Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Sex Differences in Formal Reasoning Ability

Task and Interviewer Effects

  • Chapter
Understanding Girls

  • 1037 Accesses

Abstract

When I was in graduate school, teams of graduate students would conduct clinical interviews with elementary and secondary students to learn how to conduct the interviews and to help fellow students collect their data. This article comes out of that data gathering experience. Thus, the first submission of this article reflected a very traditional analysis of students by Piagetian levels and did not add much to the then current research.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Butler, M. & Marzone, J. (1980). Education: The critical filter. A statistical report on the status of female students in post-secondary education (Vol. 2). San Francisco, CA: Women’s Educational Equity Network, Far West Laboratory for Educational Research and Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chandran, S., Treagust, D. & Tobin, K. (1987). The role of cognitive factors in chemistry achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24(2), 145–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dearman, N. & Plisko, V. (1981). The conditions of education. Washington, DC: National Center for Educational Statistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Enyeart, M., Baker, D. & VanHarlingen, D. (1980). Correlation of inductive and deductive logical reasoning to college physics achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 17(3), 263–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farrell, M. & Farmer, W. (1985). Adolescents’ performance on a sequence of proportional reasoning tasks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22(6), 503–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Golbeck, S. (1986). The role of physical content in Piagetian spatial tasks: Sex differences in spatial knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23(4), 365–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graybill, L. (1975). Sex differences in problem solving ability. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 12(4), 341–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, R. (1972). Sexual bias on Rorschach administration. Journal of Personality Assessment, 36(4), 336–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, R. & Gordon, M. (1983). Sex and children’s Rorschach productivity. Psychological Reports, 53(2), 355–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hernandez, L., Marek, E. & Renner, J. (1984). Relationships among gender, age, and intellectual development. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 21(4), 365–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, R. (1982). The classroom climate: A chilly one for women? Washington, D.C.: Project on the Status of Women.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howe, A. & Shayer, M. (1981). Sex related differences on a task of volume and density. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 18(2), 169–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inhelder, B. & Piaget, J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence, New York, NY: Basic Books.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Joseph, C., McKay, T. & McKay, M. (1982). The effect of sex of the subject, sex of the experimenter, and reinforcement condition on serial digit learning. Journal of General Psychology, 107(1), 47–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahle, J. & Lakes, M. (1983). The myth of equality in science classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20(2), 131–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karplus, R., Karplus, E., Formisano, M. & Paulsen, A. (1977). Proportional reasoning and control of variables in seven countries. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 14(5), 411–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karplus, R. & Peterson, R. (1970). Intellectual development beyond elementary school II: Ratio, a survey. School Science and Mathematics, 70(9), 813–820.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, A. (1975). Sex differences in concrete and formal reasoning as measured by manipulative tasks and written tasks. Science Education, 59(3), 397–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, A. & Sheperd, G. (1979). Written language maturity and formal reasoning in male and female adolescents. Language and Speech, 22(2), 117–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lennon, R., Eisenberg, N. & Carroll, J. (1983). The assessment of empathy in early childhood. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 4(3), 295–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linn, M. C. & Pulos, S. (1983). Aptitude and experience influences on proportional reasoning during adolescence: Focus on male-female differences. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 14(1), 30–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McMahan, E. (1976). The role of the experimenter in observed sex differences in conservation acquisition. Journal of Psychology, 92(4), 205–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meehan, A. (1984). A meta-analysis of sex differences in formal operational thought. Child Development, 55(3), 1110–1124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, A. & Lawson, A. (1988). Predicting genetics achievement in nonmajors college biology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25(1), 23–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Science Foundation (1986). Women and minorities in science and engineering. Washington, D.C.: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piaget, J. & Inhelder, B. (1975). The origin of the idea of chance in children. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piburn, M. (1980). Spatial reasoning as a correlate of formal thought and science achievement for New Zealand students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 17(5), 443–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piburn, M. & Baker, D. (1988, April). Reasoning about logical propositions and success in science. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piburn, M. & Enyeart, M. (1981, April). An error analysis of responses to a test of propositional logic. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Grossinger’s NY.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rumenik, C., Capasso, D. & Hendrick, C. (1977). Experimenter sex effects in behavioral research. Psychological Bulletin, 84(4), 852–877.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saunders, W. and Jesunathadas, J. (1988). The effect of task content upon proportional reasoning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25(1), 59–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sclafani, J. & Labarba, R. (1982). Sex differences and effects of sex of examiner on early conservation ability. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 19(4), 191–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sobal, J. & Juhasz, J. (1977). Sex, experimenter and reinforcement effects in verbal learning. Journal of Social Psychology, 102(2), 267–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SPSS-X, Inc. (1986). User’s guide. Chicago, Illinois: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Staver, J. (1984). Effects of method and format on subjects’ responses to a control of variables reasoning problem. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 21(5), 517–526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Staver, J. & Gabel, D. (1979). The development and construct validation of a group administered test of formal thought. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 16(6), 535–544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Staver, J. & Pascarella, E. (1984). The effect of method and format on the responses of subjects to a Piagetian reasoning problem. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 21(3), 305–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stefanich, G., Unroth, R., Perry, B. & Phillips, G. (1983). Convergent validity of group tests of cognitive development. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20(6), 557–563.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tschopp, J. & Kurdek, L. (1981). An assessment of the relation between traditional and paper-and pencil operations tasks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 18(1), 87–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wittig, A., Sasse, S. and Giacomi, J. (1984). Predictive validity of five cognitive skills tests among women receiving engineering training. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 21(5), 537–546.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Arizona State University, USA

    Dale Rose Baker

Authors
  1. Dale Rose Baker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Sense Publishers

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Baker, D.R. (2016). Sex Differences in Formal Reasoning Ability. In: Understanding Girls. Cultural and Historical Perspectives on Science Education. SensePublishers, Rotterdam. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6300-497-8_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6300-497-8_4

  • Publisher Name: SensePublishers, Rotterdam

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-6300-497-8

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation