Pretend play is a ubiquitous learning tool in early childhood, enabling children to explore possibilities outside of their current reality. Here, we demonstrate how pretend play can be leveraged to empower girls in scientific domains. American children ages 4 to 7 years (N = 240) played a challenging science activity in one of three conditions. Children in the exposure condition heard about a successful gender-matched scientist, children in the roleplay condition pretended to be that scientist, and children in the baseline condition did not receive information about the scientist. Girls in the roleplay condition, but not in the exposure condition, persisted longer in the science activity than girls in the baseline condition. Pretending to be the scientist equated girls’ persistence to that of boys. These findings suggest that pretend play of role models motivates young girls in science and may help reduce gender gaps from their roots. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

Psychological science can benefit from and contribute to emerging approaches from the computing and information sciences driven by the availability of real-world data and advances in sensing and computing. We focus on one such approach, machine-learned computational models (MLCMs)-computer programs learned from data, typically with human supervision. We introduce MLCMs and discuss how they contrast with traditional computational models and assessment in the psychological sciences. Examples of MLCMs from cognitive and affective science, neuroscience, education, organizational psychology, and personality and social psychology are provided. We consider the accuracy and generalizability of MLCM-based measures, cautioning researchers to consider the underlying context and intended use when interpreting their performance. We conclude that in addition to known data privacy and security concerns, the use of MLCMs entails a reconceptualization of fairness, bias, interpretability, and responsible use.

While scale cognition and learning is a crosscutting concept that pervades science and can aid students in making connections across disciplines, students struggle to conceptualize and consider scales that go far beyond their everyday world experience. Virtual reality technology affords embodied learning experiences, which enable students to physically engage in learning activities in an environment with rich information. Scale Worlds is a virtual learning environment implemented in an immersive CAVE, which portrays scientific entities of a wide range of sizes. A user can scale themself up or down by powers of ten, in order to experience entities from an atom to the Sun. This paper reports on an expert-based usability evaluation of Scale Worlds, including three sets of A/B testing, by five usability experts. Outcomes of the usability evaluation will inform the refinement of Scale Worlds. The evaluation provides insights for usability evaluation and design in immersive virtual environments.

The transfer pathway from community college to university holds promise for advancing equity in STEM because it is followed by disproportionately high numbers of underrepresented students. Among the challenges these students face is cultivating belonging in multiple institutional settings. By combining belonging and validation theories, this qualitative study investigated how underrepresented students’ belonging developed in their STEM majors, highlighting differences between students who transferred and those who began as first-time in college (FTIC) students. The findings revealed that for each type of belonging experience a smaller proportion of transfer students than FTIC students experienced validation and a higher proportion experienced invalidation. Department-based transfer student orientation and ongoing programming were uniformly validating to STEM transfer students. The study provides evidence that major belonging is an academic phenomenon that is within the scope of institutional responsibility to improve. Practical implications for administrators and faculty are included as are suggestions for future research. © The Author(s) 2022.

Psychological science is at an inflection point: The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated inequalities that stem from our historically closed and exclusive culture. Meanwhile, reform efforts to change the future of our science are too narrow in focus to fully succeed. In this article, we call on psychological scientists—focusing specifically on those who use quantitative methods in the United States as one context for such conversations—to begin reimagining our discipline as fundamentally open and inclusive. First, we discuss whom our discipline was designed to serve and how this history produced the inequitable reward and support systems we see today. Second, we highlight how current institutional responses to address worsening inequalities are inadequate, as well as how our disciplinary perspective may both help and hinder our ability to craft effective solutions. Third, we take a hard look in the mirror at the disconnect between what we ostensibly value as a field and what we actually practice. Fourth and finally, we lead readers through a roadmap for reimagining psychological science in whatever roles and spaces they occupy, from an informal discussion group in a department to a formal strategic planning retreat at a scientific society.

Four studies examine the faculty-student relationship as a mechanism through which students ascertain their place in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. Studies 1 and 2 use experimental methods to demonstrate STEM faculty who behave communally, relative to independently, increase undergraduates' belonging and interest in STEM roles through anticipation of greater role-specific support (i.e., support that emphasizes guiding students through structures and activities of field-specific roles). Study 3 then examined the consequences of role-specific support for undergraduates' belonging and interest in STEM. Students anticipated more belonging and interest in STEM roles when faculty provided high levels of role-specific support. Finally, STEM doctoral students' perception of role-specific support from faculty related to their belonging and future identification in STEM fields (Study 4). Taken together, these studies demonstrate the importance of students' construals of role-specific support from faculty, and how faculty behavior signals role-specific support, with benefits for student involvement in STEM.

