CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 195Career Development and DiversityScience Education and PerceptionsEducation, Achievement, and Giftedness

STEM stereotypes predict students’ STEM career interest via self-efficacy and outcome expectations

Open access
Luo, Tian, So, Winnie Wing Mui, Wan, Zhi Hong, Li, Wai Chin·2021·International Journal of STEM Education
DOI 10.1186/s40594-021-00295-y
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Background: Nurturing students’ interest in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) careers is a major goal of STEM education. Although the relationship between students’ stereotypical beliefs regarding STEM careers and their career interest can be reasonably hypothesized, research investigating the extent to which and how students’ STEM career interest is directly or indirectly influenced by their stereotypical beliefs is lacking. This study investigated how upper primary students’ stereotypical beliefs regarding STEM careers predicted their STEM self-efficacy and STEM career-related outcome expectations and how these constructs predicted their STEM career interest. Structural equation modelling was used to analyse quantitative survey data of 824 fourth- to sixth-grade students and test the hypothesized models. Results: Students’ stereotypical beliefs regarding STEM careers negatively predicted their self-efficacy in STEM activities and career-related outcome expectations. Additionally, the students’ self-efficacy in STEM activities and career-related outcome expectations in turn predicted their STEM career interest. Conclusions: These results explain the potential indirect effect of STEM stereotypes on students’ career interest through self-efficacy and outcome expectations. The findings highlight the significant role of STEM stereotypes, self-efficacy in STEM activities, and career-related outcome expectations in students’ career development. The implications of this study for STEM education are also discussed.

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 · 10.1186/s40594-021-00295-y

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Cognitive motivational constructs such as academic self-efficacy, self-regulation, effort control, and goal setting affect STEM students' academic performance and intentions to pursue and persist in STEM fields.

    “such as academic self-efficacy (Chen & Zimmerman, 2007;Han et al., 2021;Luo et al., 2021;van Aalderen-Smeets et al., 2018), selfregulation (Shell & Soh, 2013;Zollman, 2012), effort control (Cromley et al., 2016), and goal setting (Shaw & Barbuti, 2010) affect STEM students' academic performance as well as their intentions to pursue and persist in STEM fields.”

    From The Importance of STEM Sense of Belonging and Academic Hope in Enhancing Persistence for Low-Income, Underrepresented STEM Students (2024) · cites this paper as Luo et al., 2021

    The section on relationships among self-efficacy, outcome expectations, and career interest reports that self-efficacy in STEM activities significantly predicted students’ STEM career interest. That supports the intention-to-pursue portion of the claim. The study concerns upper-elementary students and does not establish effects on academic performance or persistence in STEM fields; its discussion of persistence refers to learning, not remaining in a STEM field. The other constructs in the sentence are cited to other sources, not Luo et al. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 52

