Sex differences in the right tail of cognitive abilities: A 30year examination

Intelligence

Volumn 38, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 412-423

  Wai, Jonathan ^a   Cacchio, Megan ^a   Putallaz, Martha ^a   Makel, Matthew C ^a  

^a DUKE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Cognitive abilities; Historical examination; Sex differences; Sociocultural factors; STEM

Indexed keywords

EID: 77954176742     PISSN: 01602896     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.intell.2010.04.006     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Ackerman P.L. A theory of adult intellectual development: Process, personality, interests, and knowledge. Intelligence 1996, 22:227-257.
2. Ackerman P.L., Heggestad E.D. Intelligence, personality, and interests: Evidence for overlapping traits. Psychological Bulletin 1997, 121:218-245.
3. ACT Your guide to the ACT Downloaded on October 25, 2009 from http://www.act.org/aap/pdf/YourGuidetoACT.pdf.
4. Benbow C.P. Sex differences in mathematical reasoning ability among the intellectually talented: Their characteristics, consequences, and possible explanations. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 1988, 11:169-183.
5. Benbow C.P., Stanley J.C. Sex differences in mathematical ability: Fact or artifact?. Science 1980, 210:1262-1264.
6. Benbow C.P., Stanley J.C. Sex differences in mathematical reasoning ability: More facts. Science 1983, 222:1029-1031.
7. Benbow C.P., Lubinski D., Shea D.L., Eftekhari-Sanjani H. Sex differences in mathematical reasoning ability: Their status 20years later. Psychological Science 2000, 11:474-480.
8. Ceci S.J., Williams W.M. The mathematics of sex: How biology and society conspire to limit talented women and girls 2010, Oxford University Press, New York.
9. Ceci S.J., Williams W.M., Barnett S.M. Women's underrepresentation in science: Sociocultural and biological considerations. Psychological Bulletin 2009, 135:218-261.
10. Cole N.S. ETS gender study: How females and males perform in educational settings 1997, Educational Testing Service, Princeton, NJ.
11. Eccles J., Jacobs J. Social forces shape math attitudes and performance. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 1986, 11:367-389.
12. Educational Testing Service The test of standard written English: A preliminary report Downloaded on October 25, 2009 from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/000 0019b/80/31/7d/52.pdf.
13. Feingold A. Cognitive gender differences are disappearing. American Psychologist 1988, 43:95-103.
14. Ferriman K., Lubinski D., Benbow C.P. Work preferences, life values, and personal views of top math/science graduate students and the profoundly gifted: Developmental changes and gender differences during emerging adulthood and parenthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2009, 97:517-532.
15. Goldstein D., Stocking V.B. TIP studies of gender differences in talented adolescents. Competence and responsibility: Proceedings of the Third European Conference of the European Council for High Ability 1994, 190-203. Hogrefe and Huber, Goettingen, Germany. K.A. Heller, E.A. Hany (Eds.).
16. Guiso L., Monte F., Sapienza P., Zingales L. Culture, gender, and math. Science 2008, 320:1164-1165.
17. Halpern D.F. Sex differences in cognitive abilities 2000, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ. (3rd Ed.).
18. Halpern D.F., Benbow C.P., Geary D.C., Gur R.C., Hyde J.S., Gernsbacher M.A. The science of sex differences in science and mathematics. Psychological Science in the Public Interest 2007, 8:1-51.
19. Hakim C. Women, careers, and work-life preferences. British Journal of Guidance & Counseling 2006, 34:279-294.
20. Haworth C.A., Dale P., Plomin R. A twin study into the genetic and environmental influences on academic performance in science in nine-year-old boys and girls. International Journal of Science Education 2008, 30:1003-1025.
21. Hedges L.V., Nowell A. Sex differences in mental test scores, variability, and numbers of high-scoring individuals. Science 1995, 269:41-45.
22. Hewlett S.A., Luce C.B. Extreme jobs: The dangerous allure of the 70hour workweek. Harvard Business Review 2006, December, 49-59.
23. Hyde J.S. The gender similarities hypothesis. American Psychologist 2005, 60:581-592.
24. Hyde J.S., Linn M.C. Gender similarities in mathematics and science. Science 2006, 314:599-600.
25. Hyde J.S., Lindberg S.M., Linn M.C., Ellis A.B., Williams C.C. Gender similarities characterize math performance. Science 2008, 321:494-495.
26. Johnson W., Carothers A., Deary I.J. Sex differences in variability in general intelligence: A new look at the old question. Perspectives on Psychological Science 2008, 3:518-531.
27. Kelley T. Interpretation of educational measurements 1927, World Book, New York.
28. Kobrin J.L., Melican G.J. Comparability of scores on the new and prior versions of the SAT reasoning test. College Board Research Notes 2007, January, 31.
29. Koenig K.A., Frey M.C., Detterman D.K. ACT and general cognitive ability. Intelligence 2008, 36:153-160.
30. Lawrence I.M., Rigol G.W., Van Essen T., Jackson C.A. A historical perspective on the content of the SAT. College Board Research Report No. 2003-3 2003.
31. Leslie D.W. The reshaping of America's academic workforce. TIAA-CREF Institute, #87 Retrieved January 10, 2010 from www.tiaa-crefinstitute.org.
32. Linn M.C., Pulos S. Male-female differences in predicting displaced volume: Strategy use, aptitude relationships, and experience influences. Journal of Educational Psychology 1983, 75:86-96.
33. Lippa R.A. Gender-related individual differences and the structure of vocational interests on the people-things dimension. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1998, 74:996-1009.
34. Lohman D.F., Lakin J. Consistencies in sex differences on the cognitive abilities test across countries, grades, test forms, and cohorts. British Journal of Educational Psychology 2009, 79:389-407.
35. Lubinski D. Introduction to the special section on cognitive abilities: 100 years after Spearman's (1904) "'general intelligence,' objectively determined and measured". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2004, 86:96-111.
36. Lubinski D., Benbow C.P. Study of mathematically precocious youth after 35years: Uncovering antecedents for the development of math-science expertise. Perspectives on Psychological Science 2006, 1:316-345.
37. Mason M.A., Goulden M. Marriage and baby blues: Redefining gender equity and the academy. Annals of American Political and Social Scientist 2004, 596:86-103.
38. Mattern K., Camara W., Kobrin J.L. SAT writing: An overview of research and psychometrics to date. College Board Research Notes 2007, January, 32.
39. Monastersky R. Primed for numbers. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 51, p. A1 Retrieved October 20, 2009, from http://chronicle.com/article/Primed-for-Numbers/26462.
40. Murphy M.C., Steele C.M., Gross J.J. Signaling threat: How situational cues affect women in math, science, and engineering settings. Psychological Science 2007, 18:879-885.
41. Park G., Lubinski D., Benbow C.P. Contrasting intellectual patterns for creativity in the arts and sciences: Tracking intellectually precocious youth over 25years. Psychological Science 2007, 18:948-952.
42. Park G., Lubinski D., Benbow C.P. Ability differences among people who have commensurate degrees matter for scientific creativity. Psychological Science 2008, 19:957-961.
43. Penner A.M. International gender x item difficulty interactions in mathematics and science achievement tests. Journal of Educational Psychology 2003, 95:650-655.
44. Penner A.M. Gender differences in extreme mathematical achievement: An international perspective on biological and social factors. American Journal of Sociology 2008, 114:S138-S170.
45. Penner A.M., Paret M. Gender differences in mathematics achievement: Exploring the early grades and the extremes. Social Science Research 2008, 37:239-253.
46. Pinker S. The sexual paradox: Men, women, and the real gender gap 2008, Scribner, New York.
47. Putallaz M., Baldwin J., Selph H. The Duke University talent identification program. Journal of High Ability Studies 2005, 16:41-54.
48. Schmidt D.B., Lubinski D., Benbow C.P. Validity of assessing educational-vocational preference dimensions among intellectually talented 13-year-olds. Journal of Counseling Psychology 1998, 45:436-453.
49. Spelke E.S. Sex differences in intrinsic aptitude for mathematics and science? A critical review. American Psychologist 2005, 60:950-958.
50. Spelke E.S. The science of gender and science: Pinker vs. Spelke, a debate. Edge: The Third Culture Downloaded March 8, 2010 from: http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/debate05/debate05_index.html.
51. Steen L.A. The science of patterns. Science 1988, April 29, 240:611-616.
52. Strand S., Deary I.J., Smith P. Sex differences in cognitive abilities test scores: A UK national picture. British Journal of Educational Psychology 2006, 76:463-480.
53. Su R., Rounds J., Armstrong P.I. Men and things, women and people: A meta-analysis of sex differences in interests. Psychological Bulletin 2009, 135:859-884.
54. Swiatek M.A., Lupkowski-Shoplik A., O'Donoghue C.C. Gender differences in above-level EXPLORE scores of gifted third through sixth graders. Journal of Educational Psychology 2000, 92:718-723.
55. Wai J., Lubinski D., Benbow C.P. Creativity and occupational accomplishments among intellectually precocious youth: An age 13 to age 33 longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology 2005, 97:484-492.
56. Wai J., Lubinski D., Benbow C.P. Spatial ability for STEM domains: Aligning over fifty years of cumulative psychological knowledge solidifies its importance. Journal of Educational Psychology 2009, 101:817-835.
57. Wai, J., Lubinski, D., Benbow, C. P., & Steiger, J. H. (in press). Accomplishment in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) and its relation to STEM educational dose: A 25-year longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology.
58. Webb R.M., Lubinski D., Benbow C.P. Spatial ability: A neglected dimension in talent searches for intellectually precocious youth. Journal of Educational Psychology 2007, 99:397-420.
59. Webb R.M., Lubinski D., Benbow C.P. Mathematically facile adolescents with math/science aspirations: New perspectives on their educational and vocational development. Journal of Educational Psychology 2002, 94:785-794.