Do They Stay or Do They Go? The Switching Decisions of Individuals Who Enter Gender Atypical College Majors

Sex Roles

Volumn 74, Issue 9-10, 2016, Pages 436-449

  Riegle Crumb, Catherine ^a   King, Barbara ^b   Moore, Chelsea ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

^b FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS   (United States)

Author keywords

Academic specialization; College students; Occupational segregation; STEM; Stereotyped attitudes

Indexed keywords

COLLEGE; COLLEGE STUDENT; DEPENDENT VARIABLE; DRAWING; EMPIRICAL RESEARCH; FEMALE; GENDER; HUMAN; LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS; LONGITUDINAL STUDY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MODEL; OCCUPATION; THEORETICAL MODEL;

EID: 84963690534     PISSN: 03600025     EISSN: 15732762     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11199-016-0583-4     Document Type: Article

References (75)

1. Alon, S., & Gelbgiser, D. (2011). The female advantage in college academic achievements and horizontal sex segregation. Social Science Research, 40(1), 107–119. doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2010.06.007.
2. Andersen, M. L. (2005). Thinking about women: A quarter century’s view. Gender and Society, 19, 437–455. doi:10.1177/0891243205276756.
3. Aud, S., Wilkinson-Flicker, S., Kristapovich, P., Rathbun, A., Wang, X., & Zhang, J. (2013). The condition of education 2013 (NCES 2013–037). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch.
4. Baird, C. L. (2012). Going against the flow: A longitudinal study of the effects of cognitive skills and gender beliefs on occupational aspirations and outcomes. Sociological Forum, 27, 986–1009. doi:10.1111/j.1573-7861.2012.01365.x.
5. Barnes, L. L. B., Bull, K. S., Campbell, J., & Perry, K. M. (2001). Effects of academic discipline and teaching goals in predicting grading beliefs among undergraduate teaching faculty. Research in Higher Education, 42(4), 455–467. doi:10.1023/A:1011006909774.
6. Blau, F. D., & Kahn, L. M. (2006). The U.S. gender pay gap in the 1990s: Slowing convergence. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 60(1), 45–66. doi:10.1177/001979390606000103.
7. Bosson, J. K., Taylor, J. N., & Prewitt-Freilino, J. L. (2006). Gender role violations and identity misclassification: The roles of audience and actor variables. Sex Roles, 55, 3–24. doi:10.1007/s11199-006-9065-5.
8. Buchmann, C., & DiPrete, T. A. (2006). The growing female advantage in college completion: The role of family background and academic achievement. American Sociological Review, 71(4), 515–541. doi:10.1177/000312240607100401.
9. Budig, M. J. (2002). Male advantage and the gender composition of jobs: Who rides the glass escalator? Social Problems, 49(2), 258–277. doi:10.1525/sp.2002.49.2.258.
10. Cabrera, A. E., Nora, A., & Castaneda, M. B. (1993). College persistence: Structural equation modeling test of an integrated model of student retention. Journal of Higher Education, 64(2), 123–139. doi:10.1037/a0026838.
11. Cech, E. A. (2013). Ideological wage inequalities? The technical/social dualism and the gender wage gap in engineering. Social Forces, 91(4), 1147–1182. doi:10.1093/sf/sot024.
12. Charles, M., & Bradley, K. (2002). Equal but separate? A cross-national study of sex segregation in higher education. American Sociological Review, 67, 573–599. doi:10.2307/3088946.
13. Chen, X. (2013). STEM attrition: College students’ paths into and out of STEM fields (NCES 2014–001). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED544470.pdf.
14. Cheryan, S. (2012). Understanding the paradox in math-related fields: Why do some gender gaps remain while others do not? Sex Roles, 66, 184–190. doi:10.1007/x11199-011-0060-z.
15. Cognard-Black, A. J. (2004). Will they stay or will they go? Sex-atypical work among token men who teach. The Sociological Quarterly, 45, 113–139. doi:10.1111/j.1533-8525.2004.tb02400.x.