  1. Allison, P. D. (2003). Missing data techniques for structural equation modeling. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 112(4), 545-557. https://doi.org/10.1037/ 0021-843X.112.4.545. · DOI
  2. Archer, L., DeWitt, J., & Dillon, J. (2014). 'It didn't really change my opinion': exploring what works, what doesn't and why in a school science, technology, engineering and mathematics careers intervention. Research in Science & Technological Education, 32(1), 35-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/0263 5143.2013.865601. · DOI
  3. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.1 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall. · DOI · Paper page
  5. Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588-606. https:// doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588. · DOI
  6. Blotnicky, K. A., Franz-Odendaal, T., French, F., & Joy, P. (2018). A study of the correlation between STEM career knowledge, mathematics self-efficacy, career interests, and career activities on the likelihood of pursuing a STEM career among middle school students. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(1), 1-15.
  7. Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen, & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation model, (pp. 136-162). Newbury Park: Sage.
  8. Capobianco, B. M., Diefes-Dux, H. A., Mena, I., & Weller, J. (2011). What is an engineer? Implications of elementary school student conceptions for engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 100(2), 304-328. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2011.tb00015.x. · DOI
  9. Cheryan, S., Siy, J. O., Vichayapai, M., Drury, B. J., & Kim, S. (2011). Do female and male role models who embody STEM stereotypes hinder women's anticipated success in STEM? Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2(6), 656-664. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550611405218. · DOI
  10. DeWitt, J., Archer, L., & Osborne, J. (2013). Nerdy, brainy and normal: children's and parents' constructions of those who are highly engaged with science. Research in Science Education, 43(4), 1455-1476. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-012-9315-0. · DOI
  11. Diekman, A. B., Brown, E. R., Johnston, A. M., & Clark, E. K. (2010). Seeking congruity between goals and roles: a new look at why women opt out of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics careers. Psychological Science, 21(8), 1051-1057. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610377342. · DOI · Paper page
  12. Fralick, B., Kearn, J., Thompson, S., & Lyons, J. (2009). How middle schoolers draw engineers and scientists. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(1), 60-73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-008-9133-3. · DOI
  13. Franz-Odendaal, T. A., Blotnicky, K. A., & Joy, P. (2020). Math self-efficacy and the likelihood of pursuing a STEM-based career: a gender-based analysis. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education, 20(3), 538-556. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42330-020-00105-7. · DOI
  14. Fung, Y. Y. H. (2002). A comparative study of primary and secondary school students' images of scientists. Research in Science & Technological Education, 20(2), 199-213. https://doi.org/10.1080/0263514022000030453. · DOI
  15. Garriott, P. O., Hultgren, K. M., & Frazier, J. (2016). STEM stereotypes and high school students' math/science career goals. Journal of Career Assessment, 25(4), 585-600.
  16. Garriott, P. O., Raque-Bogdan, T. L., Zoma, L., Mackie-Hernandez, D., & Lavin, K. (2017). Social cognitive predictors of Mexican American high school students' math/science career goals. Journal of Career Development, 44(1), 77-90. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894845316633860. · DOI
  17. Gottfredson, L. S. (1981). Circumscription and compromise: a developmental theory of occupational aspirations. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 28(6), 545-579. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.28.6.545. · DOI
  18. Hair, J. F. (2006). Multivariate data analysis. Pearson Education India.
  19. Hancock, A. J., Clarke, H. M., & Arnold, K. A. (2020). Sexual orientation occupational stereotypes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 119, 103427. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2020.103427. · DOI
  20. Hazari, Z., Sonnert, G., Sadler, P. M., & Shanahan, M. C. (2010). Connecting high school physics experiences, outcome expectations, physics identity, and physics career choice: a gender study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(8), 978-1003.
  21. Holmegaard, H. T., Madsen, L. M., & Ulriksen, L. (2014). To choose or not to choose science: Constructions of desirable identities among young people considering a STEM higher education programme. International Journal of Science Education, 36(2), 186-215. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.749362. · DOI
  22. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55. https://doi.org/10.1 080/10705519909540118. · DOI · Paper page
  23. Johnson, C. C. (2013). Conceptualizing integrated STEM education. School Science and Mathematics, 113(8), 367-368. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12043. · DOI
  24. Kier, M. W., Blanchard, M. R., Osborne, J. W., & Albert, J. L. (2014). The development of the STEM career interest survey (STEM-CIS). Research in Science Education, 44(3), 461-481. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-013-9389-3. · DOI
  25. Kline, R. B. (2005). Methodology in the social sciences. London: Routledge.
  26. Lent, R., Brown, S., & Hackett, G. (1994). Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of career and academic interest, choice, and performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 45(1), 79-122. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1994.1027. · DOI · Paper page
  27. Lent, R., Miller, M., Smith, P., Watford, B., Hui, K., & Lim, R. (2015). Social cognitive model of adjustment to engineering majors: longitudinal test across gender and race/ethnicity. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 86, 77-85. https://doi.org/1 0.1016/j.jvb.2014.11.004. · DOI
  28. Lent, R. W., Sheu, H. B., Miller, M. J., Cusick, M. E., Penn, L. T., & Truong, N. N. (2018). Predictors of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics choice options: a meta-analytic path analysis of the social-cognitive choice model by gender and race/ethnicity. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 65(1), 17-35. https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000243. · DOI
  29. Lin, C., & Deemer, E. D. (2019). Stereotype threat and career goals among women in STEM: Mediating and moderating roles of perfectionism. Journal of Career Development. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894845319884652. · DOI
  30. Luo, T., Li, J., & So, W. W. M. (2018). Analysis of students' visual presentations of STEM professionals. Hualien: Paper presented at 2018 International Conference of East-Asian Association for Science Education.
