Daniel Willingham--Science & Education
Hypothesis non fingo
  • Home
  • About
  • Books
  • Articles
  • Op-eds
  • Videos
  • Learning Styles FAQ
  • Daniel Willingham: Science and Education Blog

Women, STEM, and beliefs about effort

1/16/2013

 
A fundamental insight of the last two decades is that motivation is strongly influenced by beliefs about ability and achievement. If you believe that achievement is a product mostly of ability, then you are likely to believe that people with a lot of natural ability achieve a lot without having to work very hard.

A recent paper (Smith, Lewis, Hawthorne, & Hodges in press) examines whether such beliefs might account for sex differences in participation in STEM fields.

In Experiment 1, they examined how much effort graduate students in STEM fields perceived that they exerted, relative to their peers. The results showed that for women, perceived effort was inversely associated with sense of belonging. That is many women seemed to say to themselves "this is so hard for me, I must not really belong in graduate school." That perception was, in turn, associated with decreased motivation. These associations were not observed in men.

In Experiment 2, the researchers created a fictitious field (Eco-psychology) and distributed a professional-looking brochure for a graduate program in Eco-psychology to Introductory psychology students. The graduate program was subtly portrayed as either male-dominated or gender-neutral. Students were asked a number of questions about it, including how interested they were in the program and how difficult they thought they would find it, compared to "the average student." When the program was portrayed as male-dominated, women thought that they would find the program harder, and were less interested in learning more about it.

Experiment 3 used an elaborate ruse in which subjects believed they were interacting via webcam with a professor from the Eco-psychology program at University of Colorado, Boulder. The key manipulation was that the "professor" provided feedback about the subject's likely success in the program (which in this experiment was always portrayed as male-dominated). The feeling of alienation observed in Experiment 2 was observed again, but feedback from the professor could undo it; if the professor merely made effort seem normal but commenting that everyone in the program had to work hard, the gender effect disappeared.

This study mirrors some conceptually similar studies of college freshmen from historically underrepresented groups. For example, in Walton & Cohen (2011) students heard a simple message from upperclassmen emphasizing that everyone feels disoriented and concerned about whether they can really do the work when they first get to college, but that things get better. These brief messages not only made students feel better, they had an impact on students' grades. (There was no effect of the intervention on White students.)

In the larger picture, these findings should remind us of the powerful impact of beliefs on motivation.

References

Smith, J. L., Lewis, K. L., Hawthorne, L., & Hodges, S. D. (in press). 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.

Walton, G. M., & Cohen, G. L. (2011). A brief social-belonging intervention improves academic and health outcomes of minority students. Science, 331(6023), 1447-1451.
Skip Tikul
1/16/2013 02:20:57 am

The studies and your comments are reasonable except for your very overblown intro "examines whether such beliefs might account for sex differences in participation in STEM fields.". There is nothing in these research designs which even arguably suggests that these beliefs _account for_ sex differences in STEM participation.

Steve Ceci (who has written several comprehensive and balanced reviews) makes a strong case (in line with common sense when you put ideology and idealism aside) that the main cause of low female participation in STEM fields is the lower female _interest_ in "things not people" seen in numerous surveys of all kinds. It is not that the typical female feels "i can't do this", nor that she can't do this, it is that she thinks "boring, yeck!".

There is really no excuse for the fact that most people who write on this topic do not even consider this common sense interpretation. It is the kind of ideologically blinkered social science that gives the public low respect for academics.

Dan Willingham
1/16/2013 02:49:33 am

@Skip I agree that "account for" is the wrong verb. I should have said "contribute to." I'm sure the authors would agree that they are not on to "the" reason for disproportionate representation in STEM.
But I disagree with your implication that it's a simple as interest. Experiments like these indicate there are other factors at work.

Skip Tikul
1/16/2013 09:32:06 am

Hmmm, do these studies show that lower female participation in STEM fields is due to factors other than interest? I don't see how Study 1 or Study 3 possibly do that. Study 2 might be argued to do that, but it seems like kind of a stretch. Women told that "Ecopsychology" was male-dominated showed less interest in going into it. So the idea would be that women considering a real field that they know is male-dominated would be put off by that? Doesn't the whole thing seem so contrived as to be very questionable? It is not as if you are taking women who have an ACTUAL interest in some ACTUAL field and showing that a randomized manipulation of learning that the field is male dominated has that effect.

With this sort of contrived stuff I wonder about demand effects. If the materials are not very subtle, subjects may figure out what's going on and play along. At a minimum there would need to be a debriefing in which subjects were asked what they think the purpose of the study was, and the authors should report what the subjects said.

If women do not think they are very interested in non-people-oriented fields that they see as very dry and boring, then why are you sure you know better than they do what they ought to be doing? Is it not possible that persuading them to go into these fields may cause human misery, or at least, get people off track for no good purpose?

Deirdre Mundy link
1/16/2013 12:47:48 pm

In the study that looked at URM students, did they control for socioeconomic/regional backgrounds? I know that as a (white) high school student, I constantly had teachers telling me how my work wasn't college level, how I'd REALLY have to work hard in college, how I'd be shocked at the difference (etc.etc. etc. Only to find that, actually, they'd prepared me very well... much better than other students in my entering class, in fact...)

Do teachers in high-URM population schools neglect to drum these points home? Would it make a difference if students received a harsher view of college and less self-esteem boosting?


Comments are closed.

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    RSS Feed


    Purpose

    The goal of this blog is to provide pointers to scientific findings that are applicable to education that I think ought to receive more attention.

    Archives

    July 2020
    May 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    December 2019
    October 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    January 2019
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    June 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    November 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    December 2015
    July 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    January 2015
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012

    Categories

    All
    21st Century Skills
    Academic Achievement
    Academic Achievement
    Achievement Gap
    Adhd
    Aera
    Animal Subjects
    Attention
    Book Review
    Charter Schools
    Child Development
    Classroom Time
    College
    Consciousness
    Curriculum
    Data Trustworthiness
    Education Schools
    Emotion
    Equality
    Exercise
    Expertise
    Forfun
    Gaming
    Gender
    Grades
    Higher Ed
    Homework
    Instructional Materials
    Intelligence
    International Comparisons
    Interventions
    Low Achievement
    Math
    Memory
    Meta Analysis
    Meta-analysis
    Metacognition
    Morality
    Motor Skill
    Multitasking
    Music
    Neuroscience
    Obituaries
    Parents
    Perception
    Phonological Awareness
    Plagiarism
    Politics
    Poverty
    Preschool
    Principals
    Prior Knowledge
    Problem-solving
    Reading
    Research
    Science
    Self-concept
    Self Control
    Self-control
    Sleep
    Socioeconomic Status
    Spatial Skills
    Standardized Tests
    Stereotypes
    Stress
    Teacher Evaluation
    Teaching
    Technology
    Value-added
    Vocabulary
    Working Memory