View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

The Lack of Fit Framework in School: Girls' Perceived Misfit and Its Consequences in a Male-Stereotyped Discipline

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: The Lack of Fit Framework in School: Girls' Perceived Misfit and Its Consequences in a Male-Stereotyped Discipline
Language: English
Authors: Arian Leopold (ORCID 0009-0005-9023-5501), Katharina Schulz, Anne Burkard, Michaela M. Köller (ORCID 0000-0003-1025-3311), Daniela Renger (ORCID 0000-0002-4474-2503)
Source: Social Psychology of Education: An International Journal. 2025 28(1).
Availability: Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. One New York Plaza, Suite 4600, New York, NY 10004. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-460-1700; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 18
Publication Date: 2025
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Education Level: High Schools
Secondary Education
Descriptors: Females, Disproportionate Representation, Gender Bias, Gender Discrimination, Sex Stereotypes, Sense of Belonging, Career Pathways, Career Choice, Goodness of Fit, Models, High School Students, Self Concept, Gender Differences, Persistence, Women Faculty
DOI: 10.1007/s11218-025-10094-w
ISSN: 1381-2890
1573-1928
Abstract: Due to the leaky pipeline, i.e., the continuous decline in the number of women along the academic career path, women are still underrepresented in many academic disciplines like STEM and philosophy. One theoretical model that explains this is the lack of fit framework (Heilman, Sex bias in work settings: The lack of fit model; Heilman & Caleo, Combatting gender discrimination: A lack of fit framework). According to this, women in male-stereotyped disciplines perceive a misfit to the person stereotypical for the discipline. This perceived misfit has been associated with a lower sense of belonging and thus less engagement, intention to persist, and probability of choosing a career in the discipline. So far, the Lack of Fit Model has been studied in work and university contexts but not in schools. In the present study, we applied the lack of fit framework to secondary school, focusing on high school students (N = 523) and their perception of philosophy (a highly male-stereotyped discipline). We showed that female high school students have a higher perceived self-philosopher misfit than male high school students. Using a structural equation model, we showed that this gender-discipline misfit correlates with less engagement and lower intention to persist and possibly career choice via a lower sense of belonging. The results extend previous findings on the lack of fit framework to the school context.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2025
Accession Number: EJ1476169
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwHY996RfYooR-XR5WNqLZSoAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDJMaZWSuSvNaZIMlLAIBEICBm8NDXrXwLkdVbPq0jcalL0VbL2bPlIv6Q52tLp5-lbY-ivRG1xSnar11z9yFeYuD2TFpPWT-NlyV29RXqVPUr6oHp0xeNfHR5momLagd1AVgHewGXcXPLfxJ780D6K0Wj_Tl62o-I3nv0txNwcXwL2MXl3MiNSd7Zms3RraoCeQQWIe1OVO_vUZPmIlb13Zr5vrjkyqg2zVuqGgQ
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0186340637;luo01jul.25;2025Jul04.05:48;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0186340637-1">The lack of fit framework in school: girls' perceived misfit and its consequences in a male-stereotyped discipline </title> <p>Due to the leaky pipeline, i.e., the continuous decline in the number of women along the academic career path, women are still underrepresented in many academic disciplines like STEM and philosophy. One theoretical model that explains this is the lack of fit framework (Heilman, Sex bias in work settings: The lack of fit model; Heilman & Caleo, Combatting gender discrimination: A lack of fit framework). According to this, women in male-stereotyped disciplines perceive a misfit to the person stereotypical for the discipline. This perceived misfit has been associated with a lower sense of belonging and thus less engagement, intention to persist, and probability of choosing a career in the discipline. So far, the Lack of Fit Model has been studied in work and university contexts but not in schools. In the present study, we applied the lack of fit framework to secondary school, focusing on high school students (N = 523) and their perception of philosophy (a highly male-stereotyped discipline). We showed that female high school students have a higher perceived self-philosopher misfit than male high school students. Using a structural equation model, we showed that this gender-discipline misfit correlates with less engagement and lower intention to persist and possibly career choice via a lower sense of belonging. The results extend previous findings on the lack of fit framework to the school context.</p> <p>Keywords: Gender stereotypes; Lack of fit; Stereotype misfit; Women in academia; Gender in education</p> <p>Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-025-10094-w.</p> <hd id="AN0186340637-2">Introduction</hd> <p>The leaky pipeline, the continuous decline in the number of women along the academic career path in many disciplines, still has holes despite countless theoretical explanations offered for it and strategies pursued against it (Almukhambetova et al., [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref1">3</reflink>]; Buckles, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref2">8</reflink>]; Liu et al., [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref3">44</reflink>]; Moak et al., [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref4">52</reflink>]). It has been theorized and empirically demonstrated that women are underrepresented in academia in part because of a perceived misfit between women and the stereotypes of an academic (Van Veelen & Derks, [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref5">65</reflink>]). This misfit is associated with negative outcomes such as a lower sense of belonging, engagement, intention to persist, and probability of choosing a career (Peters et al., [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref6">55</reflink>]; Van Veelen & Derks, [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref7">65</reflink>]). However, while leaks in the pipeline can be found in almost all disciplines, there are large differences between them (Cheryan et al., [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref8">10</reflink>]). Whereas most humanities show a female majority, some disciplines (e.g., STEM, philosophy) have an equal distribution or an underrepresentation of women at the beginning of university (Klonschinski, [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref9">37</reflink>]). The existence of these gender-specific differences in the first semester of university indicates that there are pre-university factors that contribute to this gender imbalance (Dougherty et al., [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref10">18</reflink>]). Empirical research should thus adopt a more comprehensive approach also focusing on stereotypes of disciplines and perceived fit in students before they enter university.