The self perceptions of math ability and four social abilities reported by 284 gifted and talented female adolescents on the Self Directed Search (SDS) were examined to test two set of hypotheses. One set of hypotheses, derived from Bern's (1981) gender schema theory, rests upon the assumption that the Personal Attributes Questionnaire (PAQ) measures global constructs of masculinity and femininity. The second set of hypotheses was derived from Spence and Helmreich's (1978, 1981) interpretation of the PAQ M and F scales as measures of socioaffective instrumental and expressive traits. The results of both typological and regression analyses provided consistent support for the hypotheses derived from the socioaffective trait interpretation of the PAQ. Parallel regression analyses testing for interaction effects failed to support an hypothesized interaction between these two scales, which, even after partialling out the contribution of demonstrated leadership ability, contributed significantly to an understanding of observed differences in self perceptions of social abilities reported by gifted and talented young women.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AikenL. (1976). Update on attitudes and other affective variables in learning mathematics.Review of Educational Research, 46, 293–311.
2.
AllisonP. D. (1977). Testing for interaction in multiple regression.American Journal of Sociology, 83, 144–153.
3.
AstinH. (1974). Sex differences in mathematical and scientific precocity. In StanleyJ., KeatingD., & FoxL. (eds.), Mathematical talent: Discovery, description, and development.Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
4.
BernS. L. (1981). Gender schema theory: A cognitive account of sex typing.Psychological Review, 88, (4), 354–364.
5.
BrushL. R. (1980). Encouraging girls in mathematics: The problem and the solution.Cambridge, Mass.: Abt Associates.
6.
CohenJ. (1978). Partialed products are interactions; partialed vectors are curve components.Psychological Bulletin, 85, 858–866.
7.
CohenJ. & CohenP. (1975). Applied multiple regression/correlational analysis for the behavioral sciences.Hillsdale, N.J.: L. Erlbaum.
8.
FennemaE. & ShermanJ. (1978). Sex related differences in mathematics achievement and related factors: A further study.Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 9, 189–203.
9.
FlemingE., HollingerC. (1979). Project choice: Creating her options in career exploration.Boston: Educational Development Corporation.
10.
FlemingE. & HollingerC. (1981). The multidimensionality of talent in adolescent young women.Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 4, 188–198.
11.
FoxL. H., (1977). Sex differences: Implications for program planning for the academically gifted. In StanleyJ. C., GeorgeW. C., & SolanoC. H., (eds.), The gifted and the creative: A fifty year perspective.Baltimore, M.D.: Johns Hopkins University Press.
12.
FoxL., PasternakS., & PeiserN. (1976). Career related interests of adolescent boys and girls. In KeatingD. P. (Ed.), Intellectual talent: Research & development.Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
13.
FoxL. & DenhamS. (1974). Values and career interests of mathematically and scientifically precocious youth. In StanleyJ. C., KeatingD. P., & FoxL. H. (Eds.), Mathematical talent: Discovery, description & development.Baltimore, The Johns Hopkins University Press, 140–175.
14.
HelmreichR., SpenceJ. & HolahanC. (1979). Psychological androgyny and sex role flexibility: A test of two hypotheses.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1631–1644.
15.
HelmreichR. L., SpenceJ. T. & WilhelmJ. A. (1981). A psychometric analysis of the Personal Attributes Questionnaire.Sex Roles, 7(11), 1097–1108.
HollingerC. (1983). Self-perception and the career aspirations of mathematically talented female adolescents.Journal of Vocational Behavior.
18.
HollingerC. (in press). Self perceptions of ability of mathematically talented female adolescents.Psychology of Women Quarterly.
19.
JonesW. H., ChernovetzM.E.D. & HanssonR. O. (1978). The enigma of androgyny: Differential implications for males and females?Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 46, 298–313.
20.
KaganJ. (1964). Acquisition and significance of sex-typing and sex role identity. In HoffmanM. L., & HoffmanL. W. (Eds.), Review of child development research (Vol. I).New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
21.
KohlbergL. (1966). A cognitive-developmental analysis of children's sex role concepts and attitudes. In MaccobyE. E. (Ed.), The development of sex differences.Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
22.
MarlandS. P. (1972). Education of the gifted and talented. Report to the Congress of the United States by the Commissioner of Education. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
23.
MeeceJ. L., ParsonsJ. E., KaczalaC. M., GoffS. B., & FuttermanR. (1982). Sex differences in math achievement: Toward a model of academic choice.Psychological Bulletin, 2, 324–348.
24.
ParsonsJ. E., AdlerT. F., FuttermanR., GoffS. B., KaczalaC. M., MeeceJ. L. & MidgleyC. (1983). Expectancies, values, and academic behaviors. In SpenceJ. T. (Ed.), Perspectives on achievement and achievement motivation.San Francisco, Calif.: Freeman.
25.
PedhazurE. J. & TetenbaumT. J. (1979). Bern Sex Role Inventory: A theoretical and methodological critique.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 996–1016.
26.
RobitailleD. (1977). A comparison of boys’ and girls’ feelings of self confidence in arithmetic computation.Canadian Journal of Education, 2, 15–22.
27.
SAS user's guide. (1979). Cary, N.C.: SAS Institute.
28.
ShermanJ. (1980). Mathematics, visual spatialization, and related factors: Changes in boys and girls, grades 8-11.Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 476–482.
29.
SpenceJ. & HelmreichR. (1978). Masculinity and femininity: Their psychological dimensions, correlates and antecedents.Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
30.
SpenceJ. & HelmreichR. (1979). On assessing “androgyny.” Sex Roles, 5, 721–738.
31.
SpenceJ. & HelmreichR. (1980). Masculine instrumentality and feminine expressiveness: Their relationships with sex role attitudes and behaviors.Psychology of Women Quarterly, 5, 147–163.
32.
SpenceJ. T. & HelmreichR. L. (1981). Androgyny verus gender schema: A comment on Bern's gender schema theory.Psychological Review, 88, (4), 365–368.
33.
SpenceJ. T.,. HelmreichR., & StappJ. (1974). The Personal Attributes Questionnaire: A measure of sex role stereotypes and masculinity-femininity.Journal Supplement Abstract Service Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 4, 43 (MS. NO. 617).
34.
SuperD. E. (1963). Toward making self concept theory operational. In SuperD. E., JordanJ. P., MaitlinN., & StarishevskyR. (Eds.), Career development: Self concept theory.New York: College Entrance Examination Board.
