Content Effects on Word Problem Performance: A Possible Source of Test Bias?
Abstract
Gender differences in mathematics test performance that favor males are rarely found on tests of computation or other mathematical symbol manipulations. These differences appear primarily in tests that are labeled as tests of “mathematical reasoning” and consist largely of word problems. The content of the word problems’ cover stories is a possible source of gender bias. Some have suggested that students are discouraged from solving problems for affective reasons when the content of the problem is sex-typed for the opposite sex; cognitive science research on problem-solving processes suggests that familiarity of content would be likely to affect problem-solving performance. To test these hypotheses, an experiment was conducted in which underlying mathematics problems were clothed in four different cover stories: masculine, feminine, neutral familiar, and neutral unfamiliar. No effect of sex-typing was found; there was a highly significant but small effect of familiarity. Ratings of problem characteristics were also collected, primarily to guide and confirm the realization of the design intentions.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
The familiarity of situations described in math word problems affected performance on those problems, even when the underlying mathematical structure was held constant.
“Chipman et al. (1991) found that the familiarity of situations described in math word problems affected performance on those problems, even when the underlying mathematical structure was held constant.”
From Equity and Artificial Intelligence in Education: Will "AIEd" Amplify or Alleviate Inequities in Education? (2021) · cites this paper as Chipman et al. (1991)
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 26 · Cited by 38
- Authors
- Chipman, S. F., Marshall, S. P., & Scott, P. A.
- Affiliations
- Office of Naval Research (US)
- San Diego State University (US)
- ORCID
- Marshall, Sandra P.
- Venue
- American Educational Research Journal
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1991
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 897
- ISSN
- 0002-8312 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1970743764
- Cited by
- 38
- References
- 26
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- American Educational Research Journal (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Applied Mathematics › Mathematics Education and Pedagogy
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Cognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
- Keywords
- word problems, gender differences, test bias, content familiarity, mathematical reasoning, mathematics achievement, problem-solving performance, cover stories
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