Girls earn better grades than boys, but the mechanism explaining this gender difference is not well understood. We examined the relative importance of self-control and motivation in explaining the female advantage in grades. In Study 1, we surveyed middle school teachers and found they judged girls to be higher in both school motivation and self-control. In Studies 2 and 3—using self-reported motivation and teacher- and/or parent-reported self-control, and quarterly and final grades obtained from school records—we find that self-control, but not school motivation, helps to explain the gender gap in academic performance. In these studies, girls appeared to be more self-controlled than boys, but—contrary to teacher judgments in Study 1—did not appear to be more motivated to do well in school.

No abstract

In dealing with the COVID‐19 pandemic, government officials often encounter two concurrent concerns: they have to enforce necessary public health and safety measures to manage COVID‐19. Meanwhile, they also have to mitigate conspiracy beliefs about COVID‐19. To shed light on these issues, we conducted two studies to investigate national identity certainty (i.e., the extent to which people are certain about their national identity) as a predictor of (a) support for restrictive measures to curtail COVID‐19 and (b) conspiracy beliefs about an outgroup as the culprit of COVID‐19. Study 1 was a three‐week longitudinal study ( N = 301) where we investigated the relationships both on a between‐person level (differences between individuals) and on a within‐person level (week‐by‐week fluctuations of the same individual). We found that individual differences in national identity certainty predicted increased support for restrictive measures and increased outgroup conspiracy beliefs. These relationships emerged, even when we controlled for national identity positivity, that is, the extent to which people see their national identity in positive light. In Study 2 ( N = 316), we used a cross‐sectional correlational design and replicated the findings of Study 1. Moreover, we found that the relationships were explained by distinct threat perceptions: realistic threat explained the increased support for restrictive measures, whereas symbolic threat explained the increased outgroup conspiracy beliefs. Overall, our findings suggest that support for restrictive measures and outgroup conspiracy beliefs can be seen as attempts of people high in national identity certainty to address the distinct threats of COVID‐19.