Wang, M.-T. & Degol, J. L. Gender hole in science, expertise, engineering, and arithmetic (STEM): present data, implications for follow, coverage, and future instructions. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 29, 119–140 (2017).
OECD. The ABC of Gender Equality in Schooling: Aptitude, Behaviour, Confidence (OECD, 2015); https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264229945-en.
Hutchison, J. E., Lyons, I. M. & Ansari, D. Extra related than completely different: gender variations in kids’s primary numerical abilities are the exception not the rule. Youngster Dev. 90, e66–e79 (2019).
Hyde, J. S., Lindberg, S. M., Linn, M. C., Ellis, A. B. & Williams, C. C. Gender similarities characterize math efficiency. Science 321, 494–495 (2008).
Kersey, A. J., Braham, E. J., Csumitta, Okay. D., Libertus, M. E. & Cantlon, J. F. No intrinsic gender variations in kids’s earliest numerical talents. npj Sci. Be taught. 3, 12 (2018).
Lauer, J. E., Yhang, E. & Lourenco, S. F. The event of gender variations in spatial reasoning: a meta-analytic evaluation. Psychol. Bull. 145, 537–565 (2019).
Miller, D. I. & Halpern, D. F. The brand new science of cognitive intercourse variations. Traits Cogn. Sci. 18, 37–45 (2014).
Spelke, E. S. Intercourse variations in intrinsic aptitude for arithmetic and science?: a important evaluation. Am. Psychol. 60, 950–958 (2005).
Amalric, M. & Dehaene, S. Origins of the mind networks for superior arithmetic in skilled mathematicians. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 4909–4917 (2016).
Dehaene, S. The Quantity Sense: How the Thoughts Creates Arithmetic (Taylor & Francis, 1997).
Levine, S. C., Foley, A., Lourenco, S., Ehrlich, S. & Ratliff, Okay. Intercourse variations in spatial cognition: advancing the dialog. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev.: Cogn. Sci. 7, 127–155 (2016).
Enge, A., Kapoor, S., Kieslinger, A.-S. & Skeide, M. A. A meta-analysis of psychological rotation within the first years of life. Dev. Sci. 26, e13381 (2023).
Nosek, B. A. et al. Nationwide variations in gender–science stereotypes predict nationwide intercourse variations in science and math achievement. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106, 10593–10597 (2009).
Stoevenbelt, A. H. et al. Are speeded exams unfair? Modeling the impression of cut-off dates on the gender hole in arithmetic. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 83, 684–709 (2023).
Voyer, D. Cut-off dates and gender variations on paper-and-pencil exams of psychological rotation: a meta-analysis. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 18, 267–277 (2011).
Arias, O., Canals, C., Mizala, A. & Meneses, F. Gender gaps in arithmetic and language: the bias of aggressive achievement exams. PLoS ONE 18, e0283384 (2023).
Boaler J. What’s Math Acquired to Do with It?: How Lecturers and Mother and father Can Remodel Arithmetic Studying and Encourage Success (Heart for Comparative Research in Race & Ethnicity, 2015).
Piazza, M. Neurocognitive start-up instruments for symbolic quantity representations. Traits Cogn. Sci. 14, 542–551 (2010).
Breda, T., Jouini, E., Napp, C. & Thebault, G. Gender stereotypes can clarify the gender-equality paradox. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117, 31063–31069 (2020).
Campbell, J. A., McIntyre, J. & Kucirkova, N. Gender equality, human improvement, and PISA outcomes over Time. Soc. Sci. 10, 480 (2021).
Cimpian, J. R., Lubienski, S. T., Timmer, J. D., Makowski, M. B. & Miller, E. Okay. Have gender gaps in math closed? Achievement, instructor perceptions, and studying behaviors throughout two ECLS-Okay cohorts. AERA Open https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858416673617 (2016).
Penner, A. M. & Paret, M. Gender variations in arithmetic achievement: exploring the early grades and the extremes. Soc. Sci. Res. 37, 239–253 (2008).
Fryer, R. G. Jr. & Levitt, S. D. An empirical evaluation of the gender hole in arithmetic. Am. Econ. J.: Appl. Econ. 2, 210–240 (2010).
Husain, M. & Millimet, D. L. The legendary ‘boy disaster’? Econ. Educ. Rev. 28, 38–48 (2009).
Fischer, J.-P. & Thierry, X. Boy’s math efficiency, in comparison with women’, jumps at age 6 (within the ELFE’s information not less than). Br. J. Dev. Psychol. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjdp.12423 (2021).
OECD. Is the Final Mile the Longest? Financial Positive factors from Gender Equality in Nordic Nations (OECD, 2018); https://doi.org/10.1787/6cda329d-en.
Di Tommaso, M. L. et al. Tackling the gender hole in arithmetic with lively studying methodologies. Econ. Educ. Rev. 100, 102538 (2024).
