Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- List of Contributors
- 1 Research on the Women and Mathematics Issue: A Personal Case History
- 2 The Perseverative Search for Sex Differences in Mathematics Ability
- 3 A Psychobiosocial Model: Why Females Are Sometimes Greater Than and Sometimes Less Than Males in Math Achievement
- 4 Gender Differences in Math: Cognitive Processes in an Expanded Framework
- 5 Cognitive Contributions to Sex Differences in Math Performance
- 6 Spatial Ability as a Mediator of Gender Differences on Mathematics Tests: A Biological–Environmental Framework
- 7 Examining Gender-Related Differential Item Functioning Using Insights from Psychometric and Multicontext Theory
- 8 The Gender-Gap Artifact: Women's Underperformance in Quantitative Domains Through the Lens of Stereotype Threat
- 9 “Math is hard!” (Barbie™, 1994): Responses of Threat vs. Challenge-Mediated Arousal to Stereotypes Alleging Intellectual Inferiority
- 10 The Role of Ethnicity on the Gender Gap in Mathematics
- 11 The Gender Gap in Mathematics: Merely a Step Function?
- 12 “I can, but I don't want to”: The Impact of Parents, Interests, and Activities on Gender Differences in Math
- 13 Gender Effects on Mathematics Achievement: Mediating Role of State and Trait Self-Regulation
- 14 Gender Differences in Mathematics Self-Efficacy Beliefs
- 15 Gender Differences in Mathematics: What We Know and What We Need to Know
- Author Index
- Subject Index
- References
14 - Gender Differences in Mathematics Self-Efficacy Beliefs
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 June 2012
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- List of Contributors
- 1 Research on the Women and Mathematics Issue: A Personal Case History
- 2 The Perseverative Search for Sex Differences in Mathematics Ability
- 3 A Psychobiosocial Model: Why Females Are Sometimes Greater Than and Sometimes Less Than Males in Math Achievement
- 4 Gender Differences in Math: Cognitive Processes in an Expanded Framework
- 5 Cognitive Contributions to Sex Differences in Math Performance
- 6 Spatial Ability as a Mediator of Gender Differences on Mathematics Tests: A Biological–Environmental Framework
- 7 Examining Gender-Related Differential Item Functioning Using Insights from Psychometric and Multicontext Theory
- 8 The Gender-Gap Artifact: Women's Underperformance in Quantitative Domains Through the Lens of Stereotype Threat
- 9 “Math is hard!” (Barbie™, 1994): Responses of Threat vs. Challenge-Mediated Arousal to Stereotypes Alleging Intellectual Inferiority
- 10 The Role of Ethnicity on the Gender Gap in Mathematics
- 11 The Gender Gap in Mathematics: Merely a Step Function?
- 12 “I can, but I don't want to”: The Impact of Parents, Interests, and Activities on Gender Differences in Math
- 13 Gender Effects on Mathematics Achievement: Mediating Role of State and Trait Self-Regulation
- 14 Gender Differences in Mathematics Self-Efficacy Beliefs
- 15 Gender Differences in Mathematics: What We Know and What We Need to Know
- Author Index
- Subject Index
- References
Summary
In the early 1940s, at the height of behaviorism's influence on American psychology and education, learning theorists began to propose theories of social learning and imitation that rejected behaviorist notions of associationism in favor of drive reduction principles (e.g., Miller & Dollard, 1941). Although these theories were instrumental in emphasizing the role that social processes play on human learning and functioning, they failed to take into account the creation of novel responses or the processes of delayed and nonreinforced behaviors. In 1963, Bandura and Walters proposed a theory of social learning that broadened the frontiers of existing theories with the now familiar principles of observational learning and vicarious reinforcement. Bandura (1977, 1986) later proposed a view of human functioning that accorded a central role to cognitive, vicarious, self-regulatory, and self-reflective processes in human adaptation and change. In this sociocognitive perspective, individuals are viewed as proactive and self-regulating rather than as reactive and controlled by biological or environmental forces.
Social cognitive theory is rooted in a view of human agency in which individuals are proactively engaged in their own development and can make things happen by their actions. Key to this sense of agency is the fact that, among other personal factors, individuals possess self-beliefs that enable them to exercise a measure of control over their thoughts, feelings, and actions, that “what people think, believe, and feel affects how they behave” (Bandura, 1986, p. 5).
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Gender Differences in MathematicsAn Integrative Psychological Approach, pp. 294 - 315Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2004
References
- 32
- Cited by