Abstract
Single-sex programs have been implemented in a variety of educational settings to help promote greater engagement of women in STEM fields. However, the mechanisms through which single-sex programs increase women’s engagement in STEM fields are unclear. Drawing from research in social and health psychology, we examined two theoretically-guided predictors of women’s sense of belonging in their STEM majors and belonging at the university: perceived identity compatibility between being a woman and being in a STEM field, and perceived social support. Participants were 65 racially, ethnically, and socioeconomically diverse women enrolled in a single-sex STEM program at a co-educational university in Northeastern United States. Participants completed online surveys before the start of their first year of college, and again at the beginning of their second year of college. Findings from multiple regression analyses support hypotheses that across STEM women’s first or transitional year of college, perceived identity compatibility, perceived support from close others, and perceived support from the single-sex program for STEM women were each independently associated with greater sense of belonging in their major. Additionally, perceived identity compatibility and perceived support from the single-sex program were associated with greater sense of belonging at the university. These findings suggest that perceived support from sources such as single-sex programs and perceived compatibility between one’s field and being female may sustain women pursuing training in nontraditional fields such as STEM. Continued investigation of these factors may elucidate the impact of single-sex programs and inform interventions to increase the retention of women in STEM.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
American Association of University Women (AAUW). (2004). Under the microscope: A decade of gender equity projects in the sciences. Washington, DC: American Association of University Women Educational Foundation.
Ancis, J. R., & Phillips, S. D. (1996). Academic gender bias and women’s behavioral agency self-efficacy. Journal of Counseling and Development, 75, 131–137.
Aron, A., Aron, E. N., & Smollan, D. (1992). Inclusion of other in the self scale and the structure of interpersonal closeness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 596–612.
Blickenstaff, J. C. (2005). Women and science careers: Leaky pipeline or gender filter? Gender and Education, 17, 369–386.
Brainard, S. G., & Carlin, L. (1998). A six-year longitudinal study of undergraduate women in engineering and science. Journal of Engineering Education, 87, 369–375.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Campbell, P. B., & Wahl, E. (1998). What’s sex got to do with it? Simplistic questions, complex answers. In S. Morse (Ed.), Separated by sex: A critical look at single-sex education for girls (pp. 63–73). Washington, DC: American Association of University Women Educational Foundation.
Ceci, S. J., Williams, W. M., & Barnett, S. M. (2009). Women’s underrepresentation in science: Sociocultural and biological considerations. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 218–261.
Deaux, K., & Major, B. (1987). Putting gender into context: An interactive model of gender-related behavior. Psychological Review, 94, 369–389.
Dunkel-Schetter, C., & Bennett, T. L. (1990). Differentiating the cognitive and behavioral aspects of social support. In I. G. Sarason, B. R. Sarason, & G. R. Pierce (Eds.), Social support: An interactional view (pp. 267–296). New York: Wiley.
Dunkel-Schetter, C., & Lobel, M. (1990). Stress among students. New Directions for Student Services, 49, 17–34.
Eccles, J. S. (2005). Subjective task value and the Eccles et al. model of achievement-related choices. In A. J. Elliot & C. S. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 105–121). New York: The Guilford Press.
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? (pp. 199–210). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Eccles, J. S., Midgley, C., Wigfield, A., Buchanan, C. M., Reuman, D., Flanagan, C., et al. (1993). The impact of stage-environment fit on young adolescents’ experiences in schools and in families. The American Psychologist, 48(2), 90–101.
Erwin, L., & Maurutto, P. (1998). Beyond access: Considering gender deficits in science education. Gender and Education, 10, 51–69.
Exline, J. J., & Lobel, M. (1997). Views of the self and affiliation strategies: A social comparison perspective. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 19, 243–259.
Ferreira, M. M. (2003). Gender issues related to graduate student attrition in two science departments. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 969–989.
Finn, J. D. (1989). Withdrawing from school. Review of Educational Research, 59, 117–142.
Gall, T. L., Evans, D., & Bellerose, S. (2000). Transition to first-year university: Patterns of change in adjustment across life domains and time. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 19, 544–567.
Garmezy, N. (1991). Resilience and vulnerability to adverse developmental outcomes associated with poverty. The American Behavioral Scientist, 34, 416–430.
Goodenow, C. (1993). The psychological sense of school membership among adolescents: Scale development and educational correlates. Psychology in the Schools, 30, 79–90.
Hoffman, M., Richmond, J., Morrow, J., & Salomone, K. (2002). Investigating “Sense of Belonging” in first year college students. Journal of College Student Retention, 4, 227–256.
Hogg, M. A., & Abrams, D. (1988). Social identifications: A social psychology of intergroup relations and group processes. Florence: Taylor & Francis/Routledge.
