Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 549

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Gender Comparisons of Mathematics Attitudes and Affect: A Meta-Analysis

Hyde, Janet Shibley, Fennema, Elizabeth, Ryan, Marilyn, Frost, Laurie A., Hopp, Carolyn·1990·Psychology of Women Quarterly
DOI 10.1111/j.1471-6402.1990.tb00022.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This article reports the complex results of meta-analyses of gender differences in attitudes and affect specific to mathematics. Overall, effect sizes were small and were similar in size to gender differences in mathematics performance. When differences exist, the pattern is for females to hold more negative attitudes. Gender differences in self-confidence and general mathematics attitudes are larger among high school and college students than among younger students. Effect sizes for mathematics anxiety differ depending upon the sample (highly selected or general). One exception to the general pattern is in stereotyping mathematics as a male domain, where males hold much more stereotyped attitudes ( d = -.90). While affect and attitudes toward mathematics are not the only influences on the development of gender differences in mathematics performance, they are important, and both male and female affect and attitudes should be considered in conjunction with other social and political influences as explanations.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1471-6402.1990.tb00022.x

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 2 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Hyde, J. S., Fennema, E., Ryan, M., Frost, L. A., & Hopp, C.
Venue
Psychology of Women Quarterly
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
1990-11
Volume
14
Issue
3
Pages
299-324
ISSN
  • 0361-6843 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-6402
DOI
10.1111/j.1471-6402.1990.tb00022.x
OpenAlex
W1898675417
Cited by
549
References
2
FWCI
5.38
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

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.