The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Gender and fair assessment
Abstract
Contents: Preface. Introduction. Research on Gender Differences. W.W. Willingham, N.S. Cole, C. Lewis, S.W. Leung, Test Performance. C.A. Dwyer, L.M. Johnson, Grades, Accomplishments, and Correlates. N.S. Cole, Understanding Gender Differences and Fair Assessment in Context. B. Bridgeman, A. Schmitt, Fairness Issues in Test Development and Administration. Fairness Issues in Test Design and Use. Summary and Implications.
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
Cited by
Validating the interpretations and uses of test scores
Kane, M. T. (2013) · Journal of Educational Measurement · doi:10.1111/jedm.12000 · Cited by 2,110
A better lemon squeezer? maximum-likelihood regression with beta-distributed dependent variables.
Smithson, M., & Verkuilen, J. (2006) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.11.1.54 · Cited by 1,788
Cross-national patterns of gender differences in mathematics: A meta-analysis.
Else-Quest, N. M., Hyde, J. S., & Linn, M. C. (2010) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0018053 · Cited by 1,630
Duckworth, A. L., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2006) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-0663.98.1.198 · Cited by 1,097
New trends in gender and mathematics performance: A meta-analysis.
Lindberg, S. M., Hyde, J. S., Petersen, J. L., & Linn, M. C. (2010) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0021276 · Cited by 920
Metadata
- Venue
- Choice Reviews Online
- Publisher
- American Library Association
- Published
- 1997-12-01
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 04
- Pages
- 35-2259-35-2259
- ISSN
- 0009-4978 (ISSN-L)
- 1523-8253
- OpenAlex
- W1520561658
- Cited by
- 437
- References
- 0
- Type
- book review
- 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: Gender and fair assessment. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5860/choice.35-2259
- The paper
- Gender and fair assessment. (1997). Choice Reviews Online. https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.35-2259
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.
