Gender Gap in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM): Current Knowledge, Implications for Practice, Policy, and Future Directions

Educational Psychology Review

Volumn 29, Issue 1, 2017, Pages 119-140

  Wang, Ming Te ^a   Degol, Jessica L ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

^b PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Career preference; Gender gap; Lifestyle value; Motivation; Relative cognitive strength; STEM

Indexed keywords

EID: 84954322922     PISSN: 1040726X     EISSN: 1573336X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10648-015-9355-x     Document Type: Review

References (111)

1. Ackerman, P. L., Bowen, K. R., Beier, M. E., & Kanfer, R. (2001). Determinants of individual differences and gender differences in knowledge. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 797–825.
2. Alexander, G. M., Wilcox, T., & Woods, R. (2009). Sex differences in infants’ visual interest in toys. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 38, 427–433. doi:10.1007/s10508-008-9430-1.
3. Allen, S. (2004). Designs for learning: studying science museum exhibits that do more than entertain. Science Education. doi:10.1002/sce.20016.
4. American Association of University Women Educational Foundation. (2008). Where the girls are: the facts about gender equity in education. Washington: Author.
5. Baker, M., & Milligan, K. (2013). Boy-girl differences in parental time investments: evidence from three countries. National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) Working Paper 18893. Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w18893. doi: 10.3386/w18893
6. Blackwell, L. S., Trzesniewski, K. H., & Dweck, C. S. (2007). Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement across an adolescent transition: a longitudinal study and an intervention. Child Development, 78, 246–263. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.00995.x.
7. Bleeker, M. M., & Jacobs, J. E. (2004). Achievement in math and science: do mothers’ beliefs matter 12 years later? Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 97–109. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.96.1.97.
8. Ceci, S. J., & Williams, W. M. (2011). Understanding current causes of women’s underrepresentation in science. PNAS, 108, 3157–3162. doi:10.1073/pnas.1014871108.
9. Ceci, S. J., Williams, W. M., & Barnett, S. M. (2009). Women’s underrepresentation in science: sociocultural and biological considerations. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 218–261. doi:10.1037/a0014412.
10. Ceci, S. J., Ginther, D. K., Kahn, S., & Williams, W. M. (2014). Women in academic science: a changing landscape. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 15, 75–141. doi:10.1177/1529100614541236.
11. Cheryan, S., & Plaut, V. C. (2010). Explaining underrepresentation: a theory of precluded interest. Sex Roles, 63, 475–488. doi:10.1007/s11199-010-9835-x.
12. Cheryan, S., Plaut, V. C., Davies, P. G., & Steele, C. M. (2009). Ambient belonging: how stereotypical cues impact gender participation in computer science. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 1045–1060. doi:10.1037/a0016239.
13. Cheryan, S., Meltzoff, A. N., & Kim, S. (2011a). Classrooms matter: the design of virtual classrooms influences gender disparities in computer science classes. Computers & Education, 57, 1825–1835. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.02.004.
14. Cheryan, S., Siy, J. O., Vichayapai, M., Drury, B. J., & Kim, S. (2011b). Do female and male role models who embody STEM stereotypes hinder women’s anticipated success in STEM? Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2, 656–664. doi:10.1177/1948550611405218.
15. Chow, A., Eccles, J. S., & Salmela-Aro, K. (2012). Task value profiles across subjects and aspirations to physical and IT-related sciences in the United States and Finland. Developmental Psychology, 48, 1612–1628. doi:10.1037/a0030194.
16. Correll, S. J. (2001). Gender and the career choice process: the role of biased self‐assessments. American Journal of Sociology, 106, 1691–1730. doi:10.1086/321299.
17. Crosnoe, R., Riegle-Crumb, C., Field, S., Frank, K., & Muller, C. (2008). Peer group contexts of girls’ and boys’ academic experiences. Child Development, 79, 139–155. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01116.x.
18. Crowley, K., Callanan, M. A., Tenenbaum, H. R., & Allen, E. (2001). Parents explain more often to boys than to girls during shared scientific thinking. Psychological Science, 12, 258–261. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00347.
19. Cvencek, D., Meltzoff, A. N., & Greenwald, A. G. (2011). Math–gender stereotypes in elementary school children. Child Development, 82, 766–779. doi:10.1111/j.14678624.2010.01529.x.
20. Deutsch, F. M. (2003). How small classes benefit high school students. NASSP Bulletin, 87, 35–44. doi:10.1177/019263650308763504.
21. Diekman, A. B., Brown, E., Johnston, A., & Clark, E. (2010). Seeking congruity between goals and roles: a new look at why women opt out of STEM careers. Psychological Science, 21, 1051–1057. doi:10.1177/0956797610377342.