</p> <p>This article brings several new aspects to the literature. First, it applies the lack of fit framework to students' self-perceptions in the high school context. Second, two stereotype dimensions (communion and agency) are used to explore the misfit in more detail and to discover possible consequences of the respective misfit. Third, the lack of fit model is applied to philosophy. While previous research has mainly investigated the underrepresentation of women in STEM (Master, [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref11">47</reflink>]), we focus on a humanity discipline.</p> <p>Three research questions arise: Do female high school students show a greater perceived misfit than male high school students in a male-stereotyped discipline? Does this misfit influence their sense of belonging? What are the consequences of a perceived misfit and belonging?</p> <hd id="AN0186340637-3">Stereotype model</hd> <p>Stereotypes refer to the characteristics and attributes assigned to social groups. They can be defined as shared beliefs within a society that link groups (e.g., gender, disciplines) with certain traits (Master, [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref12">47</reflink>]). The Stereotype-Content Model (Fiske et al., [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref13">23</reflink>]; Fiske, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref14">22</reflink>]) provides a framework for analyzing stereotypes. It classifies stereotypes according to the dimensions of communion ("getting along") and agency ("getting ahead"; Abele et al., [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref15">2</reflink>]; Hogan, [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref16">32</reflink>]). Communion refers to qualities like being friendly or fair. Agency refers to attributes like competence and ambition. Gender stereotypes are cognitive generalizations about which traits men and women possess (Eagly et al., [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref17">21</reflink>]; Heilman & Caleo, [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref18">31</reflink>]).[<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref19">1</reflink>] Social role theory argues that gender stereotypes predict behavior as individuals act following shared social roles (Eagly & Wood, [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref20">20</reflink>]). Role congruity theory posits that incongruent expectations between two social roles that a person holds can lead to prejudice (Eagly & Karau, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref21">19</reflink>]; del Carmen Triana et al., [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref22">15</reflink>]). Stereotypically, women are described as more communal and less agentic, and men as more agentic and less communal (Abele et al., [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref23">1</reflink>]; Fiske et al., [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref24">23</reflink>]). People also have stereotypes about academic disciplines and whether they are male or female (Weisgram et al., [<reflink idref="bib71" id="ref25">71</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0186340637-4">Consequences of a perceived misfit</hd> <p>The Lack of Fit Framework (Heilman & Caleo, [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref26">31</reflink>]) theorizes the consequences of a perceived misfit between conflicting stereotypes (e.g., gender and discipline) on career paths. The framework was further enhanced to also examine the concept of self-perceived misfit (Van Veelen & Derks, [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref27">65</reflink>]). Individuals identify more strongly with disciplines where they perceive a fit between stereotypes about the self and the stereotype associated with the discipline, whereas a perceived misfit leads to negative outcomes (Leopold et al., [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref28">39</reflink>]; Peters et al., [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref29">55</reflink>]; Van Veelen & Derks, [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref30">65</reflink>]). A misfit can manifest itself in two ways: as an <emph>overfit</emph> (i.e., individuals describe themselves higher on a stereotype dimension than the comparison group), or as an <emph>underfit</emph> (i.e., individuals describe themselves lower on a stereotype dimension than the comparison group). Women primarily perceive a communion overfit in certain disciplines (e.g., philosophy, STEM), which is associated with reduced interest and intention to persist (Leopold et al., [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref31">39</reflink>]; Diekman et al., [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref32">16</reflink>]; McPherson et al., [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref33">50</reflink>]). Studies have shown either negative consequences of a perceived underfit in agentic traits (Van Veelen & Derks, [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref34">65</reflink>]) or no effects (Leopold et al., [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref35">39</reflink>]).