Helping and Hindering Undergraduate Women’s STEM Motivation: Experiences With STEM Encouragement,STEM-Related Gender Bias,and Sexual Harassment

Abstract

Prior research indicates many women either leave or pursue science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) degrees because the social climate undermined or strengthened their motivation and career aspirations. We investigated whether women’s experiences of sexual harassment and STEM-related gender bias negatively predicted their STEM motivation (task value, competence beliefs, and perceived costs) and STEM career aspirations. We also tested whether STEM encouragement from friends and family positively predicted motivation and aspirations. To consider domain-specific effects, we also tested the predictors in relation to non-STEM motivation and career aspirations. Students’ grade point average was controlled in all analyses. The sample was undergraduate women enrolled in gateway biology courses for majors (N = 685; M = 19.67 years of age; 35% Asian, 31% White, and 27% Latinx). A majority experienced gender bias (60.9%) or sexual harassment (78.1%) at least once in the past year. STEM-related gender bias from classmates and sexual harassment from instructors (faculty, teaching assistants, or graduate students) were negatively related to STEM motivation and career aspirations. Perceived STEM encouragement from friends was positively related to motivation, and STEM encouragement from friends and family predicted STEM career aspirations. Finally, domain-specific effects were indicated. Our research highlights the need for programs that increase awareness of discrimination, combat bias and harassment, and affirm students’ STEM interest. Additional online materials for this article are available on PWQ's website at https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/suppl/10.1177/0361684318806302

Keywords

motivation science sexism sexual harassment teachers peers family

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

American Association of University Women. (2005). Drawing the line: Sexual harassment on campus. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from https://www.aauw.org/files/2013/02/drawing-the-line-sexual-harassment-on-campus.pdf

American Association of University Women. (2011). Crossing the line: Sexual harassment at school. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.aauw.org/research/crossing-the-line/

Boehnke

(2008). Peer pressure: A cause of scholastic underachievement? A cross-cultural study of mathematical achievement among German, Canadian, and Israeli middle school students. Social Psychology of Education, 11, 149–160. doi:10.1007/s11218-007-9041-z

Brechwald

W. A.

Prinstein

M. J.

(2011). Beyond homophily: A decade of advances in understanding peer influence processes. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 21, 166–179. doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2010.00721.x

Brown

C. S.

Bigler

R. S.

(2005). Children’s perceptions of discrimination: A developmental model. Child Development, 76, 533–553. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2005.00862.x

Brown

C. S.

Leaper

(2010). Latina and European American girls’ experiences with academic sexism and their self-concepts in mathematics and science during adolescence. Sex Roles, 63, 860–870. doi:10.1007/s11199-010-9856-5

Cheryan

Ziegler

S. A.

Montoya

A. K.

Jiang

(2017). Why are some STEM fields more gender balanced than others? Psychological Bulletin, 143, 1–35. doi:10.1037/bul0000052

Crosby

(1984). The denial of personal discrimination. The American Behavioral Scientist, 27, 371. doi:10.1177%2F000276484027003008

Dasgupta

Stout

J. G.

(2014). Girls and women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics: STEMing the tide and broadening participation in STEM careers. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1, 21–29. doi:10.1177/2372732214549471

10.

Diekman

A. B.

Fuesting

M. A.

(2018). Choice, context, and constraint: When and why do women disengage from STEM? In Travis

C. B.

White

J. W.

Rutherford

Williams

W. S.

Cook

S. L.

Wyche

K. F.

(Eds.), APA handbook of the psychology of women: Perspectives on women’s private and public lives (Vol. 2, pp. 475–495). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/0000060-026

11.

Downing

R. A.

Crosby

F. J.

Blake-Beard

(2005). The perceived importance of developmental relationships on women undergraduates’ pursuit of science. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 29, 419–426. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2005.00242.x

12.

Eccles

J. S.

(2014). Gender and achievement choices. In Gershoff

E. T.

Mistry

R. S.

Crosby

D. A.

(Eds.), Societal contexts of child development: Pathways of influence and implications for practice and policy (pp. 19–34). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

13.

Eccles

J. S.

Wang

(2016). What motivates females and males to pursue careers in mathematics and science? International Journal of Behavioral Development, 40, 100–106. doi:10.1177/0165025415616201

14.

Eccles

J. S.

Wigfield

(1995). In the mind of the actor: The structure of adolescents’ achievement task values and expectancy-related beliefs. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 215–225. doi:10.1177/0146167295213003

15.

Eccles

J. S.

Wigfield

(2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 109–132. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135153

16.

