The effect of a male-oriented computer gaming culture on careers in the computer industry

ABSTRACT

If careers in the computer industry were viewed, it would be evident that there is a conspicuous gender gap between the number of male and female employees. The same gap can be observed at the college level where males are dominating females as to those who pursue and obtain a degree in computer science. The question that this research paper intends to show is: Why are males so dominant when it comes to computer related matter? I have traced this question back to the computer game. Computer games are a fun medium and provide the means for an individual to become computer literate through the engagement of spatial learning and cognitive processing abilities. Since such games are marketed almost exclusively to males, females have a distinct disadvantage. Males are more computer literate through the playing of computer games, and are provided with an easy lead-in to more advanced utilization of computers such as programming. Females tend to be turned off due to the male stereotypes and marketing associated with games and thus begins the gender gap.

REFERENCES

• 1: Barbieri, M. & Light, P. (1992). Interaction, gender and performance on a computer-based problem-solving task. Learning and Instruction, 2, 199 - 213.
• 2: John Beynon, Computers, dominant boys and invisible girls: or, “Hannah, it's not a toaster, it's a computer!”, Computers into classrooms: more questions than answers, Taylor & Francis, Inc., Bristol, PA, 1993
• 3: Buchman, D. and Funk, J. (1996). Children's perceptions of gender differences in social approval for playing electronic games. Sex Roles, 35 (3), 219 - 231.
• 4: Cooper, L (1988). The role of spatial representations in complex problem solving. In S. Schiffer & A. Steele (Eds.). Cognition and representations. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
• 5: Lorraine Culley, Gender equity and computing in secondary schools: issues and strategies for teachers, Computers into classrooms: more questions than answers, Taylor & Francis, Inc., Bristol, PA, 1993
• 6: Davies, A., Klawe, M., NG, M., Nyhus, C., Sullivan, H. (2000). Gender issues in computer science education. Proceedings of NISE 2000: Fifth Annual Forum on Diversity and Equity_Issues in Mathematics and Science Education. Detroit, MI.
• 7: Doolittle, J. (1995). Using riddles and interactive computer games to teach problem-solving skills. Teaching of Psychology, 22 (1), 33 - 36.
• 8: Fletcher-Flinn, C. M. & Suddendorf, T. (1996). Computer attitudes, gender, and exploratory behavior: A developmental study. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 15 (4), 369 - 392.
• 9: Gardener, H (1993). Multiple intelligences, the theory in practice, a reader. New York: Basic Books.
• 10: Harrison, A. et al (1997). Gender differences in computing activities. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 12, 849 - 869.
• 11: Kori Inkpen , Maria Klawe , Joan Lawry , Kamran Sedighian , Steve Leroux , David Hsu , Rena Upitis , Ann Anderson , Mutindi Ndunda, “We have never-forgetful flowers in our garden”: girls' responses to electronic games, Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, v.13 n.4, p.383-403, 1994
• 12: Kahana, M., Sekuler, R., Caplan, J., Kirschen, M., & Madsen, J. (1999). Human theta oscillations exhibit task dependence during virtual maze navigation. Nature,399, 781 - 784.
• 13: Koch, C. (1995). Is equal computer time fair for girls? A computer culture in a grade 7/8 classroom. In Electronic Games for Education in Math and Science Online}. Available: http://taz.cs.ubc.ca/egems/papers/equal.doc {October}.
• 14: Littleton, K. et al. (1998). Gender, task scenarios and children's computer-based problemsolving. Educational Psychology, 18 (3), 327 - 341.
• 15: Mayer, R., Schustack, M. & Blanton, W. (1999). What do children learn from using computers in an informal collaborative setting? Educational Technology, 39 (2),27 - 31.
• 16: McClurg, P. A. & Chaille', C (1987). Computer games: Environments for developing spatial cognition? Educational Computing Research, 3, (11), 95 - 111.
• 17: Piaget, J (1952). The origins of intelligence in children. New York: International Universities Press.
• 18: Pillay, H., Brownlee, J, and Wilss, L (1999). Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 32 (1), 203 - 217.
• 19: Shashaani, L. (1997). Gender differences in computer attitudes and use among college students. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 16 (1), 37-51.
• 20: Simonson, M., Maurer, M., Montag-Torardi, M., Whitaker, M. (1987). Development of astandardized test of computer literacy and a computer anxiety index. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 3_(2), 231 - 247.
• 21: Kurt VanLehn, Architectures for Intelligence, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Mahwah, NJ, 1999
• 22: Ware, M. C. & Stuck, M. F. (1985) Gender and computers: Two surveys of computer related attitudes. Sex roles, 13, 215-229.
• 23: Women's Educational Equity Act Equity Resource Center (1992). Beyond equal access. in WEEA Digest {Online}. J. Mark (Ed.). Available: http://www.edc.org/womensequity /resource/mst/digest/beyondig.htm {1992, June}
• 24: Wilson, F. (1992). Language, power. Human Relations, 45, 883 - 904.
• 25: Young, B. (2000). Gender differences in student attitudes toward computers. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33, (2), 204 - 217.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  K. Computing Milieux
  K.8 PERSONAL COMPUTING
      K.8.0 General
          Subjects: Games

Additional Classification:
  K. Computing Milieux
  K.4 COMPUTERS AND SOCIETY
      K.4.3 Organizational Impacts
          Subjects: Employment
  K.7 THE COMPUTING PROFESSION
      K.7.1 Occupations

General Terms:
Human Factors