MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2980672978

Addressing the STEM Gender Gap: The Influence of Stereotypes on the Retention of Adolescent Women in Math and Science

2019· article· en· W2980672978 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jacqueline Wightman

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace (University of Toronto) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCareer Development and Diversity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGender gapPsychologyAdolescent developmentDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyMathematics educationDemographic economicsEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this review article, I present summaries of past reviews of the literature on the topic of women in STEM as well as recent statistics on gender differences in STEM fields globally and in Canada. I review the main findings of a collection of recent studies on gender differences in attitudes towards math and science, and discuss how these may be affected by overarching stereotypes about gender and STEM. I conclude by presenting key concepts and arguments from recent literature with regards to what can be done at the school level to combat gender and STEM stereotypes and ensure that support exists for young women with an aptitude and interest to pursue science and math.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.431
Threshold uncertainty score0.977

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.076
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.196 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace (University of Toronto)Same topicCareer Development and DiversityFrench-language works237,207