The development of children's gender stereotypes about STEM and verbal abilities: A preregistered meta-analytic review of 98 studies
Abstract
This meta-analysis studied the development of ability stereotypes that could limit girls' and women's participation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields, as well as contribute to boys' underachievement in reading and writing. We integrated findings from 98 studies measuring children's gender stereotypes about STEM and verbal abilities. The data comprised 145,204 children (ages 4-17) from 33 nations across more than 40 years (1977-2020). Preregistered analyses showed why prior researchers have reached diverging conclusions about the onset, change, and extent of these stereotypes in childhood and adolescence. Contrary to some prior conclusions, math stereotypes favoring male ability were minimal on average (0.11 SDs from gender neutrality). Stereotypes were instead far stronger for computer science, engineering, and physics (0.51 SDs), which favored male ability by age 6. Girls increasingly endorsed pro-male STEM stereotypes with age. Pro-female verbal ability stereotypes were also substantial (0.46 SDs), emerging by age 8 and becoming more female-biased with age. Additionally, STEM stereotypes were weaker for Black than White U.S. participants, as predicted. Unexpectedly, however, boys' STEM stereotypes declined before age 13 but increased thereafter, revealing an asymmetric development across STEM versus verbal domains. We integrated developmental intergroup theory and social role theory to explain this asymmetry, considering both cognitive and…
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 145,204 participants or records.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Quantum dots: synthesis, bioapplications, and toxicity
- Preliminary Toxicity Analysis of 3DCRT versus IMRT on the High Dose Arm of the RTOG 0126 Prostate Cancer Trial
- Adaptive Radiotherapy for Head and Neck Cancer: Initial Clinical Outcomes from a Prospective Trial
- A Guide to In Silico Drug Design
- Automated in Silico Design of Homogeneous Catalysts
- American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group 263: Standardizing Nomenclatures in Radiation Oncology
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.