22. Diekman, A. B., Clark, E. K., Johnston, A. M., Brown, E. R., & Steinberg, M. (2011). Malleability in communal goals and beliefs influences attraction to STEM careers: evidence for a goal congruity perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 902–918. doi:10.1037/a0025199.
23. Dweck, C. S. (2002). The development of ability conceptions. In A. Wigfield & J. S. Eccles (Eds.), Development of achievement motivation. A volume in the educational psychology series: Vol. xvii, (pp. 57–88). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. doi:10.1016/B978-012750053-9/50005-X.
24. Dweck, C. (2007). Is math a gift? Beliefs that put females at risk. In S. J. Ceci & W. M. Williams (Eds.), Why aren’t more women in 1460 science? Top researchers debate the evidence (pp. 47–55). Washington: APA Press. doi:10.1037/11546-004.
25. Eccles, J. S. (2009). Who am I and what am I going to do with my life? Personal and collective identities as motivators of action. Educational Psychologist, 44, 78–89. doi:10.1080/00461520902832368.
26. Eccles, J. S., Wigfield, A., Harold, R. D., & Blumenfeld, P. (1993). Age and gender differences in children’s self- and task perceptions during elementary school. Child Development, 64, 830–847. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1993.tb02946.x.
27. Eccles, J. S., Barber, B., & Jozefowicz, D. (1999). Linking gender to educational, occupational, and recreational choice: applying the Eccles et al. model of achievement-related choices. In J. T. Spence (Ed.), Sexism and stereotypes in modern society: the gender science of Janet Taylor Spence (pp. 153–191). Washington: APA. doi:10.1037/10277-007.
28. Else-Quest, N. M., Hyde, J. S., & Linn, M. C. (2010). Cross-national patterns of gender differences in mathematics: a meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 103–127. doi:10.1037/a0018053.
29. Ferriman, K., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2009). 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, 97, 517–532. doi:10.1037/a0016030.
30. Freund, A. M., Weiss, D., & Wiese, B. S. (2012). Graduating from high school: the role of gender-related attitude, attributes, and motives for a central transition in late adolescence. Switzerland: Department of Psychology, University of Zurich. doi:10.1080/17405629.2013.772508. Unpublished manuscript.
31. Frick, A., & Wang, S. H. (2014). Mental spatial transformations in 14‐ and 16‐month‐old infants: effects of action and observational experience. Child Development, 85, 278–293. doi:10.1111/cdev.12116.
32. Friedel, J. M., Cortina, K. S., Turner, J. C., & Midgley, C. (2007). Achievement goals, efficacy beliefs and coping strategies in mathematics: the role of perceived parent and teacher goal emphases. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32, 434–458. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2006.10.009.
33. Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1997). Hostile and benevolent sexism: measuring ambivalent sexist attitudes toward women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 119–135. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.1997.tb00104.x.
34. Hakim, C. (2006). Women, careers, and work-life preferences. British Journal of Guidance and Counseling, 34, 279–294. doi:10.1080/03069880600769118.
35. Hanson, S. L. (2004). African American women in science: experiences from high school through the post-secondary years and beyond. NWSA Journal, 16, 96–115. doi:10.1353/nwsa.2004.0033.
36. Hanson, S. L. (2007). Success in science among young African American women: the role of minority families. Journal of Family Issues, 28, 3–33. doi:10.1177/0192513X06292694.
37. Haughey, M., Snart, F., & da Costa, J. (2001). Literacy achievement in small grade 1 classes in high-poverty environments. Canadian Journal of Education, 26, 301–320. doi:10.2307/1602210.
38. Hill, C., Corbett, C., & St. Rose, A. (2010). Why so few? Women in science, technology, engineering and mathematics. Washington: American Association of University Women.
39. Hyde, J. S., Lindberg, S. M., Linn, M. C., Ellis, A. B., & Williams, C. C. (2008). Gender similarities characterize math performance. Science, 321, 494–495. doi:10.1126/science.1160364.
40. Jacobs, J. E., & Eccles, J. S. (1992). The impact of mothers’ gender-role stereotypic beliefs on mothers’ and children’s ability perceptions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 932–944. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.63.6.932.
41. Jacobs, J. E., & Winslow, S. E. (2004). Overworked faculty: job and stresses and family demands. Annals of American Political and Social Scientist, 596, 104–129. doi:10.1177/0002716204268185.
42. Kelleher, C., Pausch, R., & Kiesler, S. (2007). Storytelling alice motivates middle school girls to learn computer programming. Proceeding of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1455-1464.
