westview.
19. Kahle, J. B., and M. K. Lakes. 1983. The myth of equality in science classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 20:131-40.
20. Kahle, J. B., L. H. Parker, L. J. Rennie, and D. Riley. 1993. Gender differences in science education: Building a model. Educational Psychologist 28:379-404.
21. Kelly, A., and B. Small. 1986. Sex stereotypes and attitudes to science among eleven-year-old children. British Journal of Educational Psychology 56:158-68.
22. LaFollette, M. C. 1981. Wizards, villains, and other scientists: The science content of television for children. Report prepared for Action for Children's Television, Newton, MA.
23. _. 1988. Eyes on the stars: Images of women scientists in popular magazines. Science, Technology, & Human Values 13 (3&4): 262-75.
24. _. 1990. Making science our own: Public images of science 1910-1955. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
25. Leslie, L. L., G. T. McClure, and R. L. Oaxaca. 1998. Women and minorities in science and engineering: A life sequence analysis. Journal of Higher Education 69 (3): 239-76.
26. Maoldomhnaigh, M. O., and A. Hunt. 1988. Some factors affecting the image of the scientist drawn by older primary school pupils. Research in Science and Technological Education 6 (2): 159-66.
27. Mason, C. L., and J. B. Kahle. 1988. Student attitudes toward science and science-related careers: A program designed to promote a stimulating gender-free learning environment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 26 (1): 25-39.
28. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. A study on the status of women faculty in science at MIT. Retrieved from the World Wide Web: http://www.web.mit.edu/fnl/women/ Fnlwomen.htm
29. Maytas, M. L. 1985. Obstacles and constraints on women in science: Preparation and participation in the scientific community. In Women in science: A report from the field, edited by J. B. Kahle, 77-101. Philadelphia: Falmer.
30. Mead, M., and R. Metraux. 1957. Image of the scientist among high-school students. Science 126:384-90.
31. Morse, M. 1995. Women changing science: Voices from a field in transition. New York: Insight Books.
32. National Center for Education Statistics. 1997. Integrated post secondary education data systems. Washington, DC: Department of Education.
33. National Science Foundation. 1996. Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering: 1996. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation [World Wide Web]. Available: http://www.nsf.gov/sbe/srs/nsf96311/start.htm.
34. _. 1999. Science and engineering degrees: 1966-1996 [Early Release Tables]. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation. Available on the World Wide Web: http://www.nsf. gov/sbe/srs/srs99408/start.htm
35. Nelkin, D. 1987. Selling science: How the press covers science and technology. New York: Freeman.
36. Pattatucci, A. M. 1998. Women in science: Meeting career challenges. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
37. Plait, P. 1998. Sagan's legacy: Astronomy shines in Contact. Astronomy 26 (4): 50.
38. Rayman, P., and B. Brett. 1993. Pathways for women in the sciences. Wellesley, MA: Center for Research on Women.
39. Schmidt, B. M., and R. M. Nixon. 1996. Improving girls' attitudes towards science. Public Understanding of Science 5:255-68.
40. Scripts on the Net. Retrieved from the World Wide Web: http://www.rosebud.com. br/scr_0. htm#C
41. Sonnert, G. 1995. Who succeeds in science? The gender dimension. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
42. Steinke, J. 1997. A portrait of a woman as a scientist: Breaking down barriers created by gender-role stereotypes. Public Understanding of Science 6:409-28.
43. Steinke, J., and M. Long. 1996. A lab of her own? Portrayals of female characters on children's educational science programs. Science Communication 18 (2): 91-115.
44. Tuchman, G. 1981. The symbolic annihilation of women by the mass media. In The manufacture of news, edited by S. Cohen and J. Young, 169-85. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
45. U.S. Department of Education. 1997. Findings from the Condition of Education 1997: Women in mathematics and science. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Available on the World Wide Web: http://www.nces.ed.gov/pubs97/97982.html
46. U.S. Department of Labor. 1996. Employment and earnings. Washington, DC: Department of Labor.
47. Vandervoort, F. S. 1985. Women's role in professional scientific organizations: Participation and recognition. In Women in science: A report from the field, edited by J. B. Kahle, 124-47. Philadelphia: Falmer.
48. Vockell, E. L., and S. Lobonc. 1981. Sex-role stereotyping by high school females in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 18:209-19.
49. Wareing, C. 1990. A survey of antecedents of attitudes toward science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 27:371-86.
50. Yentsch, C. M., and C. J. Sindermann. 1992. The woman scientist: Meeting the challenges for a successful career. New York: Plenum.