Sex Differences in Intrinsic Aptitude for Mathematics and Science?: A Critical Review.

Spelke, Elizabeth S.

doi:10.1037/0003-066x.60.9.950

Cited by 625 publications

(466 citation statements)

References 87 publications

(175 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

397

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, the effect obtained by Grimshaw et al (1995) is probably only indirectly related to mental rotation abilities. These results are in line with recent findings that girls and boys do not differ in their ability to learn about objects, numbers and space (Spelke 2005), but as proposed by Hyde (2005), they may use slightly different strategies in solving problems (von Hofsten and Rönnqvist 1988).…”

Section: Sex Differences In Spatial Abilitysupporting

confidence: 92%

“…This advantage is, however, much less distinct in children, if at all present (Voyer 1995;Roberts and Bell 2002). As proposed by Hyde (2005) and Spelke (2005), adult men and women have equivalent cognitive abilities, but slightly different approaches to cognitive problems that can be solved with multiple strategies. Men and women are apt to choose different solutions, but when they are encouraged to choose one source of information the gender gap of reasoning is narrowed and they tend to perform equally well (Spelke 2005).…”

Section: Mental Rotation and Sex Differencesmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…As proposed by Hyde (2005) and Spelke (2005), adult men and women have equivalent cognitive abilities, but slightly different approaches to cognitive problems that can be solved with multiple strategies. Men and women are apt to choose different solutions, but when they are encouraged to choose one source of information the gender gap of reasoning is narrowed and they tend to perform equally well (Spelke 2005). A few studies have found differences in the preschool years, (1995; Levine, Huttenlocher et al 1999;DeLoache, Uttal et al 2004).…”

Section: Mental Rotation and Sex Differencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Fitting objects into holes: On the development of spatial cognition skills.

Örnkloo¹,

Hofsten²

2007

Developmental Psychology

121

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The authors examined 14-to 26-month-old infants' understanding of the spatial relationships between objects and apertures in an object manipulation task. The task was to insert objects with various cross-sections (circular, square, rectangular, ellipsoid, and triangular) into fitting apertures. A successful solution required the infant to mentally rotate the object to be fit into the aperture and use that information to plan the action. The object was presented standing up in half of the trials; in the other half, it was lying down. The results showed that infants solved the problem consistently from age 22 months and that a successful solution was associated with appropriate preadjustments before the hand arrived with the block to the aperture. No sex differences were found.

show abstract

Section: Sex Differences In Spatial Abilitysupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Mental Rotation and Sex Differencesmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Mental Rotation and Sex Differencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Fitting objects into holes: On the development of spatial cognition skills.

Örnkloo¹,

Hofsten²

2007

Developmental Psychology

121

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Men and women receive equal grades in college mathematics classes that are of comparable difficulty (Bridgeman & Lewis, 1996), and, as noted, women now earn almost half of the bachelor's degrees in mathematics. Thus, Spelke (2005) argued, "By the most meaningful measure-the ability to master new, challenging mathematics material over extended time-college men and women show equal aptitude for mathematics " (p. 592).…”

Section: Causal Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Women's underrepresentation in science: Sociocultural and biological considerations.

Ceci

Williams

Barnett

2009

Psychological Bulletin

810

573

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The underrepresentation of women at the top of math-intensive fields is controversial, with competing claims of biological and sociocultural causation. The authors develop a framework to delineate possible causal pathways and evaluate evidence for each. Biological evidence is contradictory and inconclusive. Although cross-cultural and cross-cohort differences suggest a powerful effect of sociocultural context, evidence for specific factors is inconsistent and contradictory. Factors unique to underrepresentation in math-intensive fields include the following: (a) Math-proficient women disproportionately prefer careers in non-math-intensive fields and are more likely to leave math-intensive careers as they advance; (b) more men than women score in the extreme math-proficient range on gatekeeper tests, such as the SAT Mathematics and the Graduate Record Examinations Quantitative Reasoning sections; (c) women with high math competence are disproportionately more likely to have high verbal competence, allowing greater choice of professions; and (d) in some math-intensive fields, women with children are penalized in promotion rates. The evidence indicates that women's preferences, potentially representing both free and constrained choices, constitute the most powerful explanatory factor; a secondary factor is performance on gatekeeper tests, most likely resulting from sociocultural rather than biological causes.Keywords: sex differences, spatial ability, mathematics, family versus career trade-offs, women in science Supplemental materials: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0014412.supp By 2001, women were earning 48% of bachelor's degrees (National Science Foundation, 2007) and 29% of PhD degrees (Hill & Johnson, 2004) in mathematics, representing enormous increases over the prior 30 years. Women's representation among editorial boards in science and awards panels similarly increased (Nelson & Brammer, 2008). These changes are evidence of the strength of cultural factors in determining such outcomes, because biology has not changed over this period. Despite this progress, women's representation among PhD degree holders has not coincided with proportional faculty appointments: Women earned 31.3% of chemistry PhD degrees between 1993 and 2003 but in 2002 were hired for only 21.5% of assistant professorships. Similar disparities exist for new faculty appointments in physics, engineering, and mathematics. In 1976 women represented only 7.5% of the faculty in physical sciences and less than 1% in engineering (Dearman & Plisko, 1979). By 2006 the percentage had increased to 16%-25%, but the hiring of assistant professors in these fields has not been proportional to female PhD pools. This hiring disparity extends beyond math-intensive fields.Even in less math-intensive fields, such as cellular and molecular biology, fields in which women obtain 46% of all PhD degrees, women disproportionately drop out at multiple points. The picture is the same across many science fields: Women are not being hired as assistant professors at the ra...

show abstract

“…The extent to which gender differences stem from biological differences, from differences in the ways that boys and girls are raised, or from an interaction between biology and cultural practices is difficult to determine, because these differences emerge slowly through time, during which they may experience different treatment in the social environment (Dehaene, 1997;Halpern, 2000;Spelke, 2005;Spelke and Newport, 1998). 2 This fact draws attention to the crucial question of the early life course trajectory of gender differences as well as the factors that produce them.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%