16. Connell, R. W., & Messerschmidt, J. W. (2005). Hegemonic masculinity rethinking the concept. Gender and Society, 19(9), 829–859. doi:10.1177/0891243205278639.
17. Correll, S. J. (2004). Constraints into preferences: Gender, status, and emerging career aspirations. American Sociological Review, 69, 93–113. doi:10.1177/000312240406900106.
18. Cottingham, M. D., Erickson, R. J., & Diefendorff, J. M. (2013). The effects of manager exclusion on nurse turnover intention and care quality. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 35(8), 1–16. doi:10.1177/0193945913483880.
19. Davis, S. N., & Greenstein, T. N. (2009). Gender ideology: Components, predictors, and consequences. Annual Review of Sociology, 35, 87–105. doi:10.1146/annurev-soc-070308-115920.
20. DiDonato, L., & Strough, J. (2013). Do college students’ gender-typed attitudes about occupations predict their real-world decisions? Sex Roles, 68, 536–549. doi:10.1007/s11199-013-0275-2.
21. Diekman, A. B., Weisgram, E. S., & Belanger, A. L. (2015). New routes to recruiting and retaining women in STEM: Policy implications of a communal goal congruity perspective. Social Issues and Policy Review, 9(1), 52–58. doi:10.1111/sipr.12010.
22. DiPrete, T., & Buchmann, C. (2013). The rise of women: The female advantage in education and what it means for American schooling. New York, NY: Russell Sage.
23. Dynan, K. E., & Rouse, C. E. (1997). The underrepresentation of women in economics: A study of undergraduate economics students. The Journal of Economic Education, 28(4), 350–368. doi:10.1080/00220489709597939.
24. Eccles, J. S. (2007). 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. 199–210). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
25. Ecklund, E. H., Lincoln, A. E., & Tansey, C. (2012). Gender segregation in elite academic science. Gender and Society, 26(5), 693–717. doi:10.1177/0891243212451904.
26. England, P. (2010). The gender revolution: Uneven and stalled. Gender and Society, 24(2), 149–166. doi:10.1177/0891243210361475.
27. England, P., & Li, S. (2006). Desegregation stalled: The changing gender composition of college majors, 1971–2002. Gender and Society, 20(5), 657–677. doi:10.1177/0891243206290753.
28. England, P., Allison, P., Li, S., Mark, N., Thompson, J., Budig, M., & Sun, H. (2007). Why are some academic fields tipping toward female? The sex composition of U.S. fields of doctoral degree receipt, 1971–2002. Sociology of Education, 80, 23–42. doi:10.1177/003804070708000102.
29. Everett, B. G., Rogers, R. G., Hummer, R. A., & Krueger, P. M. (2011). Trends in educational attainment by race/ethnicity, nativity, and sex in the United States, 1989–2005. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 34(9), 1543–1566. doi:10.1080/01419870.2010.543139.
30. Frome, P. M., Alfeld, C. J., Eccles, J. S., & Barber, B. L. (2006). Why don’t they want a male-dominated job? An investigation of young women who changed their occupational aspirations. Educational Research and Evaluation, 12(4), 359–372. doi:10.1080/13803610600765786.
31. Glass, J., Sassler, S., Levitte, Y., & Michelmore, K. (2013). What’s so special about STEM? A comparison of women’s retention in STEM and professional occupations. Social Forces, 92(2), 723–756. doi:10.1093/sf/sot092.
32. Good, C., Aronson, J., & Harder, J. A. (2007). Problems in the pipeline: Stereotype threat and women’s achievement in high-level math courses. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 29(1), 17–28. doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2007.10.004.
33. Good, C., Rattan, A., & Dweck, C. S. (2012). Why do women opt out? Sense of belonging and women’s representation in mathematics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(4), 700–717. doi:10.1037/a0026659.
34. Griffith, A. L. (2010). Persistence of women and minorities in STEM field majors: Is it the school that matters? Economics of Education Review, 29(6), 911–922. doi:10.1016/j.econedurev.2010.06.010.