Hollenshead, C., Younce, P. S., & Wenzel, S. A. (1994). Women graduate students in mathematics and physics: Reflections on success. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 1, 63–88.
Kleinbaum, D. G., Kupper, L. L., Muller, K. E., & Nizam, A. (1998). Applied regression analysis and multivariate methods. Pacific Grove: Duxbury.
Lazarus, R., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer Publishing Company.
Levy, S. R., West, T., & Ramirez, L. (2005). Lay theories and intergroup relations: A social developmental perspective. European Review of Social Psychology, 16, 189–220.
London, B., Downey, G., Bolger, N., & Velilla, E. (2005). A framework for studying social identity and coping with daily stress during the transition to college. In G. Downey, J. Eccles, & C. Chatman (Eds.), Navigating the future: Social identity, coping, and life tasks (pp. 45–63). New York: Russell Sage.
London, B., Downey, G., Bonica, C., & Paltin, I. (2007). Social causes and consequences of rejection sensitivity. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 17, 481–506.
London, B., Rosenthal, L., & Gonzalez, A. (2011). Using experience sampling methodology to capture the impact of identity, support, and gender rejection on the academic engagement of women. Journal of Social issues, 67(3).
Mael, F., Alonso, A., Girbson, D., Rogers, K., & Smith, M. (2005). Single-sex versus co-educational schooling: A systematic review. Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Education.
Meinholdt, C., & Murray, S. L. (1999). Why aren’t there more women engineers? Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 5, 239–263.
Mendoza-Denton, R., Downey, G., Purdie, V., Davis, A., & Pietrzak, J. (2002). Sensitivity to status-based rejection: Implications for African-American students college experiences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 896–918.
National Science Foundation, Division of Science Resources Statistics, Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering: 2009, NSF 09-305, (Arlington, VA; January 2009). Available from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/.
Osterman, K. F. (2000). Students’ need for belonging in the school community. Review of Educational Research, 70, 323–367.
Ostrove, J. M., & Long, S. M. (2007). Social class and belonging: Implications for college adjustment. The Review of Higher Education, 30, 363–389.
Protheroe, N. (2009). Single-sex classrooms. Principal, May/June. Retrieved from http://www.naesp.org.
Roccas, S., & Brewer, M. B. (2002). Social identity complexity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6, 88–106.
Rosenthal, L., London, B., Levy, S. R., Lobel, M., Guarino, M., Bermeo, J., et al. (2009, August). Role models increase women’s engagement in science. Poster presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association. Toronto, Canada.
Ruble, D., & Seidman, E. (1996). Social transitions: Windows into social psychological processes. In E. T. Higgins & A. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 830–856). New York: Guilford Press.
Settles, I. H. (2004). When multiple identities interfere: The role of identity centrality. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 487–500.
Settles, I. H. (2006). Use of an intersectional framework to understand Black women’s racial and gender identities. Sex Roles, 54, 589–601.
Settles, I. H., Jellison, W. A., & Pratt-Hyatt, J. S. (2009). Identification with multiple social groups: The moderating role of identity change over time among women scientists. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 856–867.
Shih, M., Pittinsky, T. L., & Ambady, N. (1999). Stereotype susceptibility: Identity salience and shifts in quantitative performance. Psychological Science, 10, 81–84.
Smithers, A., & Robinson, P. (2006). The paradox of single-sex and co-educational schooling. Buckingham, UK: Carmichael Press.
Steele, J., James, J. B., & Barnett, R. C. (2002). Learning in a man’s world: Examining the perceptions of undergraduate women in male-dominated academic areas. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26, 46–50.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Monterey: Brooks/Cole.
Taylor, S. E., & Lobel, M. (1989). Social comparison activity under threat: Downward evaluation and upward contacts. Psychological Review, 96, 569–575.
Tropp, L. R., & Wright, S. C. (2001). Ingroup identification as the inclusion of ingroup in the self. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 585–600.
Walker, C. O., & Greene, B. A. (2009). The relations between student motivational beliefs and cognitive engagement in high school. The Journal of Educational Research, 102, 463–471.
Warrington, M., & Younger, M. (2000). The other side of the gender gap. Gender and Education, 12, 493–508.
Acknowledgement
We are grateful to Kimberly Alexander, Jhanidya Bermeo, Michelle Guarino, and Carrie-Ann Miller for their valuable assistance on this project, to the study participants, and to all of the other individuals who contributed to this research. This work was supported by Grant HRD-0733918 from the National Science Foundation (Human Resource Development-Research on Gender in Science and Engineering).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rosenthal, L., London, B., Levy, S.R. et al. The Roles of Perceived Identity Compatibility and Social Support for Women in a Single-Sex STEM Program at a Co-educational University. Sex Roles 65, 725–736 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-011-9945-0
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-011-9945-0