43. Kena, G., Musu-Gillette, L., Robinson, J., Wang, X., Rathbun, A., Zhang, J., et al. (2015). The condition of education 2015 (NCES 2015–144). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch. Accessed 26 Aug 2015.
44. King, D. K. (1992). Unraveling fabric, missing the beat: class and gender in Afro-American social issues. The Black Scholar, 22, 36–44.
45. Knobloch-Westerwick, S., Glynn, C. J., & Huge, M. (2013). The Matilda effect in science communication: an experiment on gender bias in publication quality perceptions and collaboration interest. Science Communication, 35, 603–625. doi:10.1177/1075547012472684.
46. Leaper, C., Anderson, K. J., & Sanders, P. (1998). Moderators of gender effects on parents’ talk to their children: a meta-analysis. Developmental Psychology, 34, 3–27. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.34.1.3.
47. Leaper, C., Farkas, T., & Brown, C. S. (2012). Adolescent girls’ experiences and gender-related beliefs in relation to their motivation in math/science and English. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 41, 268–282. doi:10.1007/s10964-011-9693-z.
48. Leslie, S.-J., Cimpian, A., Meyer, M., & Freeland, E. (2015). Expectations of brilliance underlie gender distributions across academic disciplines. Science, 347, 262–265. doi:10.1126/science.1261375.
49. Liben, L. S., & Coyle, E. F. (2014). Chapter three-developmental interventions to address the STEM gender gap: exploring intended and unintended consequences. Advances in Child Development and Behavior, 47, 77–115.
50. Lindberg, S. M., Hyde, J. S., Petersen, J. L., & Linn, M. C. (2010). New trends in gender and mathematics performance: a meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 1123–1135. doi:10.1037/a0021276.
51. Lippa, R. A., Collaer, M. L., & Peters, M. (2010). Sex differences in mental rotation and line angle judgments are positively associated with gender equality and economic development across 53 nations. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39, 990–997. doi:10.1007/s10508-008-9460-8.
52. Lohman, D. F., Gambrell, J., & Lakin, J. (2008). The commonality of extreme discrepancies in the ability profiles of academically gifted students. Psychology Science Quarterly, 50, 269–282.
53. Lubienski, S. T., Robinson, J. P., Crane, C. C., & Ganley, C. M. (2013). Girls’ and boys’ mathematics achievement, affect, and experiences: findings from ECLS-K. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 44, 634–645. doi:10.5951/jresematheduc.44.4.0634.
54. Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2006). Study of mathematically precocious youth after 35 years: uncovering antecedents for the development of math-science expertise. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1, 316–345. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00019.x.
55. Lubinski, D., Benbow, C. P., Webb, R. M., & Bleske-Rechek, A. (2006). Tracking exceptional human capital over two decades. Psychological Science, 17, 194–199. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01685.x.
56. Maeda, Y., & Yoon, S. Y. (2013). A meta-analysis on gender differences in mental rotation ability measured by the Purdue spatial visualization tests: visualization of rotations (PSVT: R). Educational Psychology Review, 25, 69–94. doi:10.1007/s10648-012-9215-x.
57. Maltese, A. V., & Tai, R. H. (2010). Eyeballs in the fridge: sources of early interest in science. International Journal of Science Education, 32, 669–685. doi:10.1080/09500690902792385.
58. Maltese, A. V., & Tai, R. H. (2011). Pipeline persistence: examining the association of educational experiences with earned degrees in STEM among U.S. students. Science Education, 95, 877–907. doi:10.1002/sce.20441.
59. Mason, M. A., & Goulden, M. (2004). Marriage and baby blues: redefining gender equity and the academy. Annals of the American Political and Social Sciences, 596, 86–103. doi:10.1177/000271620459600104.
60. Meece, J. L., Anderman, E. M., & Anderman, L. H. (2006). Classroom goal structure, student motivation, and academic achievement. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 387–503. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070258.
61. Meyer, M., Cimpian, A., & Leslie, S. J. (2015). Women are underrepresented in fields where success is believed to require brilliance. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1–12. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00235.
62. Miller, D. I., & Halpern, D. F. (2014). The new science of cognitive sex differences. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18, 37–45. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2013.10.011.
63. Miller, D. I., Eagly, A. H., & Linn, M. C. (2015). Women’s representation in science predicts national gender-science stereotypes: evidence from 66 nations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107, 631–644.
64. Möhring, W., & Frick, A. (2013). Touching up mental rotation: effects of manual experience on 6-month-old infants’ mental object rotation. Child Development, 84, 1554–1565. doi:10.1111/cdev.12065.
