Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 2138794

Gender differences in mathematics performance: a meta-analysis.

Abstract

Reviewers have consistently concluded that males perform better on mathematics tests than females do. To make a refined assessment of the magnitude of gender differences in mathematics performance, we performed a meta-analysis of 100 studies. They yielded 254 independent effect sizes, representing the testing of 3,175,188 Ss. Averaged over all effect sizes based on samples of the general population, d was -0.05, indicating that females outperformed males by only a negligible amount. For computation, d was -0.14 (the negative value indicating superior performance by females). For understanding of mathematical concepts, d was -0.03; for complex problem solving, d was 0.08. An examination of age trends indicated that girls showed a slight superiority in computation in elementary school and middle school. There were no gender differences in problem solving in elementary or middle school; differences favoring men emerged in high school (d = 0.29) and in college (d = 0.32). Gender differences were smallest and actually favored females in samples of the general population, grew larger with increasingly selective samples, and were largest for highly selected samples and samples of highly precocious persons. The magnitude of the gender difference has declined over the years; for studies published in 1973 or earlier d was 0.31, whereas it was 0.14 for studies published in 1974 or later. We conclude that gender differences in mathematics performance are small. Nonetheless, the lower performance of women in problem solving that is evident in high school requires attention.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

J S Hyde, E Fennema, S J Lamon. 1990. Gender differences in mathematics performance: a meta-analysis.. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.139

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Use of context in pragmatic language comprehension by children with Asperger syndrome or high-functioning autism.

Utilizing relevance theory, this study investigated the ability of children with Asperger syndrome (AS) and high-functioning autism (HFA) to use context when answering questions and when giving explanations for their correct answers. Three groups participated in this study: younger AS/HFA group (age 7-9, n=16), older AS/HFA group (age 10-12, n=23) and a normally functioning control group (age 7-9, n=23). The results indicated that the younger AS/HFA group did less well when answering contextually demanding questions compared to the control group, and the performance of the older AS/HFA group fell in between the younger AS/HFA group and the control group. Both AS/HFA groups had difficulties explaining their correct answers, suggesting that they are not always aware of how they have derived answers from the context.

Aptitude↗

Executive function in preschoolers with autism: evidence consistent with a secondary deficit.

Recent research on executive function (EF) deficits in autism has led investigators to conclude that EF deficits are secondary to the disorder. The current study has two major goals: (1) Examine whether specific EF deficits are present in the youngest autism group to date (mean=2.9 years), and (2) examine whether such deficits are secondary to autism, or act as an early non-specific cognitive risk factor for autism by comparing EF abilities of this autism group to a CA-matched typically developing group. Results from Experiment 1 suggest no specific EF deficits in autism relative to MA-matched controls, while results from Experiment 2 are consistent with the hypothesis that EF deficits may emerge as a secondary deficit in autism. Alternative hypotheses are also considered.

Aptitude↗

Trait-based perspectives of leadership.

The trait-based perspective of leadership has a long but checkered history. Trait approaches dominated the initial decades of scientific leadership research. Later, they were disdained for their inability to offer clear distinctions between leaders and nonleaders and for their failure to account for situational variance in leadership behavior. Recently, driven by greater conceptual, methodological, and statistical sophistication, such approaches have again risen to prominence. However, their contributions are likely to remain limited unless leadership researchers who adopt this perspective address several fundamental issues. The author argues that combinations of traits and attributes, integrated in conceptually meaningful ways, are more likely to predict leadership than additive or independent contributions of several single traits. Furthermore, a defining core of these dominant leader trait patterns reflects a stable tendency to lead in different ways across disparate organizational domains. Finally, the author summarizes a multistage model that specifies some leader traits as having more distal influences on leadership processes and performance, whereas others have more proximal effects that are integrated with, and influenced by, situational parameters.

Aptitude↗