Journal of Youth and Adolescence

, Volume 47, Issue 5, pp 976–990 | Cite as

Do Growth Mindsets in Math Benefit Females? Identifying Pathways between Gender, Mindset, and Motivation

  • Jessica L. Degol
  • Ming-Te Wang
  • Ya Zhang
  • Julie Allerton
Empirical Research

Abstract

Despite efforts to increase female representation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), females continue to be less motivated to pursue STEM careers than males. A short-term longitudinal study used a sample of 1449 high school students (grades 9–12; 49% females) to examine pathways from gender and mindset onto STEM outcomes via motivational beliefs (i.e., expectancy beliefs, task value, and cost). Mindset, motivational beliefs, and STEM career aspirations were assessed between the fall and winter months of the 2014–2015 school year and math grades were obtained at the conclusion of the same year. Student growth mindset beliefs predicted higher task values in math. Task values also mediated the pathway from a growth mindset to higher STEM career aspirations. Expectancy beliefs mediated the pathway between gender and math achievement. This mediated pathway was stronger for females than for males, such that females had higher math achievement than males when they endorsed a growth mindset. Findings suggest possible avenues for improving female’s interest in STEM.

Keywords

Achievement motivation Growth mindset STEM career aspirations Gender differences 

Notes

Funding

This study was supported by National Science Foundation Grant 1503181.

Authors’ Contributions

J.L.D. conceptually designed the study, interpreted the results, and drafted and revised the manuscript; M.T.W contributed to the conceptual design of the study and interpretation of the results, and reviewed and revised drafts of the manuscript; Y.Z. carried out analyses, drafted the analytic plan and reviewed drafts of the manuscript; J.A. drafted the method section and reviewed drafts of the manuscript. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Ethical Approval

