Societal stereotypes depict girls as less interested than boys in computer science and engineering. We demonstrate the existence of these stereotypes among children and adolescents from first to 12th grade and their potential negative consequences for girls' subsequent participation in these fields. Studies 1 and 2 (n = 2,277; one preregistered) reveal that children as young as age six (first grade) and adolescents across multiple racial/ethnic and gender intersections (Black, Latinx, Asian, and White girls and boys) endorse stereotypes that girls are less interested than boys in computer science and engineering. The more that individual girls endorse genderinterest stereotypes favoring boys in computer science and engineering, the lower their own interest and sense of belonging in these fields. These gender-interest stereotypes are endorsed even more strongly than gender stereotypes about computer science and engineering abilities. Studies 3 and 4 (n = 172; both preregistered) experimentally demonstrate that 8- to 9-y-old girls are significantly less interested in an activity marked with a gender stereotype (girls are less interested in this activity than boys) compared to an activity with no such stereotype (girls and boys are equally interested in this activity). Taken together, both ecologically valid real-world studies (Studies 1 and 2) and controlled preregistered laboratory experiments (Studies 3 and 4) reveal that stereotypes that girls are less interested than boys in computer science and engineering emerge early and may contribute to gender disparities.

Gender disparities in participation in many STEM fields, particularly computer science, engineering, and physics, remain prevalent in Western societies. Stewart-Williams and Halsey contend that an important contributor to these disparities is gender differences in career-related preferences that are driven partly by biology. We argue that Stewart-Williams and Halsey understate the influence of cultural factors in shaping these preferences. We provide evidence for an important and overlooked cultural factor that contributes to gender disparities in computer science, engineering, and physics: masculine defaults. Masculine defaults exist when cultures value and reward traits and characteristics associated with the male gender role and see them as standard (Cheryan & Markus, 2020). We provide examples of how changing computer science, engineering, and physics cultures can decrease gender disparities in participation. Finally, we discuss policy implications, specifically the importance of (1) recognizing that preferences for STEM are malleable and (2) addressing exclusionary cultures of STEM fields. Recognizing and changing exclusionary STEM cultures are important for creating a society that is more just and equitable.

Four studies reveal that offering diversity awards (i.e., awards for applicants from marginalized groups) has unintentionally negative implications for equity. Across the four studies, applicants from marginalized groups were more likely to select the more lucrative award when two unrestricted awards were offered (Study 1: adults from racial groups underrepresented in U.S. colleges who were recruited from Amazon Mechanical Turk, N = 168; Studies 2–4: college women, N range = 152–628). However, the presence of a less lucrative diversity award caused applicants to apply for and prioritize diversity awards over more lucrative unrestricted awards. Fit, or how much applicants felt the award was for someone like them, mediated their increased likelihood of applying for diversity awards over unrestricted awards. These findings suggest that diversity awards may inadvertently siphon applicants from marginalized groups out of application pools for unrestricted awards. Greater examination of unrestricted awards is needed to increase their attractiveness and fit, especially in instances when diversity awards are also offered.

Three studies examine the relationship between women’s expression of interest in computer science and identity expression threat, the concern about conveying an identity inconsistent with one's gender role. Undergraduates perceive academic majors to signal who they are to peers (Study 1). Women imagining majoring in computer science report greater identity expression threat from their peers outside computer science than from those inside the field (Study 2). Women report greater identity expression threat in computer science (but not biology or English) than do men. Identity expression threat mediates gender differences in reported likelihood of downplaying interest in computer science (Study 3). Women considering computer science perceive they will be doubly isolated, both from those within and outside the field. © 2019, © 2019 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.

Understanding and remedying women's underrepresentation in majority-male fields and occupations require the recognition of a lesser-known form of cultural bias called masculine defaults. Masculine defaults exist when aspects of a culture value, reward, or regard as standard, normal, neutral, or necessary characteristics or behaviors associated with the male gender role. Although feminist theorists have previously described and analyzed masculine defaults (e.g., Bem, 1984; de Beauvoir, 1953; Gilligan, 1982; Warren, 1977), here we define masculine defaults in more detail, distinguish them from more well-researched forms of bias, and describe how they contribute to women's underrepresentation. We additionally discuss how to counteract masculine defaults and possible challenges to addressing them. Efforts to increase women's participation in majority-male departments and companies would benefit from identifying and counteracting masculine defaults on multiple levels of organizational culture (i.e., ideas, institutional policies, interactions, individuals).

Using data from 15 countries, this article investigates whether descriptive and prescriptive gender norms concerning housework and child care (domestic work) changed after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Results of a total of 8,343 participants ( M = 19.95, SD = 1.68) from two comparable student samples suggest that descriptive norms about unpaid domestic work have been affected by the pandemic, with individuals seeing mothers’ relative to fathers’ share of housework and child care as even larger. Moderation analyses revealed that the effect of the pandemic on descriptive norms about child care decreased with countries’ increasing levels of gender equality; countries with stronger gender inequality showed a larger difference between pre- and post-pandemic. This study documents a shift in descriptive norms and discusses implications for gender equality—emphasizing the importance of addressing the additional challenges that mothers face during health-related crises.

Despite global commitments and efforts, a gender‐based division of paid and unpaid work persists. To identify how psychological factors, national policies, and the broader sociocultural context contribute to this inequality, we assessed parental‐leave intentions in young adults (18–30 years old) planning to have children ( N = 13,942; 8,880 identified as women; 5,062 identified as men) across 37 countries that varied in parental‐leave policies and societal gender equality. In all countries, women intended to take longer leave than men. National parental‐leave policies and women's political representation partially explained cross‐national variations in the gender gap. Gender gaps in leave intentions were paradoxically larger in countries with more gender‐egalitarian parental‐leave policies (i.e., longer leave available to both fathers and mothers). Interestingly, this cross‐national variation in the gender gap was driven by cross‐national variations in women's (rather than men's) leave intentions. Financially generous leave and gender‐egalitarian policies (linked to men's higher uptake in prior research) were not associated with leave intentions in men. Rather, men's leave intentions were related to their individual gender attitudes. Leave intentions were inversely related to career ambitions. The potential for existing policies to foster gender equality in paid and unpaid work is discussed.