Reported is the 20-year follow-up of 1,975 mathematically gifted adolescents (top 1%) whose assessments at age 12 to 14 revealed robust gender differences in mathematical reasoning ability. Both sexes became exceptional achievers and perceived themselves as such; they reported uniformly high levels of degree attainment and satisfaction with both their career direction and their overall success. The earlier sex differences in mathematical reasoning ability did predict differential educational and occupational outcomes. The observed differences also appeared to be a function of sex differences in preferences for (a) inorganic versus organic disciplines and (b) a career-focused versus more-balanced life. Because profile differences in abilities and preferences are longitudinally stable, males probably will remain more represented in some disciplines, whereas females are likely to remain more represented in others. These data have policy implications for higher education and the world of work.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AchterJ.A.LubinskiD.BenbowC.P.
(1996).
Multipotentiality among the intellectually gifted: It was never there and already it's vanishing.
Journal of Counseling Psychology,
43, 65–76.
2.
AchterJ.A.LubinskiD.BenbowC.P.Eftekhari-SanjaniH.
(1999).
Assessing vocational preferences among gifted adolescents adds incremental validity to abilities: A discriminant analysis of educational outcomes over a 10-year interval.
Journal of Educational Psychology,
91, 777–786.
3.
BenbowC.P.
(1988).
Sex differences in mathematical reasoning ability in intellectually talented preadolescents: Their nature, effects, and possible causes.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
11, 169–183, 225–232.
4.
BenbowC.P.
(1992).
Academic achievement in mathematics and science of students between ages 13 and 23: Are there differences among students in the top one percent of mathematical ability?Journal of Educational Psychology,
84, 51–61.
5.
BenbowC.P.MinorL.L.
(1986).
Mathematically talented males and females and achievement in the high school sciences.
American Educational Research Journal,
23, 425–436.
6.
BenbowC.P.StanleyJ.C.
(1980).
Sex differences in mathematical ability: Fact or artifact?Science,
210, 1262–1264.
7.
BenbowC.P.StanleyJ.C.
(1982).
Consequences in high school and college of sex differences in mathematical reasoning ability: A longitudinal perspective.
American Educational Research Journal,
19, 598–622.
8.
BenbowC.P.StanleyJ.C.
(1983).
Sex differences in mathematical reasoning ability: More facts.
Science,
222, 1029–1031.
9.
BenbowC.P.StanleyJ.C.
(1996).
Inequity in equity: How “equity” can lead to inequity for high-potential students.
Psychology, Public Policy, and Law,
2, 249–292.
10.
CohenJ.
(1988).
Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.).
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
11.
GearyD.C.
(1996).
Sexual selection and sex differences in mathematical abilities.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
19, 229–284.
12.
HalpernD.F.
(1992).
Sex differences in cognitive abilities.
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
13.
HalpernD.F.
(1997).
Sex differences in intelligence: Implications for education.
American Psychologist,
52, 1091–1102.
14.
HedgesL.V.NowellA.
(1995).
Sex differences in mental test scores.
Science,
269, 41–45.
15.
HumphreysL.G.LubinskiD.YaoG.
(1993).
Utility of predicting group membership and the role of spatial visualization for becoming an engineer, physical scientist, or artist.
Journal of Applied Psychology,
78, 250–261.
LippaR.
(1998).
Gender-related individual differences and the structure of vocational interests: The importance of the people-things dimension.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
74, 996–1009.
18.
LubinskiD.
(2000).
Scientific and social significance of assessing individual differences: “Sinking shafts at a few critical points.”Annual Review of Psychology,
51, 405–544.
19.
LubinskiD.BenbowC.P.
(1992).
Gender differences in abilities and preferences among the gifted: Implications for the math-science pipeline.
Current Directions in Psychological Science,
1, 61–66.
20.
LubinskiD.BenbowC.P.
(1994).
The Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth (SMPY): The first three decades of a planned 50-year study of intellectual talent. In
SubotnikR.F.ArnoldK.D. (Eds.),
Beyond Terman: Longitudinal studies in contemporary gifted education (pp. 255–281).
Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
21.
LubinskiD.BenbowC.P.
(2000).
States of excellence.
American Psychologist,
55, 137–150.
22.
LubinskiD.WebbR.M.MorelockM.J.BenbowC.P.
(in press).
Top 1 in 10,000: A 10-year follow up of the profoundly gifted.
Journal of Applied Psychology.
23.
MillsC.J.AblardK.E.StumpfH.
(1993).
Gender differences in academically talented young students' mathematical reasoning: Patterns across age and subskills.
Journal of Educational Psychology,
85, 340–346.
24.
National Center for Educational Statistics.
(1998).
Digest of educational statistics (NCES Publication No. 1999–036).
Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
25.
NeisserU.BoodooG.BouchardT.J.Jr.BoykinA.W.BrodyN.CeciS.J.HalpernD.F.LoehlinJ.C.PerloffR.SternbergR.J.UrbinaS.
(1996).
Intelligence: Knowns and unknowns.
American Psychologist,
51, 77–101.
26.
RobinsonN.M.AbbottR.D.BerningerV.W.BusseJ.
(1996).
The structure of abilities in mathematically precocious young children: Gender similarities and differences.
Journal of Educational Psychology,
88, 341–352.
27.
RobinsonN.M.AbbottR.D.BerningerV.W.BusseJ.MukhopadhyahS.
(1997).
Developmental changes in mathematically precocious young children.
Gifted Child Quarterly,
41, 145–158.
28.
SchmidtD.B.LubinskiD.BenbowC.P.
(1998).
Validity of assessing educational-vocational preference dimensions among intellectually talented 13-year olds.
Journal of Counseling Psychology,
45, 436–453.
29.
StanleyJ.C.
(1994).
Gender differences for able elementary school students on above-grade-level ability and achievement tests. In
ColangeloN.AssoulineS.AmbrosonD.L. (Eds.),
Talent development (Vol.
2, pp. 141–148).
Dayton, OH: Ohio Psychology Press.
30.
StevensG.HoisingtonE.
(1987).
Occupational prestige and the 1980 U.S. labor force.
Social Science Research,
16, 74–105.
31.
Van Tassel-BaskaJ.
(1996).
Contributions of the talent-search concept to gifted education. In
BenbowC.P.LubinskiD. (Eds.),
Intellectual talent: Psychometric and social issues (pp. 236–245).
Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
