skip to main content

Title: No intrinsic gender differences in children’s earliest numerical abilities

Recent public discussions have suggested that the under-representation of women in science and mathematics careers can be traced back to intrinsic differences in aptitude. However, true gender differences are difficult to assess because sociocultural influences enter at an early point in childhood. If these claims of intrinsic differences are true, then gender differences in quantitative and mathematical abilities should emerge early in human development. We examined cross-sectional gender differences in mathematical cognition from over 500 children aged 6 months to 8 years by compiling data from five published studies with unpublished data from longitudinal records. We targeted three key milestones of numerical development: numerosity perception, culturally trained counting, and formal and informal elementary mathematics concepts. In addition to testing for statistical differences between boys’ and girls’ mean performance and variability, we also tested for statistical equivalence between boys’ and girls’ performance. Across all stages of numerical development, analyses consistently revealed that boys and girls do not differ in early quantitative and mathematical ability. These findings indicate that boys and girls are equally equipped to reason about mathematics during early childhood.

; ; ; ;
Publication Date:
Journal Name:
npj Science of Learning
Nature Publishing Group
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Abstract

    Gender stereotypes are harmful for girls’ enrollment and performance in science and mathematics. So far, less is known about children’s and adolescents’ stereotypes regarding technology and engineering. In the current study, participants’ (N = 1,206, girlsn = 623; 5–17-years-old,M = 8.63,SD = 2.81) gender stereotypes for each of the STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) domains were assessed along with the relation between these stereotypes and a peer selection task in a STEM context. Participants reported beliefs that boys are usually more skilled than are girls in the domains of engineering and technology; however, participants did not report gender differences in ability/performance in science and mathematics. Responses to the stereotype measures in favor of one’s in-group were greater for younger participants than older participants for both boys and girls. Perceptions that boys are usually better than girls at science were related to a greater likelihood of selecting a boy for help with a science question. These findings document the importance of domain specificity, even within STEM, in attempts to measure and challenge gender stereotypes in childhood and adolescence.

  2. Abstract Background

    Women and people of color continue to be underrepresented in many STEM fields and careers. Many studies have linked societal biases against the mathematical abilities of women and people of color to this underrepresentation, as well as to earlier measures of mathematical confidence and performance. Recent studies have shown that teachers may unintentionally have biases that reflect those in broader society. Yet, many studies on teachers’ reports of students’ abilities use data in the field—not experimental data—and thus often cannot say if the findings reflect bias or actual differences. The few experimental studies conducted suggest bias against the abilities of girls and students of color, but the prior work has limitations, which we seek to address (e.g., local samples, no exploration of moderators, no preregistration).


    In this preregistered experiment of 458 teachers across the U.S., we randomly assigned gender- and race-specific names to solutions to math problems, then asked teachers to rate the correctness of the solution, as well as the student’s math ability and effort. Teachers also completed scales reflecting their own beliefs and dispositions, which we then assessed how those beliefs/dispositions moderated their biases. We used multilevel modeling to account for the nested data structure.


    Consistent withmore »our preregistered hypotheses, when the solution was not fully correct, findings suggest teachers thought boys had higher ability, even though the same teachers did not report differences in the correctness of the solution or perceived effort. Moreover, teachers who reported that gender disparities no longer exist in society were particularly likely to underestimate girls’ abilities. Although findings revealed no evidence of racial bias on average, teachers’ math anxiety moderated their ability judgments of students from different races, albeit with only marginal significance; teachers with high math anxiety tended to assume that White students had higher math ability than students of color.


    The present research identifies teachers’ beliefs and dispositions that moderate their gender and racial biases. This experimental evidence sheds new light on why even low-performing boys consistently report higher math confidence and pursue STEM—namely, their teachers believe they have higher mathematical ability.

    « less
  3. In this work, we examine whether repeated participation in an after-school computing program influenced student learning of computational thinking concepts, practices, and perspectives. We also examine gender differences in learning outcomes. The program was developed through a school–university partnership. Data were collected from 138 students over a 2.5-year period. Data sources included pre–post content assessments of computational concepts related to programming in addition to computational artifacts and interviews with a purposeful sample of 12 participants. Quantitative data were analyzed using statistical methods to identify gains in pre- and post-learning of computational thinking concepts and examine potential gender differences. Interview data were analyzed qualitatively. Results indicated that students made significant gains in their learning of computational thinking concepts and that gains persisted over time. Results also revealed differences in learning of computational thinking concepts among boys and girls both at the beginning and end of the program. Finally, results from student interviews provided insights into the development of computational thinking practices and perspectives over time. Results have implications for the design of after-school computing programs that help broaden participation in computing.
  4. Abstract Objective

    Cesarean delivery is often epidemiologically associated with childhood obesity. However, little attention is paid to post‐birth modulatory environments, and most studies are conducted in settings where obesity arises for a number of reasons in addition to birth mode. We therefore assess population differences in the relationship between birth mode and childhood growth using data from rural and peri‐urban Latin American indigenous populations, and test predictions developed using life history theory.


    Child height and weight were measured monthly in 80 Yucatec Maya and 58 Toba/Qom children aged 1‐48 months (2007‐2014, 3812 observations). Random‐effects linear mixed models were used to compare children's growth by population, sex, and birth mode, accounting for potential confounders.


    Cesarean delivery rates were 47% (Toba/Qom) and 20% (Yucatec Maya). Childhood obesity and overweight rates were low in both populations. Cesarean‐delivered children had significantly greater weight gain (but similar height grain) compared to vaginally‐delivered children. By age 4, cesarean delivered Yucatec Maya girls and boys, and Toba/Qom boys (not girls), had significantly higher weight‐for‐age compared to vaginally‐delivered children from their own sex and population.


    This provides one of the first attempts to document differences in children's growth patterns according to mode of birth in modernizing indigenous populations. Cesarean deliverymore »is associated with young children's growth patterns, even in the absence of many obesity‐inducing factors. There are also population, age, and sex differences in the relationship between birth mode and childhood weight trajectories that warrant future investigation.

    « less
  5. Abstract Research Highlights

    Field‐specific ability beliefs (FABs) are beliefs about the extent to which intellectual talent (or “brilliance”) is required for success in a particular field or context.

    Among adults, brilliance‐oriented FABs are an obstacle to diversity in science and technology, but the childhood antecedents of these beliefs are not well understood.

    The presentmore »study (N = 174) found that FABs that associate success in math (vs. reading/writing) with brilliance were already present in Grades 1−4.

    Brilliance‐oriented FABs about math were negatively associated with elementary school students’ (and particularly girls’) math motivation—specifically, their math self‐efficacy and interest.

    « less