Women Are Underrepresented in Fields Where Success is Believed to Require Brilliance

Article English OPEN
Meredith eMeyer ; Andrei eCimpian ; Sarah-Jane eLeslie (2015)

Women’s underrepresentation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields is a prominent concern in our society and many others. Closer inspection of this phenomenon reveals a more nuanced picture, however, with women achieving parity with men at th... View more
  • References (44)
    44 references, page 1 of 5

    Baron-Cohen S. (2002). The extreme male brain theory of autism. Trends Cogn. Sci. 6 248–254. 10.1016/S1364-6613(02)01904-6

    Bennett M. (1996). Men’s and women’s self-estimates of intelligence. J. Soc. Psychol. 136 411–412. 10.1080/00224545.1996.9714021

    Bennett M. (1997). Self-estimates of ability in men and women. J. Soc. Psychol. 137 540–541. 10.1080/00224549709595475

    Bennett M. (2000). Self-estimates and population estimates of ability in men and women. Aust. J. Psychol. 52 23–28. 10.1080/00049530008255363

    Berinsky A. J. Huber G. A. Linz G. S. (2012). Evaluating online labor markets for experimental research: Amazon.com’s mechanical turk. Political Analysis 20 351–368. 10.1093/pan/mpr057

    Blackwell L. S. Trzesniewski K. H. Dweck C. S. (2007). Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement across an adolescent transition: a longitudinal study and an intervention. Child Dev. 78 246–263. 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.00995.x

    Ceci S. J. Ginther D. Kahn S. Williams W. M. (2014). Women in academic science: a changing landscape. Psychol. Sci. Public Interest. 15 75–141. 10.1177/1529100614 541236

    Ceci S. J. Williams W. M. (2007). Why aren’t More Women in Science? Top Researchers Debate the Evidence. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Ceci S. J. Williams W. M. (2010). Sex differences in math-intensive fields. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 19 275–279. 10.1177/0963721410383241

    Ceci S. J. Williams W. M. Barnett S. M. (2009). Women’s underrepresentation in science: sociocultural and biological considerations. Psychol. Bull. 135 218–261. 10.1037/a0014412

  • Metrics
    No metrics available
Share - Bookmark