Erikson

M. G.

(2007). The meaning of the future: Toward a more specific definition of possible selves. Review of General Psychology, 11, 348–358. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.11.4.348

17.

Evans

C. D.

Diekman

A. B.

(2009). On motivated role selection: Gender beliefs, distant goals, and career interest. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 33, 235–249. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2009.01493.x

18.

Fernández

M. L.

Castro

Y. R.

Otero

M. C.

Foltz

M. L.

Lorenzo

M. G.

(2006). Sexism, vocational goals, and motivation as predictors of men’s and women’s career choice. Sex Roles, 55, 267–272. doi:10.1007/s11199-006-9079-y

19.

Ferry

T. R.

Fouad

N. A.

Smith

P. L.

(2000). The role of family context in a social cognitive model for career-related choice behavior: A math and science perspective. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 57, 348–364. doi:10.1006/jvbe.1999.1743

20.

Field

(2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

21.

Gruber

Fineran

(2016). Sexual harassment, bullying, and school outcomes for high school girls and boys. Violence Against Women, 22, 112–133. doi:10.1177/1077801215599079

22.

Guo

Marsh

H. W.

Morin

A. J. S.

Parker

P. D.

Kaur

(2015). Directionality of the associations of high school expectancy-value, aspirations, and attainment: A longitudinal study. American Educational Research Journal, 52, 371–402. doi:10.3102/0002831214565786

23.

Handley

I. M.

Brown

E. R.

Moss-Racusin

Smith

J. L.

(2015). Quality of evidence revealing subtle gender biases in science is in the eye of the beholder. PNAS: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 112, 13201–13206. doi:10.1073/pnas.1510649112

24.

Harackiewicz

J. M.

Rozek

C. S.

Hulleman

C. S.

Hyde

J. S.

(2012). Helping parents to motivate adolescents in mathematics and science: An experimental test of a utility-value intervention. Psychological Science, 23, 899–906. doi:10.1177/0956797611435530

25.

Hershcovis

S. M.

Barling

(2010). Towards a multi-foci approach to workplace aggression: A meta-analytic review of outcomes from different perpetrators. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31, 24–44. doi:10.1002/job.621

26.

Holmes

Gore

Smith

Lloyd

(2018). An integrated analysis of school students’ aspirations for STEM careers: Which student and school factors are most predictive? International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 16, 655–675. doi:10.1007/s10763-016-9793-z

27.

Huang

(2013). Gender differences in academic self-efficacy: A meta-analysis. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 28, 1–35. doi:10.1007/s10212-011-0097-y

28.

Huerta

Cortina

L. M.

Pang

J. S.

Torges

C. M.

Magley

V. J.

(2006). Sex and power in the academy: Modeling sexual harassment in the lives of college women. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 616–628. doi:10.1177/0146167205284281

29.

Kessels

(2005). Fitting into the stereotype: How gender-stereotyped perceptions of prototypic peers relate to liking for school subjects. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 20, 309–323. doi:10.1007/BF03173559

30.

Kosovich

J. J.

Hulleman

C. S.

Barron

K. E.

Getty

(2015). A practical measure of student motivation: Establishing validity evidence for the expectancy-value-cost scale in middle school. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 35, 790–816. doi:10.1177/0272431614556890

31.

Kuchynka

S. L.

Salomon

Bosson

J. K.

El-Hout

Kiebel

Cooperman

Toomey

(2018). Hostile and benevolent sexism and college women’s STEM outcomes. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 42, 72–87. doi:10.1177/0361684317741889

32.

Lagaert

Van Houtte

Roose

(2017). Engendering culture: The relationship of gender identity and pressure for gender conformity with adolescents’ interests in the arts and literature. Sex Roles, 77, 482–495. doi:10.1007/s11199-017-0738-y

33.

Leaper

(2015). Do I belong? Gender, peer groups, and STEM. International Journal of Gender, Science, and Technology, 7, 166–179.

34.

Leaper

Brown

C. S.

(2008). Perceived experiences with sexism among adolescent girls. Child Development, 79, 685–704. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2008.01151.x

35.

Leaper

Farkas

Brown

C. S.

(2012). Adolescent girls’ experiences and gender-related beliefs in relation to their motivation in math/science and English. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 41, 268–282. doi:10.1007/s10964-011-9693-z

36.

Leaper

Van

S. R.

(2008). Masculinity ideology, covert sexism, and perceived gender typicality in relation to young men’s academic motivation and choices in college. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 9, 139–153. doi:10.1037/1524-9220.9.3.139

37.

