“Who Has to Work Harder, Girls or Boys?” Children's Gender Stereotypes About Required Effort in Math and Reading

Our culture attributes women's and girls' ability in mathematics and related domains to their efforts more so than men's and boys'-a stereotype that contributes to inequities in scientific and technical careers. Here, we provide the first investigation of this gender stereotype in children, examining its endorsement across a broad age range and assessing its links to student motivation. Specifically, we investigated 6- to 12-year-old US elementary school students' stereotypes about how hard girls and boys have to work to be good at math and, as a comparison, reading (N = 246; 50% girls; 50% White, 19% Asian, 9% Multiracial, 6% Black). We also tested whether these stereotypes are related to children's self-efficacy, interest, and anxiety in math and reading, and whether these links differ in strength across age. Although we anticipated that, like US adults, children would stereotype girls as having to work harder than boys to be good at math, we found that-in line with previously documented gender ingroup biases-younger children reported that effort was less of a requirement for their own (vs. another) gender; this ingroup bias was absent among older children. However, consistent with our hypotheses, children who more strongly believed their own gender needed to work harder to be good in a subject also reported lower self-efficacy in that subject, and older children reported lower interest in it as well. The present research contributes to our understanding of how to effectively encourage student motivation in school.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Developmental Science
Published
2025-06-07
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.70025
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.24

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

“Who Has to Work Harder, Girls or Boys?” Children's Gender Stereotypes About Required Effort in Math and Reading

Bethany Lassetter, Sarah Theule Lubienski, Natalie Toomajian, Vivian Liu et al.
2 citations
Developmental Science
Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
4.24
article

“Who Has to Work Harder, Girls or Boys?” Children's Gender Stereotypes About Required Effort in Math and Reading

Bethany Lassetter, Sarah Theule Lubienski, Natalie Toomajian, Vivian Liu, Andrei Cimpian, Natalie Hutchins
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Our culture attributes women's and girls' ability in mathematics and related domains to their efforts more so than men's and boys'-a stereotype that contributes to inequities in scientific and technical careers. Here, we provide the first investigation of this gender stereotype in children, examining its endorsement across a broad age range and assessing its links to student motivation. Specifically, we investigated 6- to 12-year-old US elementary school students' stereotypes about how hard girls and boys have to work to be good at math and, as a comparison, reading (N = 246; 50% girls; 50% White, 19% Asian, 9% Multiracial, 6% Black). We also tested whether these stereotypes are related to children's self-efficacy, interest, and anxiety in math and reading, and whether these links differ in strength across age. Although we anticipated that, like US adults, children would stereotype girls as having to work harder than boys to be good at math, we found that-in line with previously documented gender ingroup biases-younger children reported that effort was less of a requirement for their own (vs. another) gender; this ingroup bias was absent among older children. However, consistent with our hypotheses, children who more strongly believed their own gender needed to work harder to be good in a subject also reported lower self-efficacy in that subject, and older children reported lower interest in it as well. The present research contributes to our understanding of how to effectively encourage student motivation in school.

Developmental ScienceVol. 28(4)
University College Dublin (IE), Yeshiva University (US), Indiana University Bloomington (US), University of Virginia (US), New York University (US)
York University, Institute of Education Sciences
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
4.24
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.