</p> <p>One potential consequence of a perceived misfit is a lower sense of belonging (Walton et al., [<reflink idref="bib69" id="ref36">69</reflink>]). Belonging is defined as "a person's perception of the quality of their relationship with a valued school, work, or community context as a whole" (Walton et al., [<reflink idref="bib69" id="ref37">69</reflink>]). It can be divided into social and ability belonging (Lewis & Hodges, [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref38">43</reflink>]). Social belonging describes feeling like a valued, accepted, and legitimate member of a group whereas ability belonging describes having skills, abilities, and knowledge commensurate with other people in this context (Banchefsky et al., [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref39">4</reflink>]). Sense of belonging correlates with engagement, intention to persist, and career choice (Pittman & Richmond, [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref40">56</reflink>]; Walton & Cohen, [<reflink idref="bib66" id="ref41">66</reflink>]; Zumbrunn et al., [<reflink idref="bib75" id="ref42">75</reflink>]). It predicts the intention to persist more for women than for men (Banchefsky et al., [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref43">4</reflink>]; McPherson et al., [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref44">50</reflink>]).</p> <p>The Lack of Fit Framework has been applied to both work and university contexts. As far as we know, the framework and possible effects have not been studied in a secondary school context. However, high school students should be researched for several reasons. First, in adolescence, conflicting self-attributions begin to affect students and are a source of inner conflict (Master et al., [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref45">48</reflink>]). This conflict affects girls to a greater extent than boys (Harter, [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref46">29</reflink>]). Second, career choices develop during this time (Weisgram & Bigler, [<reflink idref="bib70" id="ref47">70</reflink>]) and self-perceptions form the basis for career decisions (Master, [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref48">47</reflink>]). If gender differences in fit, belonging, and career choice develop before university, it is important to tackle them when students are in high school. And third, extending the applicability of the Lack of Fit Model to the secondary school context could facilitate a more comprehensive understanding of the underrepresentation of women in male-stereotyped disciplines, gendered educational pathways, and the model itself.</p> <hd id="AN0186340637-5">Misfit and consequences in the school context</hd> <p>Stereotypes are present in children (King et al., [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref49">36</reflink>]). The process of stereotyping begins at preschool age and intensifies during the school years. Children adopt traditional gender stereotypes and stereotypes about disciplines (Cvencek et al., [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref50">14</reflink>]; Leaper, [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref51">38</reflink>]; Solbes-Canales et al., [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref52">62</reflink>]). For example, children stereotype scientists as male and languages as female (Miller et al., [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref53">51</reflink>]; Thomson et al., [<reflink idref="bib64" id="ref54">64</reflink>]; Whitehead, [<reflink idref="bib72" id="ref55">72</reflink>]). In addition, children's gender and gender stereotypes have a profound impact on their self-perceptions, beliefs, and behavior (Master, [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref56">47</reflink>]). These stereotypes influence their assumption of what is expected of them and their ability beliefs in different domains (Good et al., [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref57">25</reflink>]).</p> <p>Parallel to the consequences of gender stereotypes and perceived misfits described above, there is initial evidence of similar patterns for children and high school students. Stereotypes affect children's expectations of belonging (Master et al., [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref58">48</reflink>]). The question "Do I belong?" is linked to the question "Does my group belong?" and even more so for underrepresented groups (Cohen & Garcia, [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref59">12</reflink>]). Furthermore, girls show a lower sense of belonging if they believe a discipline is more for boys (Master et al., [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref60">49</reflink>]). Regarding the intention to persist, studies showed that girls reported less interest in a discipline if they did not fit the stereotype of it (Master et al., [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref61">48</reflink>]). Studies focusing on career choice showed that stereotypes influence career choice in children and high school students (Gottfredson, [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref62">26</reflink>]; Renger et al., [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref63">57</reflink>]) and that children base their career choice on their perceived fit to the prototype of the discipline (Kessels & Hannover, [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref64">35</reflink>]). Therefore, stereotypes and a perceived misfit with certain disciplines could impact children's belonging, engagement, and career choices.</p> <hd id="AN0186340637-6">Philosophy as a male-stereotyped discipline</hd> <p>A lack of fit and the consequences of this are assumed in male-stereotyped disciplines. In this article, we focus on philosophy. There are various reasons for this. First, philosophy is a male-stereotyped discipline (Dougherty et al., [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref65">18</reflink>]; Leopold et al., [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref66">39</reflink>]). Second, philosophy has been described as the discipline with the highest inherent ability belief (Hannak et al., [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref67">28</reflink>]; Leslie et al., [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref68">40</reflink>]). Brilliancy is not only associated with men but also part of the agentic stereotype and is correlated with less belonging for women (Bian et al., [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref69">6</reflink>]; Leslie et al., [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref70">40</reflink>]). Third, more than other disciplines, philosophy focuses on the authors of theories (e.g., Plato, Kant). An analysis of philosophy textbooks for high schools in Germany showed that around 95% of the philosophers featured are male (Schulz & Burkard, [<reflink idref="bib59" id="ref71">59</reflink>]). This suggests that high school students are primarily exposed to male philosophers. This is important since self-perceptions and stereotypes are based on people's experiences (Master, [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref72">47</reflink>]). Fourth, the underrepresentation of women in philosophy discourages female students from engaging in philosophy contributing to a systematic intellectual and conceptual impoverishment of philosophy, manifesting as a limited spectrum of perspectives, methodologies, and inquiries (Friedman, [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref73">24</reflink>]; Maranges et al., [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref74">46</reflink>]; Wylie, [<reflink idref="bib74" id="ref75">74</reflink>]). The diversification of philosophy would entail a diversification of philosophical content, facilitating the emergence of new insights through the inclusion of arguments and research questions that were previously outside the discourse of the discipline (Leuschner, [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref76">42</reflink>]; Thompson et al., [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref77">63</reflink>]). Fifth, previous research on the leaky pipeline, stereotyping, and underrepresentation has focused particularly on STEM (Lesperance et al., [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref78">41</reflink>]). However, we believe that these issues observed in STEM reflect more general principles that can be fruitfully applied to other disciplines in which women are underrepresented.</p> <hd id="AN0186340637-7">Present research</hd> <p>Based on the extant theoretical and empirical research, this article focuses on the effects of a perceived misfit on engagement, intention to persist, and career choice, mediated by belonging in school. We examined the following three questions:</p> <p>First, do female high school students show a higher perceived misfit (self-philosopher-misfit) than male high school students, and if so, where is this misfit located (in communal or agentic attributes), and in which direction (over- or underfit)? Since previous research found a communion overfit for female students (Leopold et al., [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref79">39</reflink>]), we hypothesize that female high school students describe themselves as higher in communion than philosophers and that this difference is significantly larger than for male high school students. As previous research has found different results for perceived agentic misfit, we did not have a specific hypothesis regarding agency.</p> <p>Second, is misfit associated with the sense of belonging? We hypothesize that a higher perceived misfit is associated with a lower sense of belonging in philosophy (Peters et al., [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref80">54</reflink>]). We distinguish between social and ability belonging and hypothesize that perceived communion overfit is associated with lower social belonging (as communion contains more social attributes, and seeing yourself as more caring/empathetic/trustworthy as philosophers should reduce one's sense of social belonging). We hypothesize that perceived agency underfit is associated with lower ability belonging (as agency contains more ability-relevant attributes, and seeing yourself as less competent/clever/assertive than philosophers should reduce one's sense of ability belonging). Third, what are the consequences of a perceived misfit? We hypothesize that a higher perceived communion overfit, mediated by less social belonging, and a higher perceived agency underfit, mediated by less ability belonging, lead to less class engagement (i.e., involvement in philosophy lessons), lower intention to persist (i.e., intention to continue studying philosophy at high school), and lower career choice (i.e., intention to pursue a career in philosophy). This should be particularly true for female high school students due to their presumed higher perceived communion overfit to stereotypes of philosophers and lower belonging.</p> <p>A correlational design was used to investigate the perceived over- or underfit between self-concept and philosopher-stereotyping and the consequences for high school students attending philosophy classes in Germany. The German school system is structured in a manner that is conducive to addressing this question. In the majority of federal states, high school students are required to decide between philosophy and religious education. Philosophy is therefore a well-established subject, but it is possible to opt out of this subject and instead take classes in religious education as an alternative. The study took place between November 2023 and March 2024. All exclusions are reported.</p> <hd id="AN0186340637-8">Method</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0186340637-9">Participants</hd> <p>High school students who attended philosophy classes in Germany were recruited as participants.[<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref81">2</reflink>] In total, 556 students across 48 classes completed the survey. As the study investigated gender differences between males and females, all participants who did not specify their gender or stated "diverse" were excluded from the analyses. The final sample consisted of 523 high school students across 48 classes. The mean age was 17.43 years (<emph>SD</emph> = 0.97 years; range = 15–21 years). 56.4% were female and 43.6% were male.</p> <hd id="AN0186340637-10">Procedure and measures</hd> <p>The study was approved in advance by the Ethics Committee of Kiel University and approved by the Ministry of Education. Participants gave declarations of consent to their teachers before participation and agreed to privacy statements regarding the collection, storage, and publication of their data. A unique, random code was created for each class.[<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref82">3</reflink>]</p> <hd id="AN0186340637-11">Lack of fit</hd> <p>At the beginning of the survey, participants rated philosophers on six communion (e.g., fair, caring) and six agency attributes (e.g., self-confident, clever; Abele et al., [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref83">1</reflink>]). At the end of the survey, participants were asked to rate themselves on the same items. To analyze the data, two misfit scales (communion misfit and agency misfit) were constructed (see Van Veelen & Derks, [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref84">65</reflink>] and Leopold et al., [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref85">39</reflink>], for a similar approach). The difference was calculated as the self-assessment minus the philosophers-assessment. The advantage of this approach is that we do not ask directly about the perceived (mis)fit (in contrast to e.g., Master et al., [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref86">48</reflink>]: "How much do you feel that you fit the stereotype of a computer scientist?"), but use a more objective, indirect measurement. Lack of fit here is a cognitive discrepancy between two separate entities (self and discipline; Smith & Henry, [<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref87">61</reflink>]; Van Veelen & Derks, [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref88">65</reflink>]). Positive misfit scores indicate a perceived overfit and negative misfit scores indicate a perceived underfit.