Women take qualifying exams and enter medical school at substantially lower levels than predicted by their interest in medical degrees at the end of high school. We examined how science course experiences contribute to gendered attrition in premed using a multicohort data set of 8,253 undergraduates taking the traditional premed sequence of introductory science courses at a public research university between 2008 and 2016. Gendered attrition was not based in academic performance, was specific to high-performing women, and yet was grounded in competency beliefs. The result is that high-performing women often graduate with lower paying, lower status degrees. Motivational interventions in premed science courses will be critical for retaining high-performing women in premed, an important outcome with implications for equity and women’s health.
BaronR. M.KennyD. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173
5.
BarrD. A. (2010). Questioning the premedical paradigm: Enhancing diversity in the medical profession a century after the Flexner report. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
6.
BarrD. A.GonzalezM. E.WanatS. F. (2008). The leaky pipeline: Factors associated with early decline in interest in premedical studies among underrepresented minority undergraduate students. Academic Medicine: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 83(5), 503–511. doi:10.1097/ACM.0b013e31816bda16
7.
BatesC.GordonL.TravisE.ChatterjeeA.ChaudronL.FivushB.. . . MosesA. (2016). Striving for gender equity in academic medicine careers. Academic Medicine, 91(8), 1050–1052. doi:10.1097/ACM.0000000000001283
8.
BauerC. F. (2005). Beyond “student attitudes”: Chemistry Self-Concept Inventory for assessment of the affective component of student learning. Journal of Chemical Education, 82(12), 1864. doi:10.1021/ed082p1864
9.
BeedeD.JulianT.LangdonD.McKittrickG.KhanB.DomsM. (2011). Women in STEM: A gender gap to innovation (No. Issue Brief 04-11). Retrieved from http://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1964782
10.
BeyerS.BowdenE. M. (1997). Gender differences in self-perceptions: Convergent evidence from three measures of accuracy and bias. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 157–172. doi:10.1177/0146167297232005
11.
BickelJ. (2005). Gender equity in undergraduate medical education : A status report. Journal of Women’s Health & Gender-Based Medicine, 10(3), 261–270.
12.
BoulisA. K.JacobsJ. A. (2008). The changing face of medicine: Women doctors and the evolution of health care in America. Ithica, NY: Cornell University Press.
13.
CheryanS.ZieglerS. A.MontoyaA.JiangL. (2016). Why are some STEM field more gender balanced than others?Psychological Bulletin, 142(206), 1–131. doi:10.1037/bul0000052
14.
CromleyJ. G.PerezT.KaplanA. (2016). Undergraduate STEM achievement and retention: Cognitive, motivational, and institutional factors and solutions. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(1), 4–11. doi:10.1177/2372732215622648
15.
DavisG.AllisonR. (2013). Increasing representation, maintaining hierarchy: An assessment of gender and medical specialization. Social Thought and Research, 32, 17–45.
16.
DuckworthA. L.SeligmanM. E. P. (2006). Self-discipline gives girls the edge: Gender in self-discipline, grades, and achievement test scores. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(1), 198–208. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.98.1.198
17.
EcclesJ. S. (1994). Understanding women’s educational and occupational choices. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18(4), 585–609. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.1994.tb01049.x
18.
EcclesJ. S.WangM. Te. (2016). What motivates females and males to pursue careers in mathematics and science?International Journal of Behavioral Development, 40(2), 100–106. doi:10.1177/0165025415616201
19.
FiorentineR.ColeS. (1992). Why fewer women become physicians: Explaining the premed persistence gap. Sociological Forum, 7(3), 469–496. doi:10.1007/BF01117557
20.
GeeJ. P. (2001). Identity as an analytic lens for research in education. Review of Research in Education, 25, 99–125.
21.
HazariZ.SonnertG.SadlerP. M.ShanahanM.-C. (2010). Connecting high school physics experiences, outcome expectations, physics identity, and physics career choice: A gender study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(8), 978–1003. doi:10.1002/tea.20363
22.
HydeJ. S. (2005). The gender similarities hypothesis. The American Psychologist, 60(6), 581–592. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.60.6.581
KilminsterS.DownesJ.GoughB.Murdoch-EatonD.RobertsT. (2007). Women in medicine—Is there a problem? A literature review of the changing gender composition, structures and occupational cultures in medicine. Medical Education, 41(1), 39–49. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02645.x
25.
KuglerA. D.TinsleyC. H.AkerlofG.AutorD.ButcherK.FiglioD.. . . LavyV. (2017). Choice of majors: Are women really different from men? (Working Paper No. 23735, National Bureau of Economic Research). Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w23735
26.
KvaernerK. J.AaslandO. G.BottenG. S. (1999). Female medical leadership: Cross sectional study. BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.), 318(7176), 91–94. doi:10.1136/bmj.318.7176.91
27.
LopezM. H.Gonzalez-BarreraA. (2014). Women’s college enrollment gains leave men behind. Retrieved from http://pewrsr.ch/1qckLFE
28.
