Take a look at the new version of this page: [ beta version ]. Tell us what you think.

ABSTRACT

We examined gender differences and differences in Computer Science (CS) majors vs. non-majors in ability in quantitative areas, educational goals and interests, experience with computers, stereotypes and knowledge about CS, confidence, personality, support and encouragement, stress and financial issues, gender discrimination, and attitudes toward the academic environment in CS. What is unique to this investigation is its multivariate nature. While others have studied these variables in isolation, our study looks at them collectively to identify important interactions among variables. This will eventually allow us to identify a profile of women who pursue careers in CS. The findings are reported in detail below. Particularly noteworthy is that men had more confidence in using computers than did women even when statistically controlling quantitative ability. In fact, female CS majors had less computer confidence than did male non-majors.

REFERENCES

• 1: Beyer, S. Gender Differences in the Accuracy of Self evaluations of Performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 59 (1990), 960--970.
• 2: Beyer, S. Maternal Employment and Children's Academic Achievement: Parenting Style as Mediating Variable. Developmental Review 15 (1995), 212--253.
• 3: Beyer, S. Gender Differences in Self-perception and Negative Recall Biases. Sex Roles 38 (1998), 103--133.
• 4: Beyer, S. The Accuracy of Academic Gender Stereotypes. Sex Roles 40 (1999a) 787--813.
• 5: Beyer, S. Gender Differences in the Accuracy of Grade Expectancies and Evaluations. Sex Roles 41 (1999b), 279--296.
• 6: Beyer, S. The Accuracy of Self-evaluations of Females, Males, Dysphorics, and Nondysphorics in Subject Areas of Varying Gender-type. Manuscript submitted for publication (2002).
• 7: Beyer, S. The Effects of Gender, Dysphoria, and Performance Feedback on the Accuracy of Self-evaluations. Sex Roles (in press).
• 8: Beyer, S. and Bowden E. M. Gender Differences in Self-perceptions: Convergent Evidence from Three Measures of Accuracy and Bias. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 23 (1997), 157--172.
• 9: Beyer, S., Chavez, M., and Rynes, K. Gender Differences in Attitudes toward and Confidence in Computer Science. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwestern Psychological Association, Chicago, IL. (2002, May).
• 10: Beyer, S., Rynes, K., Chavez, M., Hay, K., and Perrault, J. Why are There so Few Women in Computer Science? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Society, New Orleans, LA. (2002, June).
• 11: J. McGrath Cohoon, Recruiting and retaining women in undergraduate computing majors, ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, v.34 n.2, June 2002 [doi>10.1145/543812.543829]
• 12: Cross, S. E. and Madson, L. Elaboration of Models of the Self: Reply to Baumeister and Sommer (1997) and Martin and Ruble (1997). Psychological Bulletin 122 (1997), 51--55.
• 13: Hecker, D. E. Occupational Employment Projections to 2010. Monthly Labor Review (November 2001), 57--84.
• 14: Henwood, F. Exceptional women? Gender and Technology in U.K. Higher Education. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine (1999/2000), 21--27.
• 15: Inzlicht, M. and Ben-Zeev, T. A Threatening Intellectual Environment: Why Females are Susceptible to Experiencing Problem-Solving Deficits in the Presence of Males. Psychological Science 11 (2000), 365--371.
• 16: Andrea Jepson , Teri Perl, Priming the pipeline, ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, v.34 n.2, June 2002 [doi>10.1145/543812.543826]
• 17: John, O. P. and Robins, R. W. Determinants of Interjudge Agreement on Personality Traits: The Big Five Domains, Observability, Evaluativeness, and the Unique Perspective of the Self. Journal of Personality 61 (1993), 521--551.
• 18: Margolis, J. and Fisher, A. Geek Mythology and Attracting Undergraduate Women to Computer Science. Impacting Change through Collaboration. Proceedings of the Joint National Conference of the Women in Engineering Program Advocates Network and the National Association of Minority Engineering Program Administrators (1997).
• 19: Margolis, J., Fisher, A., and Miller, F. The Anatomy of Interest: Women in Undergraduate Computer Science. Women's Studies Quarterly 28 (2000), 104--127.
• 20: Markus, H. R. and Kitayama, S. Culture and the Self: Implications for Cognition, Emotion, and Motivation. Psychological Review 98 (1991), 224--253.
• 21: Rasmussen, B. and Hapnes, T. Excluding Women from the Technologies of the Future? A Case Study of the Culture of Computer Science. Futures 23 (1991), 1107--1119.
• 22: Seymour, E. and Hewitt, N. M. Talking about Leaving: Factors Contributing to High Attrition Rates among Science, Mathematics, and Engineering Undergraduate Major (1994) Boulder: University of Colorado.
• 23: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Digest of Education Statistics 1999 (2000).
• 24: Zubrow, D. How Computing Attitudes Change during the Freshman Year. In S. Kiesler & L. Sproull (Eds.), Computing and Change on Campus (pp. 195--211) (1987). New York: Cambridge.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  K. Computing Milieux
  K.3 COMPUTERS AND EDUCATION
      K.3.2 Computer and Information Science Education
          Subjects: Computer science education

General Terms:
Experimentation, Measurement, Theory

Keywords:
confidence, gender, stereotyping