</p> <hd id="AN0186340637-12">Belonging, class engagement, intention to persist, and career choice</hd> <p>Participants were asked about social belonging (4 Items; adapted from Banchefsky et al., [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref89">4</reflink>]; e.g., "I feel connected to philosophers"), ability belonging (4 Items; adapted from Banchefsky et al., [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref90">4</reflink>]; e.g., "I'm not sure whether my skills fit into philosophy" (reversed), and class engagement (6 Items; self-developed; e.g., "I enjoy taking part in philosophy lessons"). For intention to persist and career choice, items from two scales (Banchefsky et al., [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref91">4</reflink>]; Renger et al., [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref92">57</reflink>]) were used. These were recombined, so that the school-related items were assigned to intention to persist (3 Items; adapted from Banchefsky et al., [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref93">4</reflink>]; e.g., "I'm looking forward to my philosophy lessons next term") and career-related items to career choice (6 Items; adapted from Banchefsky et al., [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref94">4</reflink>]; e.g., "I can imagine studying philosophy" and Renger et al., [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref95">57</reflink>]; e.g., "I could imagine becoming a philosopher as my profession"). The scales were translated into German (if needed) and adapted to philosophy. All scales were surveyed on a 7-point Likert scale. At the end of the survey, students provided demographic data on age and gender.</p> <hd id="AN0186340637-13">Data analysis</hd> <p>As the scales were either adapted to philosophy, newly developed, or translated into German, an exploratory factor analysis was carried out including the misfit scales to check the number of factors and the categorization of the items. The sample size fulfilled the recommendations and provided a ratio of at least 10:1 to the number of items (Costello & Osborne, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref96">13</reflink>]). Bartlett's test (<emph>χ2</emph> (<reflink idref="bib595" id="ref97">595</reflink>) = 9344.18; <emph>p</emph> <.001) and the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy (KMO = 0.906) indicated that the variables were suitable for a factor analysis. An exploratory factor analysis was conducted in SPSS using principal axis factoring extraction and oblimin rotation (Costello & Osborne, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref98">13</reflink>]). The number of eigenvalues above 1.0 (Guttman, [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref99">27</reflink>]; Kaiser, [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref100">34</reflink>]) and the scree plot (Costello & Osborne, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref101">13</reflink>]) indicated a 7-factor solution that explained 62.68% of the variance.[<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref102">4</reflink>] Factor loadings above 0.4 were considered meaningful (Williams et al., [<reflink idref="bib73" id="ref103">73</reflink>]). Almost all items loaded highest on the respective factors. Only one item[<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref104">5</reflink>] from ability belonging loaded on the social belonging factor. The inspection of the wording showed that this may be due to the German translation which contained aspects of social belonging. For this reason, it was assigned to social belonging for further analysis.[<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref105">6</reflink>] In addition, two items were excluded from the analyses because their factor loadings were not above the cutoff value of 0.4 on any factor (results are also replicated without the exclusions). Table 1 shows the correlations and reliabilities of the scales.</p> <p>Table 1 Means, standard deviations, correlations, and cronbach's alpha</p> <p> <ephtml> <table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead><tr><th align="left"><p>• Variable</p></th><th align="left"><p>M</p></th><th align="left"><p>SD</p></th><th align="left"><p>1</p></th><th align="left"><p>2</p></th><th align="left"><p>3</p></th><th align="left"><p>4</p></th><th align="left"><p>5</p></th><th align="left"><p>6</p></th><th align="left"><p>7</p></th><th align="left" /></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="left"><p>1. Gender</p></td><td align="left" /><td align="left" /><td align="left" /><td align="left" /><td align="left" /><td align="left" /><td align="left" /><td align="left" /><td align="left" /><td align="left" /></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>2. Agency Misfit</p></td><td align="left"><p>-0.14</p></td><td align="left"><p>1.27</p></td><td align="left"><p>− 0.25**</p><p>[-0.33, − 0.17]</p></td><td align="left"><p>0.77</p></td><td align="left" /><td align="left" /><td align="left" /><td align="left" /><td align="left" /><td align="left" /></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>3. Communion Misfit</p></td><td align="left"><p>1.45</p></td><td align="left"><p>1.27</p></td><td align="left"><p>0.16**</p><p>[0.07, 0.24]</p></td><td align="left"><p>0.17**</p><p>[0.08, 0.25]</p></td><td align="left"><p>0.81</p></td><td align="left" /><td align="left" /><td align="left" /><td align="left" /><td align="left" /></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>4. Ability Belonging</p></td><td align="left"><p>4.36</p></td><td align="left"><p>1.55</p></td><td align="left"><p>− 0.12**</p><p>[-0.21, − 0.04]</p></td><td align="left"><p>0.18**</p><p>[0.09, 0.26]</p></td><td align="left"><p>− 0.03</p><p>[-0.12, 0.05]</p></td><td