Cited by 372Gender and Technology in EducationTeaching and Learning ProgrammingCareer Development and Diversity

Programming experience promotes higher STEM motivation among first-grade girls

Open access
Master, Allison, Cheryan, Sapna, Moscatelli, Adriana, Meltzoff, Andrew N.·2017·Journal of Experimental Child Psychology

Abstract

The gender gap in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) engagement is large and persistent. This gap is significantly larger in technological fields such as computer science and engineering than in math and science. Gender gaps begin early; young girls report less interest and self-efficacy in technology compared with boys in elementary school. In the current study (N=96), we assessed 6-year-old children's stereotypes about STEM fields and tested an intervention to develop girls' STEM motivation despite these stereotypes. First-grade children held stereotypes that boys were better than girls at robotics and programming but did not hold these stereotypes about math and science. Girls with stronger stereotypes about robotics and programming reported lower interest and self-efficacy in these domains. We experimentally tested whether positive experience with programming robots would lead to greater interest and self-efficacy among girls despite these stereotypes. Children were randomly assigned either to a treatment group that was given experience in programming a robot using a smartphone or to control groups (no activity or other activity). Girls given programming experience reported higher technology interest and self-efficacy compared with girls without this experience and did not exhibit a significant gender gap relative to boys' interest and self-efficacy. These findings show that children's views mirror current American cultural messages about who excels at computer science and engineering and show the benefit of providing young girls with chances to experience technological activities.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jecp.2017.03.013

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Master et al. (2017) reported higher technology interest and higher self-efficacy in students in the treatment group compared to the control group.

    “The study reported higher technology interest and higher self-efficacy in students who were in the treatment group compared to students in the control group.”

    From A Systematic Review of Studies on Educational Robotics (2019) · cites this paper as Master et al., 2017

  • Master et al. (2017) found no gender gap between boys and girls in technology interest and self-efficacy.

    “Furthermore, the study found no gender gap between boys and girls in this regard.”

    From A Systematic Review of Studies on Educational Robotics (2019) · cites this paper as Master et al., 2017

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Master, A., Cheryan, S., Moscatelli, A., & Meltzoff, A. N.
Affiliations
University of Washington (US)
Corresponding author
Master, Allison
Venue
Journal of Experimental Child Psychology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-08
Volume
160
Pages
92-106
ISSN
0022-0965 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2606540748
Cited by
372
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 52 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 49 · 2021: 55 · 2020: 84 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1
FWCI
72.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Experimental Child Psychology (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Science Foundation (SMA-0835854, DRL-1420351, SBIR-1346821)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender and Technology in Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Teaching and Learning Programming
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Career Development and Diversity
Keywords
gender gap in STEM, programming experience, robot programming, gender stereotypes, self-efficacy, technology interest, early childhood, first grade students
MeSH terms
Child, Female, Humans, Male, Motivation, Programming Languages, Robotics, Sex Factors, Stereotyping, Technology, Self Efficacy

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