Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Gender Roles and Stereotypes about Science Careers Help Explain Women and Men’s Science Pursuits

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Sex Roles Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Diverse perspectives in science promote innovation and creativity, and represent the needs of a diverse populace. However, many science fields lack gender diversity. Although fewer women than men pursue careers in physical science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (pSTEM), more women than men pursue careers in behavioral science. The current work measured the relationship between first-year college students’ stereotypes about science professions and course completion in science fields over the next 3 years. pSTEM careers were more associated with self-direction and self-promotion (i.e., agency) than with working with and for the betterment of others (i.e., communion). On the flip side, behavioral science careers were associated with communion to a greater degree than with agency. Women completed a lower proportion of pSTEM courses than did men, but this gender disparity disappeared when women perceived high opportunity for communion in pSTEM. Men pursued behavioral science courses to a lesser degree than did women; this disparity did not exist when men perceived ample opportunity for agency in behavioral science. These results suggest highlighting the communal nature of pSTEM and the agentic nature of behavioral science in pre-college settings may promote greater gender diversity across science fields.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abele, A. E., & Wojciszke, B. (2007). Agency and communion from the perspective of self versus others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 751–763. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.93.5.751.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Camp, T. (2012). Computing, we have a problem. ACM Inroads, 3, 34–40. doi:10.1145/2381083.2381097.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ceci, S. J., & Williams, W. M. (2011). Understanding current causes of women’s underrepresentation in science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 108, 3157–3162. doi:10.1073/pnas.1014871108.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cejka, M. A., & Eagly, A. H. (1999). Gender-stereotypic images of occupations correspond to the sex segregation of employment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 413–423. doi:10.1177/0146167299025004002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cheryan, S., Plaut, V. C., Handron, C., & Hudson, L. (2013). The stereotypical computer scientist: Gendered media representations as a barrier to inclusion for women. Sex Roles, 69, 58–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheryan, S., Ziegler, S. A., Montoya, A., & Jiang, L. (2016). Why are some STEM fields more gender balanced than others? Manuscript submitted for publication.

  • Croft, A., Schmader, T., & Block, K. (2015). An under-examined inequality: Cultural and psychological barriers to men’s engagement with communal roles. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 19, 343–370. doi:10.1177/1088868314564789.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dasgupta, N., & Stout, J. G. (2014). Girls and women in science, technology, engineering and mathematics: STEMing the tide and broadening participation in STEM careers. Policy Insights from Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1, 21–29. doi:10.1177/2372732214549471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diekman, A. B., & Eagly, A. H. (2008). On men, women, and motivation: A role congruity account. In J. Y. Shah & W. L. Gardner (Eds.), Handbook of motivation science (pp. 434–447). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diekman, A. B., Brown, E. R., Johnston, A. M., & Clark, E. K. (2010). Seeking congruity between goals and roles: A new look at why women opt out of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics careers. Psychological Science, 21, 1051–1057. doi:10.1177/0956797610377342.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H. (1987). Sex differences in social behavior: A social-role interpretation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109, 573–598. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.109.3.573.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., & Steffen, V. J. (1984). Gender stereotypes stem from the distribution of women and men into social roles. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 735–754.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finson, K. D. (2002). Drawing a scientist: What we do and do not know after fifty years of drawings. School Science and Mathematics, 102, 335–345. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.46.4.735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fleiss, J. L. (1971). Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychological Bulletin, 76, 378–382. doi:10.1037/h0031619.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forbes. (2016). The 10 best-paying STEM jobs for recent grads. Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/pictures/efkk45ekgkh/the-10-best-paying-stem-jobs-for-recent-grads/.

  • Hanson, S. L., & Palmer-Johnson, E. (2000). Expecting the unexpected: A comparative study of African American women’s experiences in science during the high school years. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 6, 265–294. doi:10.1615/JWomenMinorScienEng.v6.i4.10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hazari, Z., Tai, R., & Sadler, P. M. (2007). Gender differences in introductory university physics performance: The influence of high school physics preparation and affective factors. Science Education, 91, 847–876. doi:10.1002/sce.20223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoever, I. J., van Knippeberg, D., van Ginkel, W. P., & Barkema, H. G. (2012). Fostering team creativity: Perspective taking as key to unlocking diversity’s potential. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 982–996. doi:10.1037/a0029159.

  • Hoh, Y. (2009). Using notable women in environmental engineering to dispel misperceptions of engineers. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 4, 117–131. doi:10.11554/5110.