Lewis

K. L.

Stout

J. G.

Finkelstein

N. D.

Pollock

S. J.

Miyake

Cohen

G. L.

Ito

T. A.

(2017). Fitting in to move forward: Belonging, gender, and persistence in the physical Sciences, Technology, Engineering, And Mathematics (pSTEM). Psychology of Women Quarterly, 41, 420–436. doi:10.1177/0361684317720186

38.

Markus

Nurius

(1986). Possible selves. American Psychologist, 41, 954–969. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.41.9.954

39.

Masten

A. S.

(2001). Ordinary magic: Resilience processes in development. American Psychologist, 56, 227–238. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.56.3.227

40.

McGee

E. O.

Bentley

(2017). The troubled success of black women in STEM. Cognition and Instruction, 35, 265–289. doi:10.1080/07370008.2017.1355211

41.

McKellar

S. E.

Marchand

A. D.

Diemer

M. A.

Malanchuk

Eccles

J. S.

(2018). Threats and supports to female students’ math beliefs and achievement. Journal of Research on Adolescence. Advance online publication. doi:10.1111/jora.12384

42.

Moss-Racusin

(2014). Male backlash: Penalties for men who violate gender stereotypes. In Burke

R. J.

Major

D. A.

(Eds.), Gender in organizations: Are men allies or adversaries to women’s career advancement? (pp. 247–269). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar. doi:10.4337/9781781955703.00021

43.

Moss-Racusin

Pietri

E. S.

Hennes

E. P.

Dovidio

J. F.

Brescoll

V. L.

Roussos

Handelsman

(2018). Reducing STEM gender bias with VIDS (video interventions for diversity in STEM). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 24, 236–260. doi:10.1037/xap0000144

44.

Moss-Racusin

Sanzari

Caluori

Rabasco

(2018). Gender bias produces gender gaps in stem engagement. Sex Roles. Advance online publication. doi:10.1007/s11199-018-0902-z

45.

Myers

D. P.

Major

D. A.

(2017). Work–family balance self-efficacy’s relationship with STEM commitment: Unexpected gender moderation. The Career Development Quarterly, 65, 264–277. doi:10.1002/cdq.12097

46.

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2018). Sexual harassment of women: Climate, culture, and consequences in academic sciences, engineering, and medicine. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi:10.17226/24994

47.

National Science Foundation. (2017). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/

48.

O’Dea

R. E.

Lagisz

Jennions

M. D.

Nakagawa

(2018). Gender differences in individual variation in academic grades fail to fit expected patterns for STEM. Nature Communications, 9(1): 3777. doi:10.1038/s41467-018-06292-0

49.

Ormerod

A. J.

Collinsworth

L. L.

Perry

L. A.

(2008). Critical climate: Relations among sexual harassment, climate, and outcomes for high school girls and boys. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 32, 113–125. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2008.00417.x

50.

Pietri

E. S.

Johnson

I. R.

Ozgumus

Young

A. I.

(2018). Maybe she is relatable: Increasing women’s awareness of gender bias encourages their identification with women scientists. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 42, 192–219. doi:10.1177/0361684317752643

51.

Pietri

E. S.

Moss-Racusin

Dovidio

J. F.

Guha

Roussos

Brescoll

V. L.

Handelsman

(2017). Using video to increase gender bias literacy toward women in science. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 41, 175–196. doi:10.1177/0361684316674721

52.

Remedios

J. D.

Snyder

S. H.

(2015). How women of color detect and respond to multiple forms of prejudice. Sex Roles, 73, 371–383. doi:10.1007/s11199-015-0453-5

53.

Rice

Barth

J. M.

Guadagno

R. E.

Smith

G. P. A.

McCallum

D. M.

(2013). The role of social support in students’ perceived abilities and attitudes toward math and science. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42, 1028–1040. doi:10.1007/s10964-012-9801-8

54.

Riegle-Crumb

Farkas

Muller

(2006). The role of gender and friendship in advanced course taking. Sociology of Education, 79, 206–228. doi:10.1177/003804070607900302

55.

Riegle-Crumb

King

Grodsky

Muller

(2012). The more things change, the more they stay the same? Prior achievement fails to explain gender inequality in entry into STEM college majors over time. American Educational Research Journal, 49, 1048–1073. doi:10.3102/0002831211435229

56.

Riegle-Crumb

Morton

(2017). Gendered expectations: Examining how peers shape female students’ intent to pursue STEM fields. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1–11. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00329

57.

Robnett

R. D.

(2016). Gender bias in STEM fields: Variation in prevalence and links to STEM self-concept. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 40, 65–79. doi:10.1177/0361684315596162

58.

Robnett

R. D.

Leaper

(2013). Friendship groups, personal motivation, and gender in relation to high school students’ STEM career interest. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 23, 652–664. doi:10.1111/jora.12013

59.

