Journal of Science Education and Technology

, Volume 24, Issue 4, pp 509–516 | Cite as

Gender Differences in Attitudes Toward Science and Technology Among Majors

  • Anu A. Gokhale
  • Cara Rabe-Hemp
  • Lori Woeste
  • Kenton Machina


In the USA, women have consistently been proportionally underrepresented in science and technology (S&T). In these disciplines, as students move from high schools to colleges to graduate programs, qualified women drop out at higher rates than do men, resulting in a striking loss of talented students. Attitude toward a discipline is one of the major factors in students’ choice of majors. As a result, attitudes toward S&T are issues with longstanding attention and interest in education research. Retention of female students in S&T majors remains a major concern. The purpose of the study was to investigate attitudes toward S&T including attitudes toward female participation in S&T, among S&T majors, and examine differences by gender and class standing. Such an investigation would provide deeper insights to help devise strategies to retain women in S&T majors.


Attitudes Science and technology Gender Class standing 


  1. Agbonlahor RO (2008) Individual characteristics as correlates of attitudes to information technology among Nigerian University lecturers. Afr J Libr Arch Inf Sci 18(2):131–146Google Scholar
  2. Ajzen I (1991) The theory of planned behavior. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 50(2):179–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ajzen I, Fishbein M (1980) Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, Prentice HallGoogle Scholar
  4. Ajzen I, Madden TJ (1986) Prediction of goal-directed behavior: attitudes, intentions and perceived behavioral control. J Exp Soc Psychol 22:453–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Allport GW (1935) Attitudes. Handbook of social psychology. Clark University Press, WorcesterGoogle Scholar
  6. Bain CD, Rice ML (2006) The influence of gender on attitudes, perceptions, and uses of technology. J Res Technol Educ 39(2):119–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barmby P, Kind PM, Jones K (2008) Examining changing attitudes in secondary school science. Int J Sci Educ 30(8):1075–1093CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bell S (2010) Women in science: the persistence of gender in Australia. High Educ Manag Policy 22(1):47–65Google Scholar
  9. Brady A (2003) Interrupting gender as usual: metis goes to work. Women’s Stud 32(2):211–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Breakwell GM, Robertson T (2001) The gender gap in science attitudes, parental and peer influences: changes between 1987–88 and 1997–98. Public Underst Sci 10:71–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Daempfle P (2003) An analysis of the high attrition rates among first year college science, math, and engineering majors. J Coll Student Retent Res Theory Pract 5(1):37–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Desy EA, Peterson SA, Brockman V (2011) Gender differences in science-related attitudes and interests among middle school and high school students. Sci Educ 20(2):23–30Google Scholar
  13. Dudo A, Brossard D, Shanahan J, Scheufele DA, Morgan M, Signorielli N (2011) Science on television in the 21st century recent trends in portrayals and their contributions to public attitudes toward science. Commun Res 38(6):754–777CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Etzkowitz H, Kemelgor C, Uzzi B (2000) Athena unbound: the advancement of women in science and technology. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fishbein M (1967) A behavior theory approach to the relation between beliefs about an object and the attitude toward the object. In: Fishbein M (ed) Readings in attitude theory and measurement. Wiley, New York, pp 389–400Google Scholar
  16. Fishbein M, Ajzen I (1975) Belief, attitude intention and behavior: an introduction to theory and research. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, ReadingGoogle Scholar
  17. Fuselier L, Jackson JK (2010) Perceptions of collaboration, equity, and values in science among female and male college students. J Balt Sci Educ 9(2):109–118Google Scholar
  18. Gedrovics J, Wäreborn I, Jeronen E (2006) Science subjects choice as a criterion of students’ attitudes to science. J Balt Sci Educ 5(1):74–85Google Scholar
  19. Gokhale A, Brauchle P, Machina K (2009) Development and validation of a scale to measure attitudes toward science and technology. J Coll Sci Teach 38(5):66–75Google Scholar
  20. Gürer D, Camp T (2002) An ACM-W literature review on women in computing. ACM SIGCSE Bull 34(2):121–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hecker D (2005) Occupational employment projections to 2014. Mon Lab Rev 128:70–102Google Scholar
  22. Hill C, Corbett C, StRose A (2010) Why so few? Women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. American Association of University Women, Washington, DC 20036Google Scholar
  23. Holt DT, Crocker M (2000) Prior negative experiences: their impact on computer training outcomes. Comput Educ 35(4):295–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hornig S (1992) Gender differences in responses to news about science and technology. Sci Technol Hum Values 17(4):532–542CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kiefer AK, Sekaquaptewa D (2007) Implicit stereotypes, gender identification, and math-related outcomes: a prospective study of female college students. Psychol Sci 18:13–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lewin AY, Zhong X (2012) The evolving diaspora of talent: a perspective on trends and implications for sourcing science and engineering work. J Int Manag 19(1):6–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Miller PH, Slawinski Blessing J, Schwartz S (2006) Gender differences in high-school students’ views about science. Int J Sci Educ 28(4):363–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. National Science Foundation (2014) Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering: data Tables. Retrieved November 28, 2014, from
  29. Nauta MM, Epperson DL (2003) A longitudinal examination of the social-cognitive model applied to high school girls’ choices of nontraditional college majors and aspirations. J Couns Psychol 50(4):448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Nixon AE, Meikle H, Borman K (2006) The urgent need to encourage aspiring engineers: effects of college degree program culture on female and minority student STEM participation. Lat Am Caribb J Eng Educ 1(2):57–63Google Scholar
  31. Osborne J, Simon S, Collins S (2003) Attitudes towards science: a review of the literature and its implications. Int J Sci Educ 25(9):1049–1079CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Schumacher P, Morahan-Martin J (2001) Gender, internet and computer attitudes and experiences. Comput Hum Behav 17(1):95–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Tolley K (2014) The science education of American girls: a historical perspective. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  34. Vandermoere F, Blanchemanche S, Bieberstein A, Marette S, Roosen J (2010) The morality of attitudes toward nanotechnology: about God, techno-scientific progress, and interfering with nature. J Nanoparticle Res 12(2):373–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Weinburgh M (1998) Gender, Ethnicity, and Grade Level as Predictors of Middle School Students’ Attitudes Toward Science. Georgia State University. (
  36. West MS, Curtis JW (2006) AAUP faculty gender equity indicators 2006. American Association of University Professors, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  37. Whalen DF, Shelley MC (2010) Academic success for STEM and non-STEM majors. J STEM Educ Innov Res 11(1):45–60Google Scholar
  38. Whitehead JM (1996) Sex stereotypes, gender identity and subject choice at A level. Educ Res 38(2):147–160Google Scholar
  39. Wyer M (2003) Intending to stay: images of scientists, attitudes toward women, and gender as influences on persistence among science and engineering majors. J Women Minor Sci Eng 9:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anu A. Gokhale
    • 1
  • Cara Rabe-Hemp
    • 2
  • Lori Woeste
    • 3
  • Kenton Machina
    • 4
  1. 1.Computer Systems TechnologyIllinois State UniversityNormalUSA
  2. 2.Criminal Justice ScienceIllinois State UniversityNormalUSA
  3. 3.Kirkwood Community CollegeCedar RapidsUSA
  4. 4.Illinois State UniversityNormalUSA

Personalised recommendations