Career Stereotypes and Identities: Implicit Beliefs and Major Choice for College Women and Men in STEM and Female-Dominated Fields
The present study examines the gendered nature of implicitly held beliefs related to STEM careers. It tests predictions from balanced identity theory on the relations between implicit STEM gender stereotypes and implicit STEM identity, as well as predictions from the associative-propositional model related to exposure to counter-stereotypical exemplars in a sample of U.S. college-aged heterosexual romantic couples that varied in whether the woman majored in STEM or in female-dominated majors (FDM). Gender-STEM stereotypes and Self-STEM identification, as measured by Implicit Associations Tasks, were examined in 117 college women majoring in STEM or in FDM and in their romantic partners, some of whom were also majoring in STEM. Women in STEM majors evidenced stronger STEM identities while also demonstrating reduced Gender/STEM stereotypes in comparison to women in FDM and men in STEM. For women, implicit STEM stereotypes predicted implicit STEM identity which in turn predicted majoring in STEM, consistent with predictions from balanced identity theory. There was no support for the hypothesis that men’s exposure to counter-stereotypical women through their romantic relationships influenced their own implicit stereotypes, inconsistent with the associative-propositional model. Women in STEM fields and their romantic partners also evidenced more similar levels of STEM gender stereotypes when compared to the other couples. Dissemination of these results may encourage other STEM-talented women in similar pursuits.
KeywordsSex roles Couples Implicit Stereotyped attitudes Identity Academic specialization (major) Gender roles Romantic relationships STEM majors
The present research was supported by Grant #HRD 1136266 from the National Science Foundation awarded to Joan Barth and the Alabama STEM Education Research Team (ASERT) which includes Rosanna E. Guadagno, Debra McCallum, Carmen L Taylor, and Beth Todd. Mary Verstatae is an additional Co-PI and coordinated data collection at the University of Akron that was part of the larger study. R. Guadagno is now at the University of Texas-Dallas and C. Burkhalter is now at the University of Alabama-Huntsville. We wish to thank Shannon Murphy, Jessy Minney, and Lauren Roberts for assistance with data collection for the Couples Survey.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
Joan M. Barth has received research grants from the National Science Foundation. Joan M. Barth declares that she has no conflict of interest. Sarah T. Dunlap declares that she has no conflict of interest.
- Corbett, C., & Hill, C. (2015). Solving the equation: The variables for women’s success in engineering and computing. Washington, DC: American Association of University Women. https://www.aauw.org/research/solving-the-equation/. Accessed 20 June 2018.
- Diekman, A. B., Steinberg, M., Brown, E. R., Belanger, A. L., & Clark, E. K. (2017). A goal congruity model of role entry, engagement, and exit: Understanding communal goal processes in STEM gender gaps. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 21, 142–175. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868316642141.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Dunlap, S. T., Barth, J. M., & Chappetta, K. (2018). Gender roles in the romantic relationships of women in STEM and female-dominated majors: A study of heterosexual couples. Gender Issues. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12147-018-9223-3.
- Eagly, A. H. (1987). Sex differences in social behavior: A social role interpretation. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Herr, N. (2018). Mediation with dichotomous outcomes. Retrieved from http://www.nrhpsych.com/mediation/logmed.html. Accessed 3 July 2018.
- Hill, C., Corbett, C., & St. Rose, A. (2010). Why so few? Women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Washington, DC: American Association of University Women Retrieved from https://www.aauw.org/research/why-so-few/. Accessed 20 Feb 2018.
- Holland, D. C., & Eisenhart, M. A. (1990). Educated in romance: Women, achievement, and college culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Murray, S. L., Derrick, J., Leder, S., & Holmes, J. G. (2008). Balancing connectedness and self-protection goals in close relationships: A levels of processing perspective on risk regulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 429–459. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3522.214.171.1249.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Murray, S. L., Aloni, M., Holmes, J. G., Derrick, J. L., Stinson, D. A., & Leder, S. (2009a). Fostering partner dependence as trust insurance: The implicit contingencies of the exchange script in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 324–348. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012856.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Murray, S. L., Holmes, J. G., Aloni, M., Pinkus, R., Derrick, J. L., & Leder, S. (2009b). Commitment insurance: Compensating for the autonomy costs of interdependence in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 256–278. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014562.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Murray, S. L., Leder, S., McGregor, J. C. D., Holmes, J. G., Pinkus, R. T., & Harris, B. (2009c). Becoming irreplaceable: How comparisons to the partner’s alternatives differentially affect low and high self-esteem people. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 1180–1191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.07.001.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- National Research Council (2010). Gender differences at critical transitions in the careers of science, engineering, and mathematics faculty. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/12062
- Nosek, B. A., Smyth, F. L., Sriram, N., Lindner, N. M., Devos, T., Ayala, A., & Greenwald, A. G. (2009). National differences in gender-science stereotypes predict national sex differences in science and math achievement. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of American, 106, 10593–10597. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0809921106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Park, L. E., Cook, K. E., & Greenwald, A. G. (2001). Implicit indicators of women’s persistence in math, science, and engineering. Psi Chi Journal of Undergraduate Research, 6, 145–152 https://www.psichi.org/page/journal_past#.W-RW_DFReUl. Accessed 4 May 2018.
- Smyth, F. L., & Nosek, B. A. (2015). On the gender-science stereotypes held by scientists: Explicit accord with gender-ratios, implicit accord with scientific identity. Frontiers in Psychology, 6(415). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00415.
- 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. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021385.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Xue, Y., & Larson, R. C. (2015, May). STEM crisis or STEM surplus? Yes and yes. Monthly Labor Review, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Retrieved from. https://doi.org/10.21916/mlr.2015.14.