Portrayals of male and female scientists in television programs popular among middle school-age children

Science Communication

Volumn 32, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 356-382

  Long, Marilee ^a   Steinke, Jocelyn ^b   Applegate, Brooks ^b   Lapinski, Maria Knight ^c   Johnson, Marne J ^d   Ghosh, Sayani ^e  

^a Department of Environmental and Radiological Health Sciences   (United States)

^b WESTERN MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d Grand Rapids Community College   (United States)

^e JSS ACADEMY OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION   (India)

Author keywords

adolescents; gender stereotypes; scientists; television; wishful identification

Indexed keywords

EID: 78650786434     PISSN: 10755470     EISSN: 15528545     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1075547009357779     Document Type: Article

References (77)

1. American Association of University Women. (1998). Gender gaps: Where schools still fail our children. Washington, DC: Author.
2. American Association of University Women. (2000). Tech-savvy: Educating girls in the new computer age. Washington, DC: American Association of University Women Educational Foundation.
3. Archer, S.L. (1985). Career and/or family: The identity process for adolescent girls. Youth & Society, 16, 289-314.
4. Aubrey, J.S., & Harrison, K. (2004). The gender-role content of children's favorite television programs and its link to their gender-related perceptions. Media Psychology, 6, 111-146.
5. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
6. Bandura, A. (2002). Social cognitive theory of mass communication. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 121-153). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
7. Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S.A. (1963a). A comparative test of the status envy, social power, and secondary reinforcement theories of identificatory learning. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 527-534.
8. Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S.A. (1963b). Imitation of film-mediated aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66, 2-11.
9. Barman, C.R. (1997). Students' views of scientists and science: Results of a national study. Science and Children, 35, 18-23.
10. Behm-Morawitz, E., & Mastro, D.E. (2008). Mean girls? The influence of gender portrayals in teen movies on emerging adults' gender-based attitudes and beliefs. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 85, 131-146.
11. Bem, S.L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42, 155-162.
12. Bem, S.L. (1981). Gender schema theory: A cognitive account of sex typing. Psychological Review, 88, 354-364.
13. Brown, J.D., & Pardun, C.J. (2004). Little in common: Racial and gender differences in adolescents' television diets. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 48, 266-278.
14. Brown, L.M., & Gilligan, C. (1992). Meeting at the crossroads: Women's psychology and girls' development. New York: Ballantine.
15. Bussey, L.M., & Bandura, A. (1999). Social cognitive theory of gender development and differentiation. Psychological Review, 106, 676-713.
16. Calvert, S.L., Kotler, J.A., Zehnder, S.M., & Shockey, E.M. (2003). Gender stereotyping in children's reports about education and information televised programs. Media Psychology, 5, 139-162.
17. Calvert, S.L., Murray, K.J., & Conger, E.E. (2004). Heroic DVD portrayals: What US and Taiwanese adolescents admire and understand. Applied Developmental Psychology, 25, 669-716.
18. Chambers, D.W. (1983). Stereotypical images of the scientist: The draw-a-scientist test. Science Education, 67, 255-265.
19. Cherney, I.D., & London, K. (2006). Gender-linked differences in the toys, television shows, computer games, and outdoor activities of 5- to 13-year-old children. Sex Roles, 54, 717-726.
20. Chory-Assad, R.M., & Cicchirillo, V. (2005). Empathy and affective orientation as predictors of identification with television characters. Communication Research Reports, 22, 151-156.
21. Congressional Commission on the Advancement of Women and Minorities in Science, Engineering, and Technology Development. (2000). Land of plenty: Diversity as America's competitive edge in science, engineering, and technology. Washington, DC: Author.
22. Corbett, J.B. (2001). Women, scientists, agitators: Magazine portrayals of Rachel Carson and Theo Colborn. Journal of Communication, 51, 720-749.
23. Dunn, R.G. (1979). Science, technology and bureaucratic domination: Television and the ideology of scientism. Media, Culture & Society, 1, 343-354.