65. Moore, D. S., & Johnson, S. P. (2008). Mental rotation in human infants: a sex difference. Psychological Science, 19, 1063–1066. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02200.x.
66. Moss-Racusin, C. A., Dovidio, J. F., Brescoll, V. L., Graham, M. J., & Handelsman, J. (2012). Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favoring male students. PNAS, 109, 16474–16479. doi:10.1073/pnas.1211286109.
67. Mueller, C. M., & Dweck, C. S. (1998). Praise for intelligence can undermine children’s motivation and performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 33–52. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.75.1.33.
68. National Science Foundation. (2011). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering: 2011. Arlington: National Science Foundation.
69. Park, G., Lubienski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2007). Contrasting intellectual patterns predict creativity in the arts and sciences. Psychological Science, 18, 948–952.
70. Quinn, P. C., & Liben, L. S. (2008). A sex difference in mental rotation in young infants. Psychological Science, 19, 1067–1070. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02201.x.
71. Reuben, E., Sapienza, P., & Zingales, L. (2014). How stereotypes impair women’s careers in science. PNAS, 111, 4403–4408. doi:10.1073/pnas.1314788111.
72. Robinson, J. P., & Lubienski, S. T. (2011). The development of gender achievement gaps in mathematics and reading during elementary and middle school: examining direct cognitive assessments and teacher ratings. American Educational Research Journal, 48, 268–302. doi:10.3102/0002831210372249.
73. Roseth, C. J., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2008). Promoting early adolescents’ achievement and peer relationships: the effects of cooperative, competitive and individualistic goal structure. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 223–246. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.134.2.223.
74. Sadik, A. (2008). Digital storytelling: A meaningful technology-integrated approach for engaged student learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56, 487–506. doi:10.1007/s11423-008-9091-8.
75. Simpkins, S. D., Davis-Kean, P. E., & Eccles, J. S. (2006). Math and science motivation: a longitudinal examination of the links between choices and beliefs. Developmental Psychology, 42, 70–83. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.42.1.70.
76. Spelke, E. S. (2005). Sex differences in intrinsic aptitude for mathematics and science? American Psychologist, 60, 950–958. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.60.9.950.
77. Stake, J. E., & Nickens, S. D. (2005). Adolescent girls’ and boys’ science peer relationships and perceptions of the possible self as scientist. Sex Roles, 52, 1–11. doi:10.1007/s11199-005-1189-4.
78. Stecher, B. M., & Bohrnstedt, G. W. (Eds.). (2002). Class size reduction in California: findings from 1999-00 and 2000-01. Sacramento: California Department of Education.
79. Stout, J. G., Dasgupta, N., Hunsinger, M., & McManus, M. A. (2011). STEMing the tide: using ingroup experts to inoculate women’s self-concept in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 255–270. doi:10.1037/a0021385.
80. Su, R., Rounds, J., & Armstrong, P. I. (2009). Men and things, women and people: a meta-analysis of sex differences in interests. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 859–884. doi:10.1037/a0017364.
81. Swim, J. K., & Cohen, L. L. (1997). Overt, covert, and subtle sexism: a comparison between attitudes toward women and modern sexism scales. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 103–118. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.1997.tb00103.x.
82. Swim, J. K., Aikin, K. J., Hall, W. S., & Hunter, B. A. (1995). Sexism and racism: old-fashioned and modern prejudices. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 199–214. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.68.2.199.
83. Swim, J. K., Mallett, R., Russo-Devosa, Y., & Stangor, C. (2005). Judgements of sexism: a comparison of the subtlety of sexism measures and sources of variability in judgements of sexism. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 29, 406–411. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2005.00240.x.
84. Tai, R. H., Liu, C. Q., Maltese, A. V., & Fan, X. (2006). Planning early for careers in science. Science, 312, 1143–1144. doi:10.1126/science.1128690.
85. Tenenbaum, H. R. (2009). ‘You'd be good at that’: gender patterns in parent‐child talk about courses. Social Development, 18, 447–463. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9507.2008.00487.x.
86. Tenenbaum, H. R., & Leaper, C. (2002). Are parents’ gender schemas related to their children’s gender-related cognitions? A meta-analysis. Developmental Psychology, 38, 615–630. doi:10.1037//0012-1649.38.4.615.
87. Tiedemann, J. (2000a). Gender-related beliefs of teachers in elementary school mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 41, 191–207. doi:10.1023/A:1003953801526.
88. Tiedemann, J. (2000b). Parents’ gender stereotypes and teachers’ beliefs as predictors of children's concept of their mathematical ability in elementary school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 144–151. doi:10.1007/s11199-011-9996-2.
