Search

Despite evidence from cognitive psychology that men and women are equal in measured intelligence, gender differences in self-estimated intelligence (SEI) are widely reported with males providing systematically higher estimates than females. This has been termed the male hubris, female humility effect. The present study explored personality factors that might explain this. Participants (N = 228; 103 male, 125 female) provided self-estimates of their general IQ and for Gardner's multiple intelligences, before completing the Cattell Culture Fair IQ test as an objective measure of intelligence. They also completed the Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI) as a measure of sex-role identification, and measures of general and academic self-esteem. Both gender and sex-role differences were observed for SEI, with males and participants of both genders who scored high in masculinity offering higher self-estimates. By comparing estimated and observed IQ, we were able to rule out gender differences in overall accuracy but observed a pattern of systematic underestimation in females. An hierarchical multiple regression showed significant independent effects of gender, masculinity, and self-esteem. Mixed evidence was observed for gender differences in the estimation of multiple intelligences, though moderately sized sex-role differences were observed. The results offer a far more nuanced explanation for the male hubris, female humility effect that includes the contribution of sex role identification to individual and group differences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A frequently observed research finding is that females outperform males on tasks of verbal and language abilities, but there is considerable variability in effect sizes from sample to sample. The gold standard for evaluating gender differences in cognitive ability is to recruit a large, demographically representative sample. We examined 3 decades of U.S. student achievement in reading and writing from the National Assessment of Educational Progress to determine the magnitude of gender differences (N = 3.9 million), and whether these were declining over time as claimed by Feingold (1988). Examination of effect sizes found a developmental progression from initially small gender differences in Grade 4 toward larger effects as students progress through schooling. Differences for reading were small-to-medium (d = −.32 by Grade 12), and medium-sized for writing (d = −.55 by Grade 12) and were stable over the historical time. Additionally, there were pronounced imbalances in gender ratios at the lower left and upper right tails of the ability spectrum. These results are interpreted in the context of Hyde's (2005) gender similarities hypothesis, which holds that most psychological gender differences are only small or trivial in size. Language and verbal abilities represent one exception to the general rule of gender similarities, and we discuss the educational implications of these findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sex differences in cognitive abilities are a controversial but actively researched topic. The present study examined whether sex-role identity mediates the relationship between sex and sex-typed cognitive abilities. Three hundred nine participants (105 males and 204 females) were tested on a range of visuospatial and language tasks under laboratory conditions. Participants also completed measures of sex-role identity, used to classify them into masculine, feminine, androgynous and undifferentiated groups. While sex differences were found for some but not all measures, significant sex-role differences were found for all spatial and language measures with the exception of a novel 2D Mental Rotation Task. Masculine sex-roles partially mediated the relationship between sex and a composite measure of spatial ability, while feminine sex-roles fully mediated the relationship between sex and a composite measure of language ability. These results suggest that sex-role identity may have greater utility in explaining individual differences in cognitive performance than biological sex alone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Gender gaps in the development of mathematical and scientific literacy have important implications for the general public's understanding of scientific issues and for the underrepresentation of women in science, technology, engineering, and math. We subjected data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress to a meta-analysis to examine whether there were sex differences in mathematics and science achievement for students in the United States across the period 1990-2011. Results show that there were small but stable mean sex differences favoring males in mathematics and science across the past 2 decades, with an effect size of d = .10 and .13, respectively, for students in 12th grade. Furthermore, there were large sex differences in high achievers, with males being overrepresented by a factor of over 2:1 at the upper right of the ability distribution for both mathematics and science. Further efforts are called for to reach equity in mathematics and science educational outcomes for all students. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hyde, Bigler, Joel, Tate, and van Anders (2019) opened debate on the treatment by psychologists and researchers of sex−gender as a dichotomous variable (male−female) and the utility of alternative conceptions. In doing so though, they framed the alternative to a gender-binary as treating gender as a categorical variable. Hyde et al.'s review obscures important contributions of a large number of psychological researchers who for decades have treated gender as a continuous variable. Their work offers a forceful contrast to the traditional gender-binary approach and also has a direct bearing on some of the questions raised by Hyde et al., including gender differences in prevalence of depression. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]