align="left"><p>0.75</p></td><td align="left" /><td align="left" /><td align="left" /><td align="left" /></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>5. Social Belonging</p></td><td align="left"><p>3.34</p></td><td align="left"><p>1.34</p></td><td align="left"><p>0.01</p><p>[-0.07, 0.10]</p></td><td align="left"><p>− 0.06</p><p>[-0.15, 0.02]</p></td><td align="left"><p>− 0.14**</p><p>[-0.22, − 0.06]</p></td><td align="left"><p>0.50**</p><p>[0.43, 0.56]</p></td><td align="left"><p>0.89</p></td><td align="left" /><td align="left" /><td align="left" /></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>6. Engagement</p></td><td align="left"><p>5.11</p></td><td align="left"><p>1.41</p></td><td align="left"><p>− 0.14**</p><p>[-0.22, − 0.05]</p></td><td align="left"><p>0.16**</p><p>[0.07, 0.24]</p></td><td align="left"><p>− 0.07</p><p>[-0.16, 0.02]</p></td><td align="left"><p>0.51**</p><p>[0.44, 0.57]</p></td><td align="left"><p>0.41**</p><p>[0.34, 0.48]</p></td><td align="left"><p>0.83</p></td><td align="left" /><td align="left" /></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>7. Intention to Persist</p></td><td align="left"><p>4.22</p></td><td align="left"><p>1.78</p></td><td align="left"><p>− 0.03</p><p>[-0.11, 0.06]</p></td><td align="left"><p>− 0.09*</p><p>[-0.17, 0.00]</p></td><td align="left"><p>− 0.07</p><p>[-0.15, 0.02]</p></td><td align="left"><p>0.43**</p><p>[0.35, 0.49]</p></td><td align="left"><p>0.57**</p><p>[0.51, 0.63]</p></td><td align="left"><p>0.50**</p><p>[0.44, 0.56]</p></td><td align="left"><p>0.76</p></td><td align="left" /></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>8. Career Choice</p></td><td align="left"><p>2.21</p></td><td align="left"><p>1.24</p></td><td align="left"><p>0.06</p><p>[-0.02, 0.15]</p></td><td align="left"><p>− 0.16**</p><p>[-0.24, − 0.07]</p></td><td align="left"><p>− 0.06</p><p>[-0.15, 0.03]</p></td><td align="left"><p>0.29**</p><p>[0.21, 0.37]</p></td><td align="left"><p>0.60**</p><p>[0.54, 0.65]</p></td><td align="left"><p>0.27**</p><p>[0.19, 0.35]</p></td><td align="left"><p>0.55**</p><p>[0.48, 0.60]</p></td><td align="left"><p>0.88</p></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p> <emph>Note. M</emph> and <emph>SD</emph> are used to represent mean and standard deviation, respectively. Values in square brackets indicate the 95% confidence interval for each correlation. The values in the diagonal give Cronbach's alpha of the respective scale. Gender is defined as 0 = male and 1 = female * indicates <emph>p</emph> <.05. ** indicates <emph>p</emph> <.01</p> <hd id="AN0186340637-14">Results</hd> <p>Gender differences in perceived communal and agency misfits and their consequences were analyzed based on the presented hypotheses. First, gender differences in the perceived misfit in both communion and agency were calculated. Subsequently, the SEM was calculated.</p> <hd id="AN0186340637-15">Gender differences in perceived misfit</hd> <p>To test our hypotheses, we conducted two <emph>t</emph>-tests. Female high school students (<emph>M</emph> = 1.62; <emph>SD</emph> = 1.19) compared to male high school students (<emph>M</emph> = 1.22; <emph>SD</emph> = 1.34) showed a greater perceived communion overfit to philosophers (<emph>t</emph>(<reflink idref="bib521" id="ref106">521</reflink>) = 3.62; <emph>p</emph> <.001; <emph>d</emph> = 0.32). According to Cohen ([<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref107">11</reflink>]), this can be considered a small effect size. Female high school students (<emph>M</emph> = -0.42; <emph>SD</emph> = 1.25) and male high school students (<emph>M</emph> = 0.23; <emph>SD</emph> = 1.2) also showed a significant difference in the perceived misfit to philosophers in agency with a medium effect size (<emph>t</emph>(<reflink idref="bib521" id="ref108">521</reflink>) = 5.98; <emph>p</emph> <.001; <emph>d</emph> = 0.53). While female high school students perceived an underfit (calculated using a one-sample <emph>t</emph>-Test against 0: <emph>t</emph>(<reflink idref="bib294" id="ref109">294</reflink>) = 5.79; <emph>p</emph> <.001; <emph>d</emph> = 0.34), male high school students perceived an overfit (calculated using a one-sample <emph>t</emph>-Test against 0: <emph>t</emph>(<reflink idref="bib227" id="ref110">227</reflink>) = 2.85; <emph>p</emph> =.004; <emph>d</emph> = 0.19). Fig. 1 illustrates the mean values of the two dimensions for self-stereotyping and philosopher stereotyping which represent the basis for the calculation of over- and underfit. Fig. 2 illustrates the mean values of the over- and underfit for male and female students.</p> <p>Graph: Fig. 1 Self-Stereotyping and Philosopher-Stereotyping for Male and Female Students. Note. Mean values with standard error of the self-stereotyping and philosopher-stereotyping for male and female students. Female students (M = 5.08; SD = 0.88) describe philosophers as significantly more agentic (t(<reflink idref="bib521" id="ref111">521</reflink>) = 2.58; p =.01; d = 0.23) in contrast to male students (M = 4.88; SD = 0.86) * p <.05 ** p <.01 *** p <.001</p> <p>Graph: Fig. 2 Misfit Scores for Male and Female Students on Perceived Communion and Agency Misfit. Note. Mean values with standard error of misfit for male and female students. Positive values indicate an overfit and negative values indicate an underfit * p <.05 ** p <.01 *** p <.001</p> <hd id="AN0186340637-16">Consequences of perceived misfit</hd> <p>Next, a structural equation model with gender (male = 0; female = 1) as a dichotomous predictor was tested to examine the consequences of female and male students' perceived misfits to philosophers. Ability and social belonging were tested as mediators for the outcome variables (see Fig. 3). As students were clustered within classes, the class variable was used in MPLUS (Muthén & Muthén, [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref112">53</reflink>]) as a cluster with the command "type = complex." For the direct paths, estimates of standardized parameters were interpreted. The indirect effects were generated by bias-corrected bootstrapping (<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref113">10</reflink>,000 iterations) and tested with a 95% confidence interval (MacKinnon et al., [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref114">45</reflink>]; Shrout & Bolger, [<reflink idref="bib60" id="ref115">60</reflink>]).