Studies often cite climate issues in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) employment to explain the lack of diversity by gender and race. Yet, little research directly attends to gender and racial differences in the college experiences, expected family roles, and ideological beliefs about gender that create the racialized gendered selves graduates bring to STEM occupations. We examine the experiences and beliefs of graduating chemistry and chemical engineering majors at two U.S. universities, showing where they coalesced into intersectional gender groups whose work and family involvement and desired working conditions substantially differ. Gendered family expectations and workplace beliefs at labor market entry subsequently predict career confidence and family-based limits on job searching, both important factors affecting retention in STEM employment. We find that women at career entry are more likely to have lower confidence and more limits on their job search, though patterns differ by ethnicity. This occurs in part because both male and female graduates who report greater expected family responsibility also report lower confidence and more limits in job searching. Overall, aspirational fulfillment is easier for men whose intersectional gender identities fit the dominant STEM workplace culture, and harder for women and non-white graduates with more flexible gender ideologies and greater anticipated household responsibilities.

The racial/ethnic disparities and average declines in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) motivation during adolescence are worrisome. Although STEM motivational beliefs are theorized to function in conjunction with one another, the unique patterns and how they change over time for different racial/ethnic groups remain understudied. Using data from the High School Longitudinal Study (N = 18,260), we identified four and five patterns of math and science motivational beliefs in 9th and 11th grade, respectively, and examined their prevalence among Asian, Black, Latina/o, White, and Multiracial adolescents. We found patterns with overall high/low beliefs, patterns with varying levels of motivational beliefs, and patterns characterized by domain differentiation. Then, we charted the stability and changes in those patterns from 9th to 11th grade for each racial/ethnic group and how the patterns at 11th grade were associated with adolescents' STEM career expectations and high school math and science grade point averages.

Purpose of the study Previous literature has examined the relationship between high school students' postsecondary STEM major choices and their prior interest and perceived ability in mathematics. Yet, we have limited understanding of whether and how perceived ability and interest in science and mathematics jointly affect students' STEM major choices. Results Using the most recent nationally representative longitudinal cohort of U.S. secondary school students, we examine the degree to which students' perceived mathematical and scientific abilities and interests predict their STEM major choices, employing logistic regression and a series of interaction analyses. We find that while both mathematics and science perceived ability positively influence STEM major selection, academic interest in these subjects is a weaker predictor. Moreover, across a series of analyses, we observe a significant gender gap-whereby women are less than half as likely to select STEM majors-as well as nuanced distinctions by self-identified race. The relationships among perceived ability, interest, and STEM major choice are not found to meaningfully vary by race nor consistently by gender. However, perceived ability has a more positive effect for men than women who are pursuing Computing/Engineering majors and a more positive effect for women than men who are pursuing other STEM majors, including less applied Social/Behavioral, Natural, and Other Sciences. Implications These findings suggest potential opportunities to enhance their perceived mathematical and scientific abilities in high school, positioning them to potentially enter STEM fields. School sites with more resources to support the ambitions of STEM students of all backgrounds may be better positioned to reduce postsecondary disparities in STEM fields. Given existing opportunity gaps and resource differentials among schools, corresponding recommendations are suggested.

Stronger metacognition, or awareness and regulation of thinking, is related to higher academic achievement. Most metacognition research has focused at the level of the individual learner. However, a few studies have shown that students working in small groups can stimulate metacognition in one another, leading to improved learning. Given the increased adoption of interactive group work in life science classrooms, there is a need to study the role of social metacognition, or the awareness and regulation of the thinking of others, in this context. Guided by the frameworks of social metacognition and evidence-based reasoning, we asked: 1) What metacognitive utterances (words, phrases, statements, or questions) do students use during small-group problem solving in an upper-division biology course? 2) Which metacognitive utterances are associated with small groups sharing higher-quality reasoning in an upper-division biology classroom? We used discourse analysis to examine transcripts from two groups of three students during breakout sessions. By coding for metacognition, we identified seven types of metacognitive utterances. By coding for reasoning, we uncovered four categories of metacognitive utterances associated with higher-quality reasoning. We offer suggestions for life science educators interested in promoting social metacognition during small-group problem solving.