The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Gender differences in student attitudes toward science: A meta‐analysis of the literature from 1970 to 1991
Abstract
A meta‐analysis covering the literature between 1970 and 1991 was conducted using an approach similar to that suggested by Glass, McGaw, and Smith (1981) and Hedges, Shymansky, and Woodworth (1989). This analysis examined gender differences in student attitudes toward science, and correlations between attitudes toward science and achievement in science. Thirty‐one effect sizes and seven correlations representing the testing of 6,753 subjects were found in 18 studies. The mean of the unweighted effect sizes was .20 (SD = .50) and the mean of the weighted effect size was .16 (SD = .50), indicating that boys have more positive attitudes toward science than girls. The mean correlation between attitude and achievement was .50 for boys and .55 for girls, suggesting that the correlations are comparable. Results of the analysis of gender differences in attitude as a function of science type indicate that boys show a more positive attitude toward science than girls in all types of science. The correlation between attitude and achievement for boys and girls as a function of science type indicates that for biology and physics the correlation is positive for both, but stronger for girls than for boys. Gender differences and correlations between attitude and achievement by gender as a function of publication date show no pattern. The results for the analysis of gender differences as a function of the selectivity of the sample indicate that general level students reflect a greater positive attitude for boys, whereas the high‐performance students indicate a greater positive attitude for girls. The correlation between attitude and achievement as a function of selectivity indicates that in all cases a positive attitude results in higher achievement. This is particularly true for low‐performance girls. The implications of these finding are discussed and further research suggested.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Hazari, Z., Sonnert, G., Sadler, P. M., & Shanahan, M. (2010) · Journal of Research in Science Teaching · doi:10.1002/tea.20363 · Cited by 1,112
Maltese, A. V., & Tai, R. H. (2011) · Science Education · doi:10.1002/sce.20441 · Cited by 1,044
How chronic self-views influence (and potentially mislead) estimates of performance.
Ehrlinger, J., & Dunning, D. (2003) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.84.1.5 · Cited by 480
Teaching and physics education research: bridging the gap
Fraser, J. M., Timan, A. L., Miller, K., Dowd, J. E., Tucker, L., & Mazur, E. (2014) · Reports on Progress in Physics · doi:10.1088/0034-4885/77/3/032401 · Cited by 422
Examining Changing Attitudes in Secondary School Science
Barmby, P., Kind, P. M., & Jones, K. (2008) · International Journal of Science Education · doi:10.1080/09500690701344966 · Cited by 379
Metadata
- Authors
- Weinburgh, M.
- Venue
- Journal of Research in Science Teaching
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1995-04
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 387-398
- ISSN
- 0022-4308 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-2736
- OpenAlex
- W2075967301
- Cited by
- 562
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 30.96
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Gender differences in student attitudes toward science: A meta‐analysis of the literature from 1970 to 1991. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/tea.3660320407
- The paper
- Weinburgh, M. (1995). Gender differences in student attitudes toward science: A meta‐analysis of the literature from 1970 to 1991. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660320407
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.