</p> <p>Graph: Fig. 3 Structural Equation Model Depicting the Association between Gender and Engagement, Intention to Persist, and Career Choice via Perceived Communion and Agency Misfit and Social and Ability Belonging. Note. Misfit was calculated as self-stereotyping minus philosopher-stereotyping. Gender was coded as male = 0; female = 1. The association between gender and perceived communion/agency misfit can be interpreted as follows: Regarding perceived communion misfit, female students show a more pronounced overfit compared to male students (here indicated by a positive association between gender and perceived communion misfit). Regarding perceived agency misfit, female students exhibit an underfit, whereas male students exhibit an overfit (here indicated by a negative association between gender and perceived agency misfit). The association between perceived communion/agency misfit and social/ability belonging can be interpreted as follows: A positive association describes that a more pronounced overfit (in contrast to a less pronounced overfit or underfit) leads to more belonging, whereas a negative association describes that a more pronounced overfit (in contrast to a less pronounced overfit or underfit) leads to less belonging. Bold lines indicate a significant indirect path generated by bootstrap (<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref116">10</reflink>,000 iterations). All values are STDYX standardized. * p <.05 ** p <.01 *** p <.001</p> <p>The model showed good fit indices (<emph>χ</emph>2(<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref117">11</reflink>) = 41.72; <emph>p</emph> <.001; <emph>RMSEA</emph> = 0.073; <emph>CFI</emph> = 0.973; <emph>TLI</emph> = 0.930; <emph>SRMR</emph> = 0.037) according to Hu and Bentler ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref118">33</reflink>]). Gender significantly predicted the perceived misfit in communion (with female high school students showing a greater overfit than males) and in agency (with female high school students showing an underfit and males an overfit). Perceived communion misfit predicted social belonging (with greater overfit associated with lower belonging) and perceived agency misfit predicted ability belonging (with an overfit associated with more ability belonging and an underfit associated with less). Ability belonging predicted engagement and intention to persist. The indirect effects from gender via perceived agency misfit and ability belonging to engagement (<emph>b</emph><subs>ind</subs> = − 0.055; CI 95% [-0.025, − 0.100]) and to intention to persist (<emph>b</emph><subs>ind</subs> = − 0.032; CI 95% [-0.012, − 0.064]) were significant. Social belonging predicted engagement, intention to persist, and career choice. The indirect effects from gender via perceived communion misfit and social belonging to engagement (indirect effect: <emph>b</emph><subs>ind</subs> = − 0.013; CI 95% [-0.003, − 0.032]), to intention to persist (<emph>b</emph><subs>ind</subs> = − 0.036; CI 95% [-0.010, − 0.084]), and to career choice (<emph>b</emph><subs>ind</subs> = − 0.032; CI 95% [-0.009, − 0.077]) were significant.</p> <hd id="AN0186340637-17">Discussion</hd> <p>In this paper, the Lack of Fit Framework (Heilman & Caleo, [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref119">31</reflink>]) was applied to the secondary school context. The present study focused on philosophy, a highly male-stereotyped discipline, and provides several important findings.</p> <p>First, it provides evidence that stereotype misfits and their consequences can be found in school-aged students (Dougherty et al., [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref120">18</reflink>]). We showed that stereotypes are prevalent during high school and can influence certain groups negatively in terms of their engagement and intentions to persist in a discipline. As hypothesized, female high school students showed a greater perceived misfit to philosophers than their male peers. The results suggest that female high school students are more likely to decide against a career in a male-stereotyped discipline due to a perceived misfit with it. Conversely, male students are more likely to contemplate such careers as they perceive themselves to be a better fit for them. Within the agentic stereotype prevalent in philosophy, female high school students exhibited an underfit, while male students demonstrated an overfit. Both phenomena could lead to an increase in the gender gap within philosophy as female students may be discouraged from pursuing philosophy, while male students may be encouraged to do so. In the communal stereotype, which is atypical for philosophy, female students exhibited a higher perceived overfit compared to their male counterparts. The combined experiences of these two perceived types of misfit could explain why the proportion of women in philosophy is already below that of other humanities at the beginning of university programs (Klonschinski, [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref121">37</reflink>]). Consequently, it is reasonable to conclude that an analysis of factors in secondary school, in addition to factors in the university, is necessary to obtain a comprehensive understanding of this issue. To ensure that female students do not encounter this sense of misfit, it is advised that educational institutions consider revising their curriculum and philosophy course materials. For example, the integration of social and interactive pedagogical approaches, including group work, interactive formats, and communal topics (Reverter-Bañón, [<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref122">58</reflink>]) has the potential to yield positive outcomes for all students.