MarshH. W. (1986). Verbal and math self-concepts: An internal/external frame of reference model. American Educational Research Journal, 23(7), 129–149. doi:10.3102/00028312023001129
29.
MazureC. M.JonesD. P. (2015). Twenty years and still counting: including women as participants and studying sex and gender in biomedical research. BMC Women’s Health, 15(1), 94. doi:10.1186/s12905-015-0251-9
30.
MorganS. L.GelbgiserD.WeedenK. A. (2013). Feeding the pipeline: Gender, occupational plans, and college major selection. Social Science Research, 42(4), 989–1005. doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2013.03.008
31.
O’BrienR. M. (2007). A caution regarding rules of thumb for variance inflation factors. Quality and Quantity, 41(5), 673–690. doi:10.1007/s11135-006-9018-6
32.
OhS. S.LewisG. B. (2011). Stemming inequality? Employment and pay of female and minority scientists and engineers. Social Science Journal, 48(2), 397–403. doi:10.1016/j.soscij.2010.11.008
PageS. (2007). The difference: How the power of diversity creates better groups, firms, schools, and societies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
35.
PerkinsR.KleinerB.RoeyS.BrownJ. (2004). The high school transcript study: A decade of change in curricula and achievement, 1990–2000. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2004/2004455.pdf
36.
ReedV.Buddeberg-FischerB. (2001). Career obstacles for women in medicine: An overview. Medical Education, 35(2), 139–147. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2923.2001.00837.x
37.
RiskaE. (2011). Gender and medical careers. Maturitas, 68(3), 264–267. doi:10.1016/j.maturitas.2010.09.010
38.
RosenthalL.LevyS. R.LondonB.LobelM.BazileC. (2013). In pursuit of the MD: The impact of role models, identity compatibility, and belonging among undergraduate women. Sex Roles, 68(7–8), 464–473. doi:10.1007/s11199-012-0257-9
39.
RosseelY. (2012). lavaan: An R package for structural equation modelingle. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36. doi:10.18637/jss.v048.i02
SadlerP. M.SonnertG.HazariZ.TaiR. (2012). Stability and volatility of STEM career interest in high school: A gender study. Science Education, 96(3), 411–427. doi:10.1002/sce.21007
42.
SanfeyH. A. (2006). Influences on medical student career choice. Archives of Surgery, 141(11), 1086. doi:10.1001/archsurg.141.11.1086
43.
SchunkD. H.MeeceJ. L. (2006). Self-efficacy development in adolescence. In PajaresF.UrdanT. (Eds.), Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents (pp. 71–96). Greewich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
44.
SemsarK.KnightJ. K.BirolG.SmithM. K. (2011). The Colorado Learning Attitudes About Science Survey (CLASS) for use in biology. CBE Life Sciences Education, 10(3), 268–278. doi:10.1187/cbe.10-10-0133
45.
SiriwardenaA. N.IrishB.AsgharZ. B.DixonH.MilneP.NedenC.. . . BlowC. (2012). Comparing performance among male and female candidates in sex-specific clinical knowledge in the MRCGP. British Journal of General Practice, 62(599), 446–450. doi:10.3399/bjgp12X649142
46.
SpelkeE. S. (2005). Sex differences in intrinsic aptitude for mathematics and science?: A critical review. The American Psychologist, 60(9), 950–958. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.60.9.950
47.
TsugawaY.JenaA. B.FigueroaJ. F.OravE. J.BlumenthalD. M.JhaA. K. (2017). Comparison of hospital mortality and readmission rates for medicare patients treated by male vs female physicians. JAMA Internal Medicine, 177(2), 206–213. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.7875
Vincent-RuzP.BinningK.SchunnC. D.GrabowskiJ. (2018). The effect of math SAT on women’s chemistry competency beliefs. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19, 342–351. doi:10.1039/C7RP00137A
50.
Vincent-RuzP.SchunnC. D. (2017). The increasingly important role of science competency beliefs for science learning in girls. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(6), 790–822. doi:10.1002/tea.21387
51.
WangM.-T.EcclesJ. S.KennyS. (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(5), 770–775. doi:10.1177/0956797612458937
52.
WattH. M. G.EcclesJ. S.DurikA. M. (2006). The leaky mathematics pipeline for girls. Equal Opportunities International, 25(8), 642–659. doi:10.1108/02610150610719119
53.
WeisgramE. S.DiekmanA. B. (2017). Making STEM “family friendly”: The impact of perceiving science careers as family-compatible. Social Sciences, 6(2), 61. doi:10.3390/socsci6020061
54.
WigfieldA.EcclesJ. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 68–81. doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.1015
55.
ZoharA.BronshteinB. (2005). Physics teachers’ knowledge and beliefs regarding girls’ low participation rates in advanced physics classes. International Journal of Science Education, 27(1), 61–77. doi:10.1080/0950069032000138798
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.
