Gender differences in young children's math ability attributions

Abstract We examined the structure underlying math ability attributions in 8- to 9-year old boys and girls. As potential determinants of math ability attributions we assessed general ability, grades, teacher evaluation of the student's math ability, and student perception of teacher ability evaluation. Although girls and boys did not differ in their general ability and grades, girls attributed math success less to high ability and math failure more to low ability. Path analyses suggested that the pathways leading to ability attributions differ between girls and boys. Girls appeared to rely mainly on perceived teacher evaluation of their ability when making math ability attributions whereas boys used both perceived teacher evaluation and the quality of their objective math performance. Only in girls was perceived teacher ability evaluation related to the ability evaluation actually held by the teacher. Key words: mathematicalability, human sex differences, studentattitudes, teacher attitudes, ability attribution Of the many causal attributions that we make about ourselves, those concerning perceived level of ability are among the most influential for human functioning. This is due to both the perceived properties of own ability and the value that is frequently attached to it. Ability is typically perceived as stable and uncontrollable (see Heider, 1958; Weiner, 1986), and having high ability - especially high intellectual ability - is highly valued by most individuals in the Western culture. Therefore, self-ascriptions of low ability often have severely debilitating effects on motivation, emotion, and action: Because ability is perceived as relatively stable, attributing failure to low ability leads to the expectation that failure will continue in the future, which, in turn, may cause an individual to stop pursuing a task. Because ability is often perceived as uncontrollable, one may be convinced that one has no means to improve it. And because having high ability is often strongly valued, a perceived lack of ability frequently leads to negative emotions and decreases of self-esteem. The just-described negative consequences of self-derogating ability attributions have been postulated for girls with respect to mathematics (math) on the basis of empirical findings concerning gender differences in attributions for success and failure. The most consistent gender difference that emerged from these studies concerned ability as a perceived causal factor of math performance. Compared to their male classmates, female students attributed success in math less to their high ability and failure more to their low ability (e.g., Eccles [Parsons], 1983; Parsons, Meece, Adler, & Kaczala, 1982, see Footnote 1; Rustemeyer & Jubel, 1996; Ryckman & Peckham, 1986, 1987; Stipek, 1984; Stipek & Gralinski, 1991; Tiedemann & Faber, 1995; Wolleat, Pedro, Becker, & Fennema, 1980). These selfderogating attributions of female students are assumed - and have partly been demonstrated (e.g. Stipek & Gralinski, 1991) - to have serious negative implications for their expectations of future success in math, their feelings accompanying success and failure, their perceptions of self-efficacy, and, consequently, their choices related to math and their long-term math achievement. The aim of the present study was to expand our understanding of the factors underlying gender differences in math ability attributions in young children (8- to 9-year olds). For this purpose, we assessed, in addition to causal attributions for math performance, four variables that were considered to be possible (direct or indirect) causes of the previously observed differential math ability attributions in boys and girls: (a) grades as an index of objective math performance, (b) general ability as measured by a standardized test; (c) teacher evaluations of the students' math ability, and (d) students' perceptions of the teacher ability evaluations. …