24. Durkin, K. (1985). Television and sex-role acquisition I. Content. British Journal of Social Psychology, 24, 101-113.
25. Durkin, K., & Nugent, B. (1998). Kindergarten children's gender-role expectations for television actors. Sex Roles, 38, 387-402.
26. Eccles, J.S. (2006). Where are all the women? Gender differences in participation in physical science and engineering. In S. J. Ceci & W. M. Williams (Eds.), Why aren't more women in science? Top researchers debate the evidence (pp. 199-212). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
27. Eggermont, S. (2004). Television viewing, perceived similarity, and adolescents' expectations of a romantic partner. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 48, 244-265.
28. Eisenstock, B. (1984). Sex-role differences in children's identification with counter-stereotypical televised portrayals. Sex Roles, 10, 417-430.
29. Faber, R.J., Brown, J.D., & McLeod, J.M. (1979). Coming of age in the global village: Television and adolescence. In E. Wartella (Ed.), Children communicating: Media and development of thought, speech, understanding (pp. 215-249). Beverly Hills, CA; Sage.
30. Flicker, E. (2003). Between brains and breasts-Women scientists in fiction film: On the marginalization and sexualization of scientific competence. Public Understanding of Science, 12, 307-318.
31. Fort, D.C., & Varney, H.L. (1989). How children see scientists: Mostly male, mostly white, and mostly benevolent. Science and Children, 26, 8-13.
32. Gerbner, G. (1987). Science on television: How it affects public conceptions. Issues in Science and Technology, 3, 109-115.
33. Gerbner, G., Gross, L., Morgan, M., Signorielli, N., & Shanahan, J. (2002). Growing up with television: Cultivation processes. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 43-67). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
34. Gibson, H.L., & Chase, C. (2002). Longitudinal impact of an inquiry-based science program on middle school students' attitudes toward science. Science Education, 86, 693-705.
35. Hawkins, R.P., Pingree, S., Hitchon, J., Gorham, B.W., Kannaovakun, P., Gilligan, E.,et al.(2001). Predicting selection and activity in television genre viewing. Media Psychology, 3, 237-263.
36. Hawkins, R.P., Pingree, S., Hitchon, J., Radler, B., Gorham, B.W., Kahlor, L.,et al.(2005). What produces television attention and attention style? Genre, situation, and individual differences as predictors. Human Communication Research, 31, 162-187.
37. Hayes, A.F. (2005). Statistical methods for communication science. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
38. Hoffner, C. (1996). Children's wishful identification and parasocial interaction with favorite television characters. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 40, 389-402.
39. Hoffner, C., & Buchanan, M. (2005). Young adults' wishful identification with television characters: The role of perceived similarity and character attributes. Media Psychology, 7, 325-351.
40. Jones, M.G., Howe, A., & Rua, M.J. (2000). Gender differences in students' experiences, interests, and attitudes toward science and scientists. Science Education, 84, 180-192.
41. Knight, M., & Cunningham, C. (2004). Draw an engineer test (DAET): Development of a tool to investigate students' ideas about engineers and engineering. Paper presented at the proceedings of the 2004 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, Salt Lake City, UT.
42. Krippendorff, K. (2004). Reliability in content analysis, some common misconceptions and recommendations. Human Communication Research, 30, 411-433.
43. 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.
44. LaFollette, M.C. (1988). Eyes on the stars: Images of women scientists in popular magazines. Science, Technology & Human Values, 13, 262-275.
45. LaFollette, M.C. (1990). Making science our own: Public images of science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
46. Landis, R.J., & Koch, G.G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159-174.
47. Lauzen, M.M., Dozier, D.M., & Horan, N. (2008). Constructing gender stereotypes through social roles in prime-time television. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 52, 200-214.
48. Leaper, C., Breed, L., Hoffman, L., & Perlman, C.A. (2002). Variations in the gender-stereotyped content of children's television cartoons across genres. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32, 1653-1662.
49. Long, M., Boiarsky, G., & Thayer, G. (2001). Gender and racial counter-stereotypes in science education television: A content analysis. Public Understanding of Science, 10, 255-269.