  31. Luo, T., So, W. W. M., Li, W. C., & Yao, J. (2020). The development and validation of a survey for evaluating primary students' self-efficacy in STEM activities. Journal of Science Education and Technology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956- 020-09882-0. · DOI · Paper page
  32. Masnick, A. M., Valenti, S. S., Cox, B. D., & Osman, C. J. (2010). A multidimensional scaling analysis of students' attitudes about science careers. International Journal of Science Education, 32(5), 653-667. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 09500690902759053. · DOI
  33. Matsumoto, D. E. (2009). The Cambridge dictionary of psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  34. Metcalf, H. (2010). Stuck in the pipeline: a critical review of STEM workforce literature. InterActions: UCLA Journal of Education and Information Studies, 6(2), 1-20.
  35. Milner, D. I., Horan, J. J., & Tracey, T. J. (2014). Development and evaluation of STEM interest and self-efficacy tests. Journal of Career Assessment, 22(4), 642- 653. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072713515427. · DOI
  36. Nassar-McMillan, S. C., Wyer, M., Oliver-Hoyo, M., & Schneider, J. (2011). New tools for examining undergraduate students' STEM stereotypes: implications for women and other underrepresented groups. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2011(152), 87-98. https://doi.org/10.1002/ir.411. · DOI
  37. National Research Council (2014). STEM integration in K-12 education: Status, prospects, and an agenda for research. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
  38. Navarro, R. L., Flores, L. Y., & Worthington, R. L. (2007). Mexican American middle school students' goal intentions in mathematics and science: a test of social cognitive career theory. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54(3), 320-335. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.54.3.320. · DOI
  39. Nugent, G., Barker, B., Grandgenett, N., & Adamchuk, V. I. (2010). Impact of robotics and geospatial technology interventions on youth STEM learning and attitudes. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(4), 391-408. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2010.10782557. · DOI · Paper page
  40. Nugent, G., Barker, B., Welch, G., Grandgenett, N., Wu, C. R., & Nelson, C. (2015). A model of factors contributing to STEM learning and career orientation. International Journal of Science Education, 37(7), 1067-1088. https://doi.org/1 0.1080/09500693.2015.1017863. · DOI
  41. O'Brien, V., Martinez-Pons, M., & Kopala, M. (1999). Mathematics self-efficacy, ethnic identity, gender, and career interests related to mathematics and science. The Journal of Educational Research, 92(4), 231-235. https://doi.org/1 0.1080/00220679909597600. · DOI
  42. Oh, Y. J., Jia, Y., Lorentson, M., & LaBanca, F. (2013). Development of the educational and career interest scale in science, technology, and mathematics for high school students. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22(5), 780-790. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-012-9430-8. · DOI
  43. Sadler, P. M., Sonnert, G., Hazari, Z., & Tai, R. (2012). Stability and volatility of STEM career interest in high school: a gender study. Science Education, 96(3), 411- 427. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21007. · DOI · Paper page
  44. Sahin, A., Ekmekci, A., & Waxman, H. C. (2017). Collective effects of individual, behavioral, and contextual factors on high school students' future STEM career plans. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 16, 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9847-x. · DOI
  45. Sasson, I., & Cohen, D. (2013). Assessment for effective intervention: enrichment science academic program. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22(5), 718-728. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-012-9425-5. · DOI
  46. Shen, F. C., Liao, K. Y., Abraham, W. T., & Weng, C. (2014). Parental pressure and support toward Asian Americans' self-efficacy, outcome expectations, and interests in stereotypical occupations: living up to parental expectations and internalized stereotyping as mediators. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 61(2), 241-252. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036219. · DOI
  47. So, W. W. M., Zhan, Y., Chow, S. C. F., & Leung, C. F. (2018). Analysis of STEM activities in primary students' science projects in an informal learning environment. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 16(6), 1003-1023. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9828-0. · DOI
  48. van Aalderen-Smeets, S. I., Walma van der Molen, J. H., & Xenidou-Dervou, I. (2018). Implicit STEM ability beliefs predict secondary school students' STEM self-efficacy beliefs and their intention to opt for a STEM field career. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 56(4), 465-485.
  49. van Tuijl, C., & van der Molen, J. H. W. (2016). Study choice and career development in STEM fields: an overview and integration of the research. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 26(2), 159-183. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-015-9308-1. · DOI
  50. Wang, X. (2013). Why students choose STEM majors. American Educational Research Journal, 50(5), 1081-1121. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312134 88622. · DOI · Paper page
  51. Wheaton, B. (1987). Assessment of fit in overidentified models with latent variables. Sociological Methods & Research, 16(1), 118-154. https://doi.org/1 0.1177/0049124187016001005. · DOI · Paper page
  52. Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Self-efficacy: an essential motive to learn. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 82-91. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1016. · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Luo, T., So, W. W. M., Wan, Z. H., & Li, W. C.
Affiliations
Education University of Hong Kong (HK)
ORCID
Venue
International Journal of STEM Education
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2021-05-17
Volume
8
Issue
1
ISSN
2196-7822 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1186/s40594-021-00295-y
OpenAlex
W3162063495
Cited by
195
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 45 · 2025: 57 · 2024: 47 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 2
FWCI
26.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • International Journal of STEM Education (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Career Development and Diversity
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Science Education and Perceptions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
Keywords
STEM career interest, STEM self-efficacy, outcome expectations, career development, upper elementary students, gender stereotypes, indirect effects, STEM education

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