What’s New in Psychology?

What Determines Why Women Chose to Study Psychology?

Jim Windell

           Although the gender-gap in achievement in STEM fields has narrowed in recent years, women remain underrepresented in many math-intensive fields.

           Why does this gender gap exist and how can its’ sustained existence be explained?

           Some analysts contend that the underrepresentation of women in math-intensive STEM fields results from the interplay of multiple factors. Although biological factors and differences in basic cognitive abilities may help to account for the gap, those factors cannot explain the substantial cross-cultural and historic variability in gender inequality in entry into STEM. Instead, researchers more recently have suggested that the underrepresentation of women in STEM fields seems to reflect choices that girls and women make themselves. That is, they may choose hobbies, academic specializations, study subjects, or career paths leading them into less math-intensive or non-STEM fields.

           Furthermore, recent research on “field-specific ability beliefs” has shown that a high emphasis on “brilliance” (i.e., raw talent) as a requirement for success goes along with a low share of female students among the graduates of a specific field. A new study has explored brilliance beliefs about oneself – beliefs that you have especially high levels of innate intelligence – play a crucial role in shaping students’ academic choices.

           In this new study, published recently in the journal Sex Roles, finds that women who believe they are not as brilliant as men tend to major in psychology, which people perceive as requiring less brilliance than philosophy. However, men’s major choices were not strongly influenced by their self-perceptions of brilliance.

           Heather M. Maranges, a research fellow in the Department of Human Development and Family Science at Florida State University, compared the fields of philosophy and psychology to explore factors that contribute to these disparities. She chose philosophy and psychology because they share historical and topical overlap and have long been known for their inverse gender gaps. More men than women study philosophy, while more women opt to study psychology. These gaps begin to develop at the undergraduate level, after introductory classes before majors are chosen, and perpetuate through graduate school and into academic careers.

           What Maranges found was that, somewhat surprisingly, intelligence mindsets did not play a significant role. Whether people believed that intelligence could be grown through hard work and effort (growth mindset) or that it was unmalleable and innate (fixed mindset) did not contribute to their choice of what to study.

           According to Dr. Maranges, “This is striking, given that women come into university with objective markers of academic ability, such as higher GPAs, and that academic psychology requires the similar types of thinking as philosophy but also statistical abilities.”

           Maranges says that missing from prior research was the ability to isolate the most important factors contributing to gender gaps by comparing fields that are more similar, such as philosophy and psychology. “Our objective,” she said, “was to consider how stereotypes about brilliance versus mindsets about intelligence might differently affect men and women’s decisions about what to study.”

           Maranges conducted the research with an interdisciplinary team at Concordia University in Montreal. The team surveyed 467 undergraduate students studying philosophy and psychology in universities across the United States and Canada. As indicated above, the study found that brilliance beliefs about oneself played a crucial role in shaping students’ academic choices.

           The findings suggest internalized beliefs about the gendered nature of brilliance are crucial in understanding why men and women tend to pursue different academic fields. “By addressing brilliance beliefs, we can open doors for capable and interested individuals of all genders and other unrepresented groups by allowing actual abilities and interests to play out, reducing disparities across academic fields,” Maranges concludes.

           To read the original article, find it with this reference:

 Maranges, H.M., Iannuccilli, M., Nieswandt, K. et al. (2023). Brilliance Beliefs, Not Mindsets, Explain Inverse Gender Gaps in Psychology and Philosophy. Sex Roles. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-023-01406-5