Rosenthal

M. N.

Smidt

A. M.

Freyd

J. J.

(2016). Still second class: Sexual harassment of graduate students. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 40, 364–377. doi:10.1177/0361684316644838

60.

Rosser

S. V.

(2012). Breaking into the lab: Engineering progress for women in science. New York: New York University Press.

61.

Ryan

A. M.

(2000). Peer groups as a context for the socialization of adolescents’ motivation, engagement, and achievement in school. Educational Psychologist, 35, 101–111. doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3502_4

62.

Seginer

(2009). Future orientation: Developmental and ecological perspectives. New York, NY: Springer.

63.

Sikora

Pokropek

(2012). Gender segregation of adolescent science career plans in 50 countries. Science Education, 96, 234–264. doi:10.1002/sce.20479

64.

Simpkins

S. D.

Fredricks

J. A.

Eccles

J. S.

(2015). The role of parents in the ontogeny of achievement-related motivation and behavioral choices. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 80, vii, 1–169. doi:10.1111/mono.12169

65.

Smith

C. P.

Freyd

J. J.

(2014). Institutional betrayal. American Psychologist, 69, 575–587. doi:10.1037/a0037564

66.

Stake

J. E.

Mares

K. R.

(2001). Science enrichment programs for gifted high school girls and boys: Predictors of program impact on science confidence and motivation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 1065–1088. doi:10.1002/tea.10001

67.

Starr

C. R.

Hunter

Dunkin

Honig

Palomino

Leaper

(2018). Doing science makes a difference: Engaging students in STEM practices increases STEM identity and motivation over time. Manuscript in preparation.

68.

Steele

James

J. B.

Barnett

R. C.

(2002). Learning in a man’s world: Examining the perceptions of undergraduate women in male-dominated academic areas. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26, 46–50. doi:10.1111/1471-6402.00042

69.

Syzmanowicz

Furnham

(2011). Gender differences in self-estimates of general, mathematical, spatial and verbal intelligence: Four meta-analyses. Learning and Individual Differences, 21, 493–504. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2011.07.001

70.

Voyer

S. D.

(2014). Gender differences in scholastic achievement: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 140, 1174–1204. doi:10.1037/a0036620

71.

Walton

G. M.

Logel

Peach

J. M.

Spencer

S. J.

Zanna

M. P.

(2015). Two brief interventions to mitigate a “chilly climate” transform women’s experience, relationships, and achievement in engineering. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107, 468–485. doi:10.1037/a0037461

72.

Wang

(2012). Educational and career interests in math: A longitudinal examination of the links between classroom environment, motivational beliefs, and interests. Developmental Psychology, 48, 1643–1657. doi:10.1037/a0027247

73.

Wang

Degol

(2013). Motivational pathways to STEM career choices: Using expectancy–value perspective to understand individual and gender differences in STEM fields. Developmental Review, 33, 304–340. doi:10.1016/j.dr.2013.08.001

74.

Wang

Eccles

J. S.

Kenny

(2013). Not lack of ability but more choice: Individual and gender differences in choice of careers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Psychological Science, 24, 770–775. doi:10.1177/0956797612458937

75.

Watt

H. M. G.

(2008). What motivates females and males to pursue sex-stereotyped careers? In Watt

H. M. G.

Eccles

J. S.

(Eds.), Gender and occupational outcomes: Longitudinal assessments of individual, social, and cultural influences (pp. 87–113). Washington, DC: APA Books.

76.

Watt

H. M. G.

(2010). Gender and occupational choice. In Chrisler

J. C.

McCreary

D. R.

(Eds.), Handbook of gender research in psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 379–400). New York, NY: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-1467-5_16

77.

Weisgram

E. S.

Bigler

R. S.

(2007). Effects of learning about gender discrimination on adolescent girls’ attitudes towards and interest in science. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31, 262–269. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2007.00369.x

78.

Weiss

D. S.

Lalonde

R. N.

(2001). Responses of female undergraduates to scenarios of sexual harassment by male professors and teaching assistants. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue Canadienne Des Sciences Du Comportement, 33, 148–163. doi:10.1037/h0087137

79.

Witkowska

Gådin

K. G.

(2005). Have you been sexually harassed in school? What female high school students regard as harassment. International Journal of Adolescent Medicine and Health, 17, 391–406. doi:10.1515/IJAMH.2005.17.4.391

80.

World Economic Forum. (2017). The global gender gap: 2017. Geneva, Switzerland: Author.

81.

Zakaria

(2011). The post-American world: Release 2.0. New York, NY: W. W. Norton.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.04 MB