35. Gunderson, E. A., Ramirez, G., Levine, S. C., & Beilock, S. L. (2012). The role of parents and teachers in the development of gender-related math attitudes. Sex Roles, 66(3), 153–166. doi:10.1007/s11199-011-9996-2.
36. Hanson, S. (1996). Lost talent: Women in the sciences. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press. doi:10.1093/sf/76.1.351.
37. Hanson, S. (2009). Swimming against the tide: African American girls and science education. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press. doi:10.1177/0094306109356659s.
38. Hardie, J. H. (2015). Women’s work? Predictors of young men’s aspirations for entering traditionally female-dominated occupations. Sex Roles, 72(7), 349–362. doi:10.1007/s11199-015-0449-1.
39. Heilman, M. E., & Wallen, A. S. (2010). Wimpy and undeserving of respect: Penalties for men’s gender-inconsistent success. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 664–667. doi:10.1016/j/jesp.2010.01.008.
40. Heyman, G. D., Martyna, B., & Bhatia, S. (2002). Gender and achievement-related beliefs among engineering students. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 8, 41–52. doi:10.1615/JWomenMinorScienEng.v8.i1.30.
41. King, B. (2015). Changing college majors: Is it more common among STEM students and do grades matter? Journal of College Science Teaching, 44(3), 46–53. doi:10.2505/4/jcst15_044_03_44.
42. Kmec, J. A., McDonald, S., & Trimble, L. B. (2010). Making gender fit and ‘correcting’ gender misfits sex segregated employment and the nonsearch process. Gender and Society, 24(2), 213–236. doi:10.1177/0891243209360531.
43. Ko, I., Kotrba, L., & Roebuck, A. (2015). Leaders as males?: The role of industry gender composition. Sex Roles, 72(7–8), 294–307. doi:10.1007/s11199-015-0462-4.
44. Lane, K. A., Goh, J. X., & Driver-Linn, E. (2012). Implicit science stereotypes mediate the relationship between gender and academic participation. Sex Roles, 66(3), 220–234. doi:10.1007/s11199-011-0036-z.
45. Lincoln, A. E. (2010). The shifting supply of men and women to occupations: Feminization in veterinary education. Social Forces, 88(5), 1969–1998. doi:10.1353/sof.2010.0043.
46. Lueptow, L. B., Garovich‐Szabo, L., & Lueptow, M. B. (2001). Social change and the persistence of sex typing: 1974–1997. Social Forces, 80, 1–35. doi:10.1353/sof.2001.0077.
47. Mann, A., & DiPrete, T. (2013). Trends in gender segregation in the choice of science and engineering majors. Social Science Research, 42, 1519–1541. doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2013.07.002.
48. McGlone, M. R., & Pfeister, A. (2007). The generality and consequences of stereotype threat. Sociological Compass, 1, 174–190. doi:10.1111/j.1751-9020.2007.00021.x.
49. Morris, L. K., & Daniel, L. G. (2008). Perceptions of a chilly climate: Differences in traditional and non-traditional majors for women. Research in Higher Education, 49(3), 256–273. doi:10.1007/s11162-007-9078-z.
50. National Science Board. (2014). Science and engineering indicators 2014. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation (NSB 14–01). Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind14/.
51. Ong, M. (2005). Body projects of young women of color in physics: Intersections of gender, race and science. Social Problems, 52(4), 593–617. doi:10.1525/sp.2005.52.4.593.
52. Peralta, R. L. (2007). College alcohol use and the embodiment of hegemonic masculinity among European American men. Sex Roles, 56(11), 741–756. doi:10.1007/s11199-007-9233-1.
53. Ridgeway, C. (2011). Framed by gender: How gender inequality persists in the modern world. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
54. Ridgeway, C. L., & Correll, S. J. (2004). Unpacking the gender system: A theoretical perspective on gender beliefs and social relations. Gender and Society, 18(4), 510–531. doi:10.1177/0891243204265269.
55. Riegle-Crumb, C., King, B., Grodsky, E., & Muller, C. (2012). The more things change, the more they stay the same? Prior achievement fails to explain gender inequality in entry into STEM majors over time. American Educational Research Journal, 49(6), 1048–1072. doi:10.3102/0002831211435229.
56. Sandler, B. R., & Hall, R. M. (1982). The classroom climate: A chilly one for women. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges.
57. Sax, L. J., Astin, A. W., Korn, W. S., & Mahoney, K. M. (2003). The American freshman: National norms for Fall 2003. Los Angeles, CA: Higher Education Research Institute, UCLA.
58. Schneider, B., & Stevenson, D. (1999). The ambitious generation: America’s teenagers, motivated but directionless. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
59. Schrock, D., & Schwalbe, M. (2009). Men, masculinity, and manhood acts. Annual Review of Sociology, 35, 277–295. doi:10.1146/annurev-soc-070308-115933.
60. Seymour, E., & Hewitt, N. M. (1997). Talking about leaving: Why undergraduates leave the sciences. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. doi:10.2307/2655673.
61. Shapiro, J. R., & Williams, A. M. (2012). The role of stereotype threats in undermining girls’ and women’s performance and interest in STEM fields. Sex Roles, 66(3), 175–183. doi:10.1007/s11199-011-0051-0.
62. Shen-Miller, D., & Smiler, A. P. (2015). Men in female-dominated vocations: A rationale for academic study and introduction to the special issue. Sex Roles, 72(7), 269–276. doi:10.1007/s11199-015-0471-3.
63. Snyder, T. D., & Dillow, S. A. (2013). Digest of Education Statistics 2012 (NCES 2014–015). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2014/2014015.
64. Snyder, K. A., & Green, A. (2008). Revisiting the glass escalator: The case of gender segregation in a female dominated occupation. Social Problems, 559(2), 271–299. doi:10.1525/sp.2008.55.2.271.
65. Spencer, S. J., Steele, C. M., & Quinn, D. M. (1999). Stereotype threat and women’s math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35(1), 4–28. doi:10.1006/jesp.1998.1373.
66. Starobin, S. S., & Laanan, F. S. (2008). Broadening female participation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics: Experiences at community colleges. New Direction for Community Colleges, 142, 37–46. doi:10.1002/cc.323.
67. 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(2), 255–270. doi:10.1037/a0021385.
68. Taylor, C. J. (2010). Occupational sex composition and the gendered availability of workplace support. Gender and Society, 24(2), 189–212. doi:10.1177/0891243209359912.
69. Vandello, J. A., & Bosson, J. K. (2013). Hard won and easily lost: A review and synthesis of theory and research on precarious manhood. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 14(2), 101–113. doi:10.1037/a0089826.
70. Wang, M., & Degol, J. (2013). Motivational pathways to STEM career choices: Using expectancy–value perspective to understand individual and gender differences in STEM fields. Developmental Review, 33(4), 304–340. doi:10.1016/j.dr.2013.08.001.
71. Williams, C. L. (1992). The glass escalator: Hidden advantages for men in the “female” professions. Social Problems, 39(3), 253–267. doi:10.2307/3096961.
72. Wine, J., Janson, N., & Wheeless, S. (2011). 2004/09 Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study (BPS:04/09) full-scale methodology report (NCES 2012–246). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2012/2012246.pdf.
73. Wingfield, A. H., & Myles, R. L. (2014). Still a man’s world? Revisiting men who do women’s work. Sociology Compass, 10(8), 1206–1215. doi:10.1111/soc4.12206.
74. Wray-Lake, L., Syvertsen, A. K., Briddell, L., Osgood, D. W., & Flanagan, C. A. (2011). Exploring the changing meaning of work for American high school seniors from 1976 to 2005. Youth and Society, 43, 1110–1135. doi:10.1177/0044118x10381367.
75. Xie, Y., & Shauman, K. A. (2003). Women in science: Career processes and outcomes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.