Gender stereotypes about math and science do not need to be endorsed, or even available to conscious introspection, to contribute to the sex gap in engagement and achievement in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). The authors examined implicit math attitudes and stereotypes among a heterogeneous sample of 5,139 participants. Women showed stronger implicit negativity toward math than men did and equally strong implicit gender stereotypes. For women, stronger implicit math=male stereotypes predicted greater negativity toward math, less participation, weaker self-ascribed ability, and worse math achievement; for men, those relations were weakly in the opposite direction. Implicit stereotypes had greater predictive validity than explicit stereotypes. Female STEM majors, especially those with a graduate degree, held weaker implicit math=male stereotypes and more positive implicit math attitudes than other women. Implicit measures will be a valuable tool for education research and help account for unexplained variation in the STEM sex gap.
AbelsonR. P.AronsonE.McGuireW. J.NewcombT. M.RosenbergM. J.TannenbaumP. H. (1968). Theories of cognitive consistency: A sourcebook. Chicago: Rand McNally.
2.
AikenL. R.Jr. (1963). Personality correlates of attitude toward mathematics. The Journal of Educational Research, 56, 476–480.
3.
AikenL. R.Jr.DregerR. M. (1961). The effect of attitudes on performance in mathematics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 52, 19–24.
4.
AronsonJ.SteeleC. M. (2005). Stereotypes and the fragility of academic competence, motivation and self-concept. In ElliotA. J.DweckC. S. (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 436–456). New York: The Guilford Press.
5.
BarghJ. A. (1994). The Four Horsemen of automaticity: Awareness, efficiency, intention, and control in social cognition. In WyerR. S.Jr.SrullT. K. (Eds.), Handbook of Social Cognition (2nd ed., pp. 1-40). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
6.
BaronA. S.BanajiM. R. (2006). The development of implicit attitudes: Evidence of race evaluations from ages 6 and 10 and adulthood. Psychological Science, 17, 53-58.
7.
Bar-AnanY.NosekB. A.VianelloM. (2009). The sorting paired features task: A measure of association strengths. Experimental Psychology, 56, 329–343.
8.
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.
9.
BetzN. E.HackettG. (1983). The relationship of mathematics self-efficacy expectations to the selection of science-based college majors. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 23, 329–345.
10.
BeyerS. (1999). The accuracy of academic gender stereotypes. Sex Roles, 40, 787–813.
11.
BlairI. V.MaJ. E.LentonA. P. (2001). Imagining stereotypes away: The moderation of implicit stereotypes through mental imagery. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 828-841.
12.
ChipmanS. F.KrantzD. H.SilverR. (1992). Mathematics anxiety and science careers among able college women. Psychological Science, 3, 292–295.
13.
ColeJ. S.GonyeaR. M. (1991). Accuracy of self-reported SAT and ACT test scores: Implications for research. Research in Higher Education, 51, 305-319.
14.
College Board. (2001). 2001 College bound seniors: A profile of SAT program test takers. New York: College Entrance Examination Board.
15.
CvencekD.MeltzoffA. N.GreenwaldA. G. (2010). Math–gender stereotypes in elementary-school children. Child Development, 82(3), 766–779.
16.
De HouwerJ.Teige-MocigembaS.SpruytA.MoorsA. (2009). Implicit measures: A normative analysis and review. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 347–368.
17.
EaglyA. H.SteffenV. J. (1984). Gender stereotypes stem from the distribution of women and men into social roles. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 735–754.
18.
EcclesJ. S. (1984). Sex differences in achievement patterns. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 32, 97–132.
19.
EcclesJ. S. (1987). Gender roles and achievement patterns: An expectancy value perspective. In ReinischJ. M.RosenblumL. A.SandersS. A. (Eds.), Masculinity/femininity: Basic perspectives (pp. 240–280). New York: Oxford University Press.
20.
EcclesJ. S.WigfieldA.HaroldR. D.BlumenfeldP. (1993). Age and gender differences in children’s self- and task perceptions during elementary school. Child Development, 64, 830–847.
21.
EthingtonC. A. (1991). A test of a model of achievement behaviors. American Educational Research Journal, 128, 155-172.
22.
FazioR. H.SanbonmatsuD. M.PowellM. C.KardesF. R. (1986). On the automatic activation of attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 229–238.
23.
FennemaE. (1985). Attribution theory and achievement in mathematics. In YussenS. R. (Ed.), The development of reflection (pp. 245–265). New York: Academic Press.
24.
FennemaE.ShermanJ. A. (1976). Fennema-Sherman Mathematics Attitude Scales: Instruments designed to measure attitudes toward the learning of mathematics by females and males. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 6, 31. (Ms. No. 1225)
25.
FestingerL. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
26.
GawronskiB.BodenhausenG. V. (2006). Associative and propositional processes in evaluation: An integrative review of implicit and explicit attitude change. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 692–731.
27.