Bian, L., Leslie, S.-J. & Cimpian, A. Gender stereotypes about mental capacity emerge early and affect kids’s pursuits. Science 355, 389–391 (2017).
Carlana, M. Implicit stereotypes: proof from lecturers’ gender bias. Q. J. Econ. 134, 1163–1224 (2019).
Gunderson, E. A., Ramirez, G., Levine, S. C. & Beilock, S. L. The function of fogeys and lecturers within the improvement of gender-related math attitudes. Intercourse Roles: J. Res. 66, 153–166 (2012).
Robinson-Cimpian, J. P., Lubienski, S. T., Ganley, C. M. & Copur-Gencturk, Y. Lecturers’ perceptions of scholars’ arithmetic proficiency could exacerbate early gender gaps in achievement. Dev. Psychol. 50, 1262–1281 (2014).
Bharadwaj, P., De Giorgi, G., Hansen, D. & Neilson, C. A. The gender hole in arithmetic: proof from Chile. Econ. Dev. Cult. Change 65, 141–166 (2016).
Tiedemann, J. Mother and father’ gender stereotypes and lecturers’ beliefs as predictors of youngsters’s idea of their mathematical capacity in elementary faculty. J. Educ. Psychol. 92, 144–151 (2000).
Upadyaya, Okay. & Eccles, J. S. How do lecturers’ beliefs predict kids’s curiosity in math from kindergarten to sixth grade? Merrill-Palmer Q. 60, 403–430 (2014).
Copur-Gencturk, Y., Thacker, I. & Cimpian, J. R. Lecturers’ race and gender biases and the moderating results of their beliefs and inclinations. Int. J. STEM Educ. 10, 31 (2023).
Van Mier, H. I., Schleepen, T. M. J. & Van den Berg, F. C. G. Gender variations relating to the impression of math nervousness on arithmetic efficiency in second and fourth graders. Entrance. Psychol. 9, 2690 (2019).
Beilock, S. L., Gunderson, E. A., Ramirez, G. & Levine, S. C. Feminine lecturers’ math nervousness impacts women’ math achievement. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 1860–1863 (2010).
Miller, D. I., Nolla, Okay. M., Eagly, A. H. & Uttal, D. H. The event of youngsters’s gender‐science stereotypes: a meta‐evaluation of 5 a long time of U.S. Draw‐a‐Scientist research. Youngster Dev. 89, 1943–1955 (2018).
Contini, D., Tommaso, M. L. D. & Mendolia, S. The gender hole in arithmetic achievement: proof from Italian information. Econ. Educ. Rev. 58, 32–42 (2017).
Dhuey, E., Figlio, D., Karbownik, Okay. & Roth, J. Faculty beginning age and cognitive improvement. J. Coverage Anal. Manag. 38, 538–578 (2019).
Downey, D. B., Kuhfeld, M. & van Hek, M. Colleges as a comparatively standardizing establishment: the case of gender gaps in cognitive abilities. Sociol. Educ. 95, 89–109 (2022).
Bassok, D., Latham, S. & Rorem, A. Is kindergarten the brand new first grade? AERA Open https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858415616358 (2016).
Breda, T. & Napp, C. Women’ comparative benefit in studying can largely clarify the gender hole in math-related fields. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 15435–15440 (2019).
Buser, T., Niederle, M. & Oosterbeek, H. Gender, competitiveness, and profession decisions. Q. J. Econ. 129, 1409–1447 (2014).
Bailey, D. H., Littlefield, A. & Geary, D. C. The codevelopment of ability at and choice to be used of retrieval-based processes for fixing addition issues: particular person and intercourse variations from first to sixth grades. J. Exp. Youngster Psychol. 113, 78–92 (2012).
Reardon, S. F., Fahle, E. M., Kalogrides, D., Podolsky, A. & Zárate, R. C. Gender achievement gaps in U.S. faculty districts. Am. Educ. Res. J. 56, 2474–2508 (2019).
Huguet, P. & Régner, I. Counter-stereotypic beliefs in math don’t shield faculty women from stereotype menace. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 45, 1024–1027 (2009).
Stout, J. G., Dasgupta, N., Hunsinger, M. & McManus, M. A. STEMing the tide: utilizing ingroup specialists to inoculate ladies’s self-concept in science, expertise, engineering, and arithmetic (STEM). J. Private. Soc. Psychol. 100, 255–270 (2011).
Alan, S. & Ertac, S. Mitigating the gender hole within the willingness to compete: proof from a randomized area experiment. J. Eur. Econ. Assoc. 17, 1147–1185 (2019).
Miyake, A. et al. Decreasing the gender achievement hole in school science: a classroom examine of values affirmation. Science 330, 1234–1237 (2010).
Rocher, T. Building d’un indice de place sociale des élèves. Éducation & formations 90, 5–27 (2016).