  • Institute of Education Statistics. (n.d.). Detail for CIP Code 45: Social Sciences. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/cipcode/cipdetail.aspx?y=55&cipid=87817.

  • Judd, C. M., James-Hawkins, L., Yzerbyt, V., & Kashima, Y. (2005). Fundamental dimensions of social judgment: Understanding the relations between judgments of competence and warmth. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 899–913. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.899.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kost-Smith, L. E., Pollock, S. J., & Finkelstein, N. D. (2009). Characterizing the gender gap in introductory physics. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 5, 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lahey, J. (2014). This is not your father’s STEM job. The Atlantic. Retrieved from http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/03/this-is-not-your-fathers-stem-job/359684/.

  • Leung, K., Maddux, W., Galinsky, A. D., & Chiu, C.-Y. (2008). Multicultural experience enhances creativity: The when and how. American Psychologist, 63, 169–181. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.63.3.169.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lippa, R. (1998). Gender-related individual differences and the structure of vocational interests: The importance of the people-things dimension. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 996–1009. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.74.4.996.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Margolis, J., & Fisher, A. (2002). Unlocking the clubhouse: Women in computing. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, C., Isaac, J. D., & Sansone, C. (2001). The role of interest in understanding the career choices of female and male college students. Sex Roles, 44, 295–320. doi:10.1023/A:1010929600004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, M. C., Steele, C. M., & Gross, J. J. (2007). Signaling threat: How situational cues affect women in math, science, and engineering settings. Psychological Science, 18, 879–885. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01995.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • National Science Foundation. (2015a). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering: Tables. Tables 5–1. Bachelor’s degrees awarded, by sex and field: 2002–12. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2015/nsf15311/tables.cfm.

  • National Science Foundation. (2015b). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering: Tables. Tables 7–2. Doctoral degrees awarded to women, by field: 2002–12. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2015/nsf15311/tables.cfm.

  • National Science Foundation. (2015c). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering: Tables. Tables 8–2. Postgraduation plans of U.S. citizen and permanent resident S&E doctorate recipients, by sex, major field, and location: 2012. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2015/nsf15311/tables.cfm.

  • National Science Foundation. (2015d). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering: Tables. Tables 9–5. Employment among scientists and engineers, by sex: 2013. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2015/nsf15311/tables.cfm.

  • National Science Foundation. (2015e). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering: Tables. Tables 9–19. Employment among scientists and engineers, by employment sector, sex, race, ethnicity, and disability status for all sectors, by broad occupation: 2013. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2015/nsf15311/tables.cfm.

  • Sheffield, S. L. (2004). Professionalizing women scientists. In S. L. Scheffield (Ed.), Women and science: Social impact and interaction (pp. 127–156). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, S. L., Choueiti, M., & Pieper, K. (2014). Gender bias without borders. Report prepared for the Geena Davis Institute on gender in media. Retrieved from http://seejane.org/research-informs-empowers/.

  • Stangor, C., Carr, C., & Kiang, L. (1998). Activating stereotypes undermines task performance expectations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 1191–1197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stout, J. G., Dasgupta, N., Hunsinger, M., & McManus, M. (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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • U.S. News & World Report. (2016). Best jobs 2015. Retrieved from http://money.usnews.com/careers/best-jobs/rankings.

  • Woolley, A. W., Chabris, C. F., Pentland, A., Hashmi, N., & Malone, T. M. (2010). Evidence for a collective intelligence factor in the performance of human groups. Science, 330, 686–688. doi:10.1126/science.1193147.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by two grants from the National Science Foundation: DRL – 0,833,364; HRD – 1,251,590. We thank Amanda Diekman for her thoughtful feedback on an earlier version of this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Computing Research Association, 1828 L St. NW, Suite 800, Washington D.C., 20036, USA

    Jane G. Stout

  2. Department of Psychology, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA

    Victoria A. Grunberg

  3. Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, 80309, CO, USA

    Tiffany A. Ito

Authors
  1. Jane G. Stout
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Victoria A. Grunberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tiffany A. Ito
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jane G. Stout.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Stout, J.G., Grunberg, V.A. & Ito, T.A. Gender Roles and Stereotypes about Science Careers Help Explain Women and Men’s Science Pursuits. Sex Roles 75, 490–499 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-016-0647-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-016-0647-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation