The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Math = male, me = female, therefore math ≠ me.
Abstract
College students, especially women, demonstrated negativity toward math and science relative to arts and language on implicit measures. Group membership (being female), group identity (self = female), and gender stereotypes (math = male) were related to attitudes and identification with mathematics. Stronger implicit math = male stereotypes corresponded with more negative implicit and explicit math attitudes for women but more positive attitudes for men. Associating the self with female and math with male made it difficult for women, even women who had selected math-intensive majors, to associate math with the self. These results point to the opportunities and constraints on personal preferences that derive from membership in social groups.
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
Cites
The measurement of psychological androgyny
Bem, S. L. (1974) · Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0036215 · Cited by 8,522
Implicit social cognition: Attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes
Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (1995) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.102.1.4 · Cited by 6,682
Self-citationFazio, R. H., Jackson, J. R., Dunton, B. C., & Williams, C. J. (1995) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.69.6.1013 · Cited by 1,793 · cited 1×
“Early formulations of the relationship between implicit and explicit social cognition focused on the independence of implicit and explicit preferences, noting the dissociations between the two (Bosson, Swann, & Pennebaker, 2000; Fazio, Jackson, Dunton, & Williams, 1995; Fazio, Sanbonmatsu, Powell, & Kardes, 1986; Gree…”
BackgroundUsing the implicit association test to measure self-esteem and self-concept
Greenwald, A. G., & Farnham, S. D. (2000) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.79.6.1022 · Cited by 1,393 · cited 1×
“Yet there is growing evidence to suggest that explicit and implicit measures can be positively and significantly correlated while remaining separate factors (Cunningham et al., 2001; Greenwald & Farnham, 2000 ).”
BackgroundSelf-citationImplicit attitude measures: Consistency, stability, and convergent validity
Cunningham, W. A., Preacher, K. J., & Banaji, M. R. (2001) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00328 · Cited by 968
Self-citation
Cited by
Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: I. An improved scoring algorithm.
Greenwald, A. G., Nosek, B. A., & Banaji, M. R. (2003) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.197 · Cited by 5,815
Self-citationUnderstanding and using the Implicit Association Test: III. Meta-analysis of predictive validity.
Greenwald, A. G., Poehlman, T. A., Uhlmann, E. L., & Banaji, M. R. (2009) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0015575 · Cited by 3,257
Self-citationScience faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students
Moss-Racusin, C. A., Dovidio, J. F., Brescoll, V. L., Graham, M. J., & Handelsman, J. (2012) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1211286109 · Cited by 3,150
Semantics derived automatically from language corpora contain human-like biases
Caliskan, A., Bryson, J. J., & Narayanan, A. (2017) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aal4230 · Cited by 2,887
(2003) · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145225 · Cited by 1,829
Metadata
- Authors
- Nosek, B. A., Banaji, M. R., & Greenwald, A. G.
- Venue
- Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
- Published
- 2002-07
- Volume
- 83
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 44-59
- ISSN
- 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1315
- OpenAlex
- W2102225743
- Cited by
- 941
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 26.27
- 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: Math = male, me = female, therefore math ≠ me. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/0022-3514.83.1.44
- The paper
- Nosek, B. A., Banaji, M. R., & Greenwald, A. G. (2002). Math = male, me = female, therefore math ≠ me. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.83.1.44
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.