89. Turner, J. C., & Patrick, H. (2004). Motivational influences on student participation in math classroom learning activities. Teachers College Record, 106, 1759–1785. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9620.2004.00404.x.
90. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2012). Higher education: gaps in access and persistence study. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2012/2012046/index.asp
91. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). (2014). Digest of education statistics. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/2014menu_tables.asp
92. Valla, J., & Ceci, S. J. (2011). Can sex differences in science be tied to the long reach of prenatal hormones? Brain organization theory, digit ratio (2D/4D), and sex differences in preference and cognition. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, 134–136. doi:10.1177/174569161140023.
93. Valla, J. M., & Ceci, S. J. (2014). Breadth-based models of women’s underrepresentation in STEM fields: an integrative commentary on Schmidt (2011) and Nye et al. (2012). Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9, 219–224. doi:10.1177/1745691614522067.
94. Voyer, D. (2011). Time limits and gender differences on paper-and-pencil tests of mental rotation: a meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 267–277. doi:10.3758/s13423-010-0042-0.
95. Voyer, D., & Voyer, S. D. (2014). Gender differences in scholastic achievement: a meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 140, 1174–1204. doi:10.1037/a0036620.
96. Voyer, D., Postma, A., Brake, B., & Imperato-McGinley, J. (2007). Gender differences in object location memory: a meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 23–38. doi:10.3758/BF03194024.
97. Wai, J., Lubinski, D., Benbow, C. P., & Steiger, J. H. (2010). Accomplishment in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) and its relation to STEM educational dose: a 25-year longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 860–871. doi:10.1037/a0019454.
98. Wai, J., Putallaz, M., & Makel, M. C. (2012). Studying intellectual outliers: Are there sex differences, and are the smart getting smarter? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21, 382–390. doi:10.1177/0963721412455052.
99. Wang, M. T. (2012). Educational and career interests in math: a longitudinal examination of the links between perceived classroom environment, motivational beliefs, and interests. Developmental Psychology, 48, 1643–1657. doi:10.1037/a0027247.
100. Wang, M. T., & Degol, J. L. (2014a). Motivational pathways to STEM career choices: using expectancy-value perspective to understand individual and gender differences in STEM fields. Developmental Review, 33, 304–340. doi:10.1016/j.dr.2013.08.001.
101. Wang, M. T., & Degol, J. L. (2014b). Staying engaged: knowledge and research needs in student engagement. Child Development Perspectives, 8, 137–143. doi:10.1111/cdep.12073.
102. Wang, M. T., & Degol, J. L. (2015). School climate: a review of the definition, measurement, and impact on student outcomes. Educational Psychology Review. doi:10.1007/s10648-015-9319-1.
103. Wang, M. T., Degol, J. L., & Ye, F. (2015). Math achievement is important, but task values are critical too: Examining the intellectual and motivational factors leading to gender disparities in STEM careers. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1–9. doi:10.3389/fpsyq.2015.00036.
104. Wang, M. T., Eccles, J. S., & Kenny, S. (2013). Not lack of ability but more choice: individual and gender differences in STEM career choice. Psychological Science, 24, 770–775. doi:10.1177/0956797612458937.
105. 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. doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2006.04.004.
106. Weisgram, E. S., & Bigler, R. S. (2007). Effects of learning about gender discrimination on adolescent girls’ attitudes toward and interest in science. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31, 262–269. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2007.00369.x.
107. Williams, W. M., & Ceci, S. J. (2012). When scientists choose motherhood: a single factor goes a long way in explaining the dearth of women in math-intensive fields. How can we address it? American Scientist, 100, 138–145. doi:10.1511/2012.95.138.
108. Wolters, C. A. (2004). Advancing achievement goal theory: using goal structures and goal orientations to predict students’ motivation, cognition, and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 236–250. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.96.2.236.
109. Wong, W. I., Pasterski, V., Hindmarsh, P. C., Geffner, M. E., & Hines, M. (2012). Are there parental socialization effects on the sex-typed behavior of individuals with congenital adrenal hyperplasia? Archives of Sexual Behavior, 42, 381–391. doi:10.1007/s10508-012-9997-4.
110. Wood, W., & Eagly, A. H. (2002). A cross-cultural analysis of the behavior of women and men: implications for the origins of sex differences. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 699–727. doi:10.1037//0033-2909.128.5.699.
111. Yeager, D. S., & Dweck, C. S. (2012). Mindsets that promote resilience: when students believe that personal characteristics can be developed. Educational Psychologist, 47, 302–314. doi:10.1080/00461520.2012.722805.