GawronskiB.DeutschR.MbirkouS.SeibtB.StrackF. (2008). When “just say no” is not enough: Affirmation versus negation training and the reduction of automatic stereotype activation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 370–377.
28.
GawronskiB.PayneB. K. (Eds.). (2010). Handbook of implicit social cognition: Measurement, theory and applications. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
29.
GonzalesP.GuzmanJ. C.PartelowL.PahlkeE.JocelynL.KastbergD.WilliamsT. (2004). Highlights from the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) 2003(NCES 2005–005) (U.S. Dept of Ed, Nat Ctr for Ed Statistics, US Government Printing Office, Washington). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
30.
GreenwaldA. G.BanajiM. R. (1995). Implicit social cognition: Attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Psychological Review, 102, 4–27.
31.
GreenwaldA. G.BanajiM. R.RudmanL. A.FarnhamS. D.NosekB. A.MellotD. S. (2002). A unified theory of implicit attitudes, beliefs, self-esteem and self-concept. Psychological Review, 109, 3–25.
32.
GreenwaldA. G.McGheeD. E.SchwartzJ. L. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The Implicit Association Test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1464–1480.
33.
GreenwaldA. G.NosekB. A.BanajiM. R. (2003). Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 197–216.
34.
GreenwaldA. G.PoehlmanT. A.UhlmannE. L.BanajiM. R. (2009). Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: III. Meta-analysis of predictive validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 17–41.
35.
GreggA. P.SeibtB.BanajiM. R. (2006). Easier done than undone: Asymmetry in the malleability of implicit preferences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 1-20.
36.
HackettG.BetzN. E. (1981). A self-efficacy approach to the career development of women. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 18, 326–339.
37.
HalpernD. F.BenbowC. P.GearyD. C.GurR. C.HydeJ. S.GernsbacherM. A. (2007). The science of sex differences in science and mathematics. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 8, 1-51.
38.
HeiderF. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley.
39.
HydeJ. S.FennemaE.RyanM.FrostL. A.HoppC. (1990). Gender comparisons of mathematics attitudes and affect: A meta-analysis. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 14, 299–324.
40.
InglesS. J.ScottL. A.LindmarkJ. T.FrankelM. R.MyersS. L.WuS. (1992). National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988. First follow-up: Student component data file user’s manual (Vol. 1). Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.
41.
JacobsJ. E. (1991). Influence of gender stereotypes on parent and child mathematics attitudes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 518–527.
42.
JacobsJ. E.LanzaS.OsgoodD. W.EcclesJ. S.WigfieldA. (2002). Changes in children’s self-competence and values: Gender and domain differences across grades one through twelve. Child Development, 73, 509–527.
43.
KieferA. K.SekaquaptewaD. (2007a). Implicit stereotypes, gender identification, and math-related outcomes—A prospective study of female college students. Psychological Science, 18, 13–18.
44.
KieferA. K.SekaquaptewaD. (2007b). Implicit stereotypes and women’s math performance: How implicit gender-math stereotypes influence women’s susceptibility to stereotype threat. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 825–832.
45.
LaneK. A.BanajiM. R.NosekB. A.GreenwaldA. G. (2007). Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: IV: Procedures and validity. In WittenbrinkB.SchwarzN. (Eds.), Implicit measures of attitudes: Procedures and controversies (pp. 59–102). New York: Guilford Press.
46.
LederG. C. (1986). Mathematics: Stereotyped as a male domain?Psychological Reports, 59, 955–958.
MapleS. A.StageF. K. (1991). Influences on the choice of math/science major by gender and ethnicity. American Educational Research Journal, 28, 37–60.
49.
MarshH. W. (1992). Content specificity of relations between academic achievement and academic self-concept. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 35–42.
50.
MarshH. W. (1993). Academic self-concept: Theory, measurement, and research. In SulsJ. (Ed.), Psychological perspectives on the self (Vol. 4, pp. 59–98). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
51.
MarshH. W.YeungA. S. (1998). Longitudinal structural equation models of academic self-concept and achievement: Gender differences in the development of math and English constructs. American Educational Research Journal, 35, 705–738.
52.
MeeceJ. L.WigfieldA.EcclesJ. S. (1990). Predictors of math anxiety and its influence on young adolescents’ course enrollment intentions and performance in mathematics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 60–70.
53.
MitchellJ. P.NosekB. A.BanajiM. R. (2003). Contextual variations in implicit evaluation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132, 455-469.
54.
National Academies of Science. (2007). Beyond bias and barriers: Fulfilling the potential of women in academic science and engineering.Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
55.
NisbettR. E.WilsonT. D. (1977). Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological Review, 84, 231–259.
56.
NosekB. A. (2007). Implicit-explicit relations. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16, 65–69.
57.
NosekB. A.BanajiM. R. (2001). The go/no-go association task. Social Cognition, 19, 625–666.
58.
NosekB. A.BanajiM. R.GreenwaldA. G. (2002). Math = Male, Me = Female, therefore Math ≠ Me. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 44–59.
59.