A review conducted by the Institutional Review Board approved the study to be consistent with the protection of the rights and welfare of human subjects and to meet the requirements of the Federal Guidelines. All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. Anderman, E. M., Eccles, J. S., Yoon, K. S., Roeser, R., Wigfield, A., & Blumenfeld, P. (2001). Learning to value mathematics and reading: Relations to mastery and performance-oriented instructional practices. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26, 76–95.Google Scholar
  2. Aronson, J., Fried, C. B., & Good, C. (2002). Reducing the effects of stereotype threat on African American college students by shaping theories of intelligence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 113–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bandura, A., & Locke, E. A. (2003). Negative self-efficacy and goal effects revisited. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 87–99.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Brummelman, E., Thomaes, S., Orobio de Castro, B., Overbeek, G., & Bushman, B. J. (2014). “That’s not just beautiful-That’s incredibly beautiful!”: The adverse impact of inflated praise on children with low self-esteem. Psychological Science, 25, 728–735.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Burnette, J. L., O’Boyle, E. H., VanEpps, E. M., Pollack, J. M., & Finkel, E. J. (2013). Mind-sets matter: A meta-analytic review of implicit theories and self-regulation. Psychological Bulletin, 139, 655–701.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Ceci, S. J., & Williams, W. M. (2010). Sex differences in math-intensive fields. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19, 275–279.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. Cury, F., Da Fonseca, D., Zahn, I., & Elliot, A. (2008). Implicit theories and IQ test performance: A sequential mediational analysis. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 783–791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dearing, E., & Hamilton, L. C. (2006). Best practices in quantitative methods for developmentalists: V. Contemporary advances and classic advice for analyzing mediating and moderating variables. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 71, 88–104.Google Scholar
  11. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Doron, J., Stephan, Y., Boiché, J., & Le Scanff, C. (2009). Coping with examinations: Exploring relationships between students’ coping strategies, implicit theories of ability, and perceived control. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 515–528.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 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 science? Top researchers debate the evidence (pp. 47–55). Washington: APA Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dweck, C. S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41, 1040–1048.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dweck, C. S. (1999). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. Philadelphia, PA: The Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  16. Dweck, C. S., & Sorich, L. A. (1999). Mastery-oriented thinking. In C. R. Snyder (Ed.), Coping: The psychology of what works (pp. 232–251). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Dweck, C. S., Chiu, C. Y., & Hong, Y. Y. (1995). Implicit theories and their role in judgments and reactions: A word from two perspectives. Psychological Inquiry, 6, 267–285.Google Scholar
  18. Eccles, J. S. (2011). Gendered educational and occupational choices: Applying the Eccles et al model of achievement-related choices. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 35, 195–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Eccles, J., Adler, T. F., Futterman, R., Goff, S. B., Kaczala, C. M., Meece, J., & Midgley, C. (1983). Expectancies, values and academic behaviors. In J. T. Spence (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motives. San Francisco, CA: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
  22. Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 109–132.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Elliot, A. J., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (1996). Approach and avoidance achievement goals and intrinsic motivation: A mediational analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 461–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Else-Quest, N. M., Mineo, C. C., & Higgins, A. (2013). Math and science attitudes and achievement at the intersection of gender and ethnicity. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 37, 293–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. England, P., & Li, S. (2006). Desegregation stalled: The changing gender composition of college majors, 1971-2002. Gender & Society, 20, 657–677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Fredricks, J. A., & Eccles, J. S. (2002). Children’s competence and value beliefs from childhood through adolescence: Growth trajectories in two male-sex-typed domains. Developmental Psychology, 38, 519–533.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Freedman-Doan, C., Wigfield, A., Eccles, J. S., Blumenfeld, P., Arbreton, A., & Harold, R. D. (2000). What am I best at? Grade and gender differences in children’s beliefs about ability improvement. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 21, 379–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gaspard, H., Dicke, A.-L., Flunger, B., Schreier, B., Häfner, I., Trautwein, U., & Nagengast, B. (2015). More value through greater differentiation: Gender differences in value beliefs about math. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107, 663–677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Good, C., Aronson, J., & Inzlicht, M. (2003). Improving adolescents’ standardized test performance: An intervention to reduce the effects of stereotype threat. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 24, 645–662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 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, 700–717.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Gunderson, E. A., Gripshover, S. J., Romero, C., Dweck, C. S., Goldin-Meadow, S., & Levine, S. C. (2013). Parent praise to 1- to 3-year-olds predicts children’s motivational frameworks 5 years later. Child Development, 84, 1526–1541.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. Harackiewicz, J. M., Barron, K. E., Tauer, J. M., Carter, S. M., & Elliot, A. J. (2000). Short-term and long-term consequences of achievement goals: Predicting interest and performance over time. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 316–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Harackiewicz, J. M., Durik, A. M., Barron, K. E., Linnenbrink-Garcia, L., & Tauer, J. M. (2008). The role of achievement goals in the development of interest: Reciprocal relations between achievement goals, interest, and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 105–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Harackiewicz, J. M., Rozek, C. S., Hulleman, C. S., & Hyde, J. S. (2012). Helping parents to motivate adolescents in mathematics and science: An experimental test of a utility-value intervention. Psychological Science, 23, 899–906.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Herbert, J., & Stipek, D. (2005). The emergence of gender differences in children’s perceptions of their academic competence. Applied Developmental Psychology, 26, 276–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hong, Y. Y., Chiu, C. Y., Dweck, C. S., Lin, D., & Wan, W. (1999). Implicit theories, attributions, and coping: A meaning system approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 588–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hulleman, C. S., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2009). Promoting interest and performance in high school science classes. Science, 326, 1410–1412.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Jacobs, J. E., Lanza, S., Osgood, D. W., Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Changes in children’s self-competence and values: Gender and domain differences across grades one through twelve. Child Development, 73, 509–527.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. King, R. B., McInerney, D. M., & Watkins, D. A. (2012). How you think about your intelligence determines how you feel in school: The role of theories of intelligence on academic emotions. Learning and Individual Differences, 22, 814–819.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Köller, O., Baumert, J., & Schnabel, K. (2001). Does interest matter? The relationship between academic interest and achievement in mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 32, 448–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Komarraju, M., & Nadler, D. (2013). Self-efficacy and academic achievement: Why do implicit beliefs, goals, and effort regulation matter? Learning and Individual Differences, 25, 67–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lubinski, D., Benbow, C. P., Webb, R. M., & Bleske-Rechek, A. (2006). Tracking exceptional human capital over two decades. Psychological Science, 17, 194–199.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Meece, J. L., Glienke, B. B., & Burg, S. (2006). Gender and motivation. Journal of School Psychology, 44, 351–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. National Science Foundation. (2011). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering. Arlington: National Science Foundation.Google Scholar
  48. Ommundsen, Y., Haugen, R., & Lund, T. (2005). Academic self-concept, implicit theories of ability, and self-regulation strategies. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 49, 461–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Park, D., Gunderson, E. A., Tsukayama, E., Levine, S. C., & Beilock, S. L. (2016). Young children’s motivational frameworks and math achievement: Relation to teacher-reported instructional practices, but not teacher theory of intelligence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108, 300–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Pomerantz, E. M., & Kempner, S. G. (2013). Mothers’ daily person and process praise: Implications for children’s theory of intelligence and motivation. Developmental Psychology, 49, 2040–2046.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879–891.Google Scholar
  52. Priess-Groben, H. A., & Hyde, J. S. (2017). Implicit theories, expectancies, and values predict mathematics motivation and behavior across high school and college. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 46, 1318–1332.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Rawsthorne, L. J., & Elliot, A. J. (1999). Achievement goals and intrinsic motivation: A meta-analytic review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3, 326–344.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Robinson-Cimpian, J. P., Ganley, C. M., Lubienski, S. T., & Copur-Gencturk, Y. (2014). Teachers’ perceptions of students’ mathematics proficiency may exacerbate early gender gaps in achievement. Developmental Psychology, 50, 1262–1281.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Romero, C., Master, A., Paunesku, D., Dweck, C. S., & Gross, J. J. (2014). Academic and emotional functioning in middle school: The role of implicit theories. Emotion, 14, 227–234.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Sadler, P. M., Sonnert, G., Hazari, Z., & Tai, R. (2012). Stability and volatility of STEM career interest in high school: A gender study. Science Education, 96, 411–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Shim, S. S., Cho, Y., & Wang, C. (2013). Classroom goal structures, social achievement goals, and adjustment in middle school. Learning and Instruction, 23, 69–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Simpkins, S. D., Fredricks, J. A., & Eccles, J. S. (2012). Charting the Eccles’ expectancy-value model from mothers’ beliefs in childhood to youths’ activities in adolescence. Developmental Psychology, 48, 1019–1032.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Smith, J. L., Lewis, K. L., Hawthorne, L., & Hodges, S. D. (2013). When trying hard isn’t natural: Women’s belonging with and motivation for male-dominated STEM fields as a function of effort expenditure concerns. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 131–143.Google Scholar
  60. Stipek, D. J. (1984). Sex differences in children’s attributions for success and failure on math and spelling tests. Sex Roles, 11, 969–981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Stipek, D. J., & Gralinski, J. H. (1991). Gender differences in children’s achievement-related beliefs and emotional responses to success and failure in mathematics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 361–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Tiedemann, J. (2000a). Gender-related beliefs of teachers in elementary school mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 41, 191–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Trautwein, U., Marsh, H. W., Nagengast, B., Lüdtke, O., Nagy, G., & Jonkmann, K. (2012). Probing for the multiplicative term in modern expectancy–value theory: A latent interaction modeling study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 763–777.Google Scholar
  65. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Wang, M.-T. (2012). Educational and career interests in math: A longitudinal examination of the link between classroom environment, motivational beliefs, and interests. Developmental Psychology, 48, 1643–1657.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Wang, M.-T., & Degol, J. L. (2013). Motivational pathways to STEM career choices: Using expectancy-value perspective to understand individual and gender differences in STEM fields. Developmental Review, 33, 304–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 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.Google Scholar
  69. Wang, M. T., & Degol, J. L. (2017). Gender gap in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM): Current knowledge, implications for practice, policy, and future directions. Educational Psychology Review, 229, 119–140.Google Scholar
  70. Wang, M. T., Chow, A., Degol, J. L., & Eccles, J. S. (2017a). Does everyone’s motivational beliefs about physical science decline in secondary school? Heterogeneity of adolescents’ achievement motivation trajectories in physics and chemistry. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 46, 1821–1838.Google Scholar
  71. Wang, M. T., Ye, F., & Degol, J. L. (2017b). Who chooses STEM careers? Using a relative cognitive strength and interest model to predict careers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 46, 1805–1820.Google Scholar
  72. Wigfield, A. (1994). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation: A developmental perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 6, 49–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 68–81.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. Wilkins, J. L. M. (2004). Mathematics and science self-concept: An international investigation. The Journal of Experimental Education, 72, 331–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Yee, D. K., & Eccles, J. S. (1988). Parent perceptions and attributions for children’s math achievement. Sex Roles, 19, 317–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jessica L. Degol
    • 1
  • Ming-Te Wang
    • 2
  • Ya Zhang
    • 3
  • Julie Allerton
    • 3
  1. 1.Pennsylvania State University Altoona, Human Development and Family StudiesAltoonaUSA
  2. 2.Departments of Psychology and Education, and Learning Research and Development CenterUniversity of Pittsburgh, School of EducationPittsburghUSA
  3. 3.Department of Psychology in EducationUniversity of Pittsburgh, School of EducationPittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations