Gendered genetics: How reading about the genetic basis of sex differences in biology textbooks could affect beliefs associated with science gender disparities
Gendered genetics: How reading about the genetic basis of sex differences in biology textbooks could affect beliefs associated with science gender disparities
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/sce.21502
复制
发表时间：
2019-07-01
影响因子：
4.3
通讯作者：
Buck Bracey, Zoe E.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Donovan, Brian M.;Stuhlsatz, Molly A. M.;Buck Bracey, Zoe E.
认为男性和女性在科学能力上的差异是由基因决定的，这一观点以复杂的方式导致了科学、技术、工程和数学（STEM）领域的性别差异。在这个实地实验中，我们探讨了遗传学课程的内容如何通过其对被称为神经遗传学本质主义的社会认知偏见的影响来影响人们对科学能力的信念。学生（n = 460, 8 -10年级）被随机分配阅读一篇遗传学文章(a)解释植物性别差异，(b)解释人类性别差异，或(c)驳斥神经遗传学本质主义。阅读后，两种性别遗传学条件下的学生对神经遗传学本质主义和天生的科学能力基础的信念明显高于阅读驳斥神经遗传学本质主义文本的学生。实验数据的结构方程模型（SEM）表明，阅读对科学能力天生信念的影响是由神经遗传本质主义介导的，这种间接影响在女孩中显著，而在男孩中不显著。反过来，相信科学能力是天生的，这预示着女孩未来对STEM的兴趣会降低，而男孩则不会。这些发现表明，了解人类基因差异并不是一项社会中立的努力。讨论了减轻STEM性别差异的意义。
The belief that men and women differ in science ability because of genetics contributes to gender disparities in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) in complex ways. In this field experiment, we explored how the content of the genetics curriculum affected beliefs about science ability through its impact on a social-cognitive bias known as neurogenetic essentialism. Students (n = 460, 8th-10th grade) were randomized to read a genetics text that (a) explained plant sex differences, (b) explained human sex differences, or (c) refuted neurogenetic essentialism. After reading, students in the two genetics of sex conditions had significantly greater belief in neurogenetic essentialism and the innate basis of science ability compared with students who read the text that refuted neurogenetic essentialism. Structural equation modeling (SEM) of the experimental data demonstrated that the effect of the readings on the belief that science ability is innate was mediated by neurogenetic essentialism and this indirect effect was significant for girls but not boys. In turn, the belief that science ability is innate predicted lower future interest in STEM for girls, but not for boys. These findings suggest that learning about human genetic difference is not a socially neutral endeavor. Implications for mitigating gender disparities in STEM are discussed.