NosekB. A.GreenwaldA. G.BanajiM. R. (2007). The Implicit Association Test at age 7: A methodological and conceptual review. In BarghJ. A. (Ed.), Social psychology and the unconscious: The automaticity of higher mental processes (pp. 265–292). Philadelphia: Psychology Press.
60.
NosekB. A.HawkinsC. B.FrazierR. S. (2011). Implicit social cognition: From measures to mechanisms. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15, 152–159.
61.
NosekB. A.SmythF. L.HansenJ. J.DevosT.LindnerN. M.RanganathK. A.SmithC. T.BanajiM. R. (2007). Pervasiveness and correlates of implicit attitudes and stereotypes. European Review of Social Psychology, 18, 36–88.
62.
NosekB. A.SmythF. L. (2007). A multitrait-multimethod validation of the Implicit Association Test: Implicit and explicit attitudes are related but distinct constructs. Experimental Psychology, 54, 14–29.
63.
NosekB. A.SriramN. (2007). Faulty assumptions: A comment on Blanton, Jaccard, Gonzales, and Christie (2006). Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 393–398.
64.
NosekB. A.SmythF. L.SriramN.LindnerN. M.DevosT.AyalaA.GreenwaldA. G. (2009). National differences in gender-science stereotypes predict national sex differences in science and math achievement. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106, 10593–10597.
65.
OsgoodC. E.TannenbaumP. H. (1955). The principle of congruity in the prediction of attitude change. Psychological Review, 62, 42-55.
66.
ParsonsJ. E. (1983). Expectances, values, and academic behaviors. In SpenceJ. T. (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motives (pp. 75–146). San Francisco: Freeman.
67.
ParsonsJ. E. (1984). Sex differences in mathematics participation. In SteinkampM.MaehrM. (Eds.), Women in science (pp. 93–137). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
68.
PayneB. K.ChengC. M.GovorunO.StewartB. (2005). An inkblot for attitudes: Affect misattribution as implicit measurement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 277–293.
69.
RamistL.LewisC.McCamley-JenkinsL. (1994). Student group differences in predicting college grades: Sex, language, and ethnic groups (College Board Report No. 93-1). New York: College Entrance Examination Board.
RydellR. J.McConnellA. R. (2006). Understanding implicit and explicit attitude change: A systems of reasoning analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 995–1008.
72.
SinghK.GranvilleM.KikaS. (2002). Mathematics and science achievement: Effects of motivation, interest, and academic engagement. The Journal of Educational Research, 95, 323–332.
73.
SmithJ. L.WhiteP. H. (2001). Development of the domain identification measure: A tool for investigating stereotype threat effects. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 61, 1040–1057.
74.
SmythF. L. (1995). Standardized testing in college admission: How the ACT and the SAT are used and compared. Journal of College Admission, 148, 24–31.
75.
SmythF. L.McArdleJ. J. (2004). Ethnic and gender differences in science graduation at selective colleges with implications for admission policy and college choice. Research in Higher Education, 45, 353–381.
76.
SteeleC. M. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape the intellectual identities and performance of women and African Americans. American Psychologist, 52, 613–629.
77.
StoutJ.DasguptaN.HunsingerM.McManusM. (2010). STEMing the tide: Using ingroup experts to inoculate women’s self-concept and professional goals in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 255–270.
78.
StrackF.DeutschR. (2004). Reflective and impulsive determinants of social behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8, 220–247.
79.
SuinnR. M.EdwardsR. (1982). The measurement of mathematics anxiety: The Mathematics Anxiety Rating Scale for Adolescents-MARS-A. Journals of Clinical Psychology, 38, 576–580.
80.
TaiR. H.LiuC. Q.MalteseA. V.FanX. T. (2006). Planning early for careers in science. Science, 312, 1143–1144.
81.
TeachmanB. A.WoodyS. R. (2003). Automatic processing among individuals with spider phobia: Change in implicit fear associations following treatment. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 112, 100-109.
82.
ValianV. (1998). Why so slow? The advancement of women.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
83.
van den BerghL.DenessenE.HornstraL.VoetenM.HollandR. W. (2010). The implicit prejudiced attitudes of teachers: Relations to teacher expectations and the ethnic achievement gap. American Educational Research Journal, 47, 497–527.
84.
WigfieldA.EcclesJ. S. (2002). The development of competence beliefs, expectancies for success, and achievement values from childhood through adolescence. In WigfieldA.EcclesJ. S. (Eds.), Development of achievement motivation (pp. 92–122). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
85.
WigfieldA.MeeceJ. L. (1988). Math anxiety in elementary and secondary school students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 210–216.
86.
WigfieldA.WagnerA. L. (2005). Competence, motivation and identity development in adolescence. In ElliotA. J.DweckC. S. (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 222–239). New York: The Guilford Press.
87.
WilsonT. D. (2002). Strangers to Ourselves: Discovering the Adaptive Unconscious. Cambridge: Belknap Press.