50. Maccoby, E.E., & Wilson, W.C. (1957). Identification and observational learning from films. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 53, 76-87.
51. Markus, H., & Nurius, P. (1986). Possible selves. American Psychologist, 41, 954-969.
52. Martin, C.L., & Halverson, C.F. Jr. (1983). The effects of sex-typing schemas on young children's memory. Child Development, 54, 563-574.
53. Miller, P.H., Blessing, J.S., & Schwartz, S. (2006). Gender differences in high-school students' views about science. International Journal of Science Education, 28, 363-381.
54. National Science Board. (2006). Science and engineering indicators 2006. Arlington, VA: Author.
55. National Science Board. (2008). Science and engineering indicators 2008. Arlington, VA: Author.
56. Nelkin, D. (1987). Selling science: How the press covers science and technology. New York: W. H. Freeman.
57. Nelkin, D. (1990). Selling science. Physics Today, 43, 41-46.
58. Nielsen Media Research. (2004). Broadcast rank 9/22/2003-5/26/2004, Primetime Daypart, ages 12-17. New York: Author.
59. Nihlen, A.S., & Bailey, B.A. (1988). Children's display of gender schemas through interaction with nontraditional workers. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 19, 155-162.
60. Orenstein, P. (1994). School girls: Young women, self-esteem, and the confidence gap. New York: Doubleday.
61. Packard, B.W.-L., & Nguyen, D. (2003). Science career-related possible selves of adolescent girls: A longitudinal study. Journal of Career Development, 29, 251-263.
62. Renn, J.A., & Calvert, S.L. (1993). The relation between gender schemas and adults' recall of stereotyped and counterstereotyped televised information. Sex Roles, 28, 449-459.
63. Reeves, B., & Miller, M.M. (1978). A multidimensional measure of children's identification with television characters. Journal of Broadcasting, 22, 71-86.
64. Scheirer, C.J., Ray, W.S., & Hare, N. (1976). The analysis of ranked data derived from completely randomized factorial design. Biometrics, 32, 429-434.
65. Signorella, M.L., & Liben, L.S. (1984). Recall and reconstruction of gender-related pictures: Effects of attitude, task difficulty, and age. Child Development, 55, 393-405.
66. Signorielli, N. (1982). Marital status in television drama: A case of reduced options. Journal of Broadcasting, 26, 585-597.
67. Signorielli, N. (1993). Television, the portrayal of women, and children's attitudes. In G. L. Berry & J. K. Asamen (Eds.), Children & television: Images in a changing sociocultural world (pp. 229-242). Newbury Park, NJ: Sage.
68. Signorielli, N., & Kahlenberg, S. (2001). Television's world of work in the nineties. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 45, 4-22.
69. Spelke, E.S., & Grace, A.D. (2006). Sex, math, and science. In S. J. Ceci & W. M. Williams (Eds.), Why aren't more women in science? Top researchers debate the evidence (pp. 57-67). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
70. Steinke, J. (1997). A portrait of a woman as a scientist: Breaking down barriers created by gender-role stereotypes. Public Understanding of Science, 6, 409-428.
71. Steinke, J. (1999). Women scientist role models on screen: A case study of Contact. Science Communication, 21, 111-136.
72. Steinke, J. (2005). Cultural representations of gender and science: Portrayals of female scientists and engineers in popular films. Science Communication, 27, 27-63.
73. Steinke, J., Lapinski, M., Zietsman-Thomas, A., Nwulu, P., Crocker, N., Williams, Y.,et al.(2007). Middle school-aged children's attitudes toward women in science, engineering and technology and the effects of media literacy training. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 12, 295-323.
74. Steinke, J., & Long, M. (1996). A lab of her own? Portrayals of female characters on children's educational science programs. Science Communication, 18, 91-115.
75. Valian, V. (2006). Women at the top in science-and elsewhere. In S. J. Ceci & W. M. Williams (Eds.), Why aren't more women in science? Top researchers debate the evidence (pp. 27-37). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
76. Weingart, P., Muhl, C., & Pansegrau, P. (2003). Of power maniacs and unethical geniuses: Science and scientists in fiction film. Public Understanding of Science, 12, 279-287.
77. Weisgram, E.S., & Bigler, R.S. (2006). Girls and science careers: The role of altruistic values and attitudes about scientific tasks. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 27, 326-348.