</p> <p>Second, the study presents two methodologically relevant findings. On the one hand, the approach of measuring misfit indirectly lowered the possibility that participants might not directly report the lack of fit. The indirect approach also recommends itself because stereotypes can have an influence even if people are not consciously aware that their self-description does not fit the stereotype of the discipline. In addition, recording the perceived misfit via the difference between self-description and philosopher description enables the consideration of variations across both dimensions. For instance, the gender differences in the perceived agentic misfit could depend both on the fact that female high school students perceive themselves as less agentic than male high school students perceive themselves, and on the fact that female high school students perceive philosophers as more agentic than male high school students do. On the other hand, it shows that a differentiated analysis of the facets of misfit and belonging is needed, as they have different consequences (Banchefsky et al., [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref123">4</reflink>]; Diekman et al., [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref124">16</reflink>]). By measuring the dimensions of communion and agency and including them simultaneously in our model, we can also determine (in contrast to e.g., Van Veelen & Derks, [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref125">65</reflink>]) which specific dimension causes the misfit. We found that perceived communion overfit correlated with a lower social belonging. The indirect effects of gender on engagement, intention to persist, and career choice, mediated by perceived communion misfit and social belonging, were significant. On the other hand, we found that perceived agency underfit correlated with lower ability belonging. The indirect effects of gender on engagement and intention to persist, mediated by perceived agency misfit and ability belonging, were significant. This means that both perceived communion and agency misfit are relevant and predict different aspects of belonging. In line with previous studies, the perceived communion overfit to philosophers and social belonging were particularly relevant for (female students') career choices (Banchefsky et al., [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref126">4</reflink>]; Diekman et al., [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref127">16</reflink>]). Third, our study extends the application of the Lack of Fit Framework to a discipline outside STEM. Philosophy is an example of a male-stereotyped discipline in the humanities where women are underrepresented. The perceived lack of fit among female students to the stereotypical philosopher and the negative effects of this perceived misfit are also evident here. This demonstrates the generalization of the model in a non-STEM area.</p> <p>The present examination was a correlational study, and thus no causal conclusions can be drawn. Furthermore, the association between perceived misfit and belonging was assessed in a linear manner. In the context of the agentic misfit, it is suitable to hypothesize a linear relationship with ability belonging, as a perceived underfit should lead to a diminished and a perceived overfit to an enhanced sense of ability belonging. For perceived communal misfit, however, the interpretation could be more challenging, because an overfit should result in a diminished sense of social belonging and an underfit could result in a similar outcome. Given that in the reported sample it was rarely observed that individuals perceived a communal underfit, this phenomenon is less pertinent to the present study. However, future studies could implement analyses for a nonlinear relationship. In addition, future research should apply the framework to other disciplines and investigate possible causal relationships. Based on the results of this study, future interventions could be developed and applied even more precisely in the school context. Since our study found an effect of the perceived communal overfit on career choice (mediated by social belonging), future interventions could start here. Goal congruity theory (Diekman et al., [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref128">16</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref129">17</reflink>]) posits that individuals tend to prefer roles and disciplines that offer opportunities to achieve their personal goals. In light of this, communal goal interventions could be used to increase high school students' interest in philosophy (Belanger et al., [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref130">5</reflink>]; Brown et al., [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref131">7</reflink>]). These interventions aim to highlight the communal goals that can be achieved by emphasizing the communal aspects of a discipline. This could serve to enhance the communal attributes associated with philosophers. Given the prevalence of the perceived communal overfit among both female and male high school students, communal goal interventions could weaken the perceived overfit for the entire student body, with a particular benefit for female students. An alternative approach could be the utilization of belonging interventions (Walton et al., [<reflink idref="bib69" id="ref132">69</reflink>]). These are intended to enhance an individual's perception of belonging within their environment, thereby mitigating the adverse effects of lack of belonging, particularly for those who are subjected to stereotyping and underrepresentation (Casad et al., [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref133">9</reflink>]; Walton & Cohen, [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref134">67</reflink>]; Walton et al., [<reflink idref="bib68" id="ref135">68</reflink>]). These types of interventions could be adapted for the secondary school context and the respective disciplines. In these ways, academically underrepresented groups could be empowered at high school and the leaky pipeline could perhaps be patched before the first hole appears.</p> <hd id="AN0186340637-18">Funding</hd> <p>Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL. Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL. This work was funded by a grant from the Federal Ministry of Research, Technology and Space (BMFTR) to Daniela Renger (01FP22021G). The research reported in this article was conducted by Arian Leopold under Daniela Renger´s supervision in partial fulfilment of the requirements for a doctoral degree. We thank Elizabeth J. Parks-Stamm for her valuable feedback on the manuscript.</p> <hd id="AN0186340637-19">Declarations</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0186340637-20">Ethical approval</hd> <p>Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the ethics committee of Kiel University. Participants gave informed consent before participation and agreed to privacy statements regarding the collection, storage, and publication of their data. All exclusions are reported.</p> <hd id="AN0186340637-21">Conflict of interest</hd> <p>We have no known conflicts of interest to disclose.</p> <hd id="AN0186340637-22">Electronic supplementary material</hd> <p>Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.</p> <p>Graph: Supplementary Material 1</p> <hd id="AN0186340637-23">Publisher's note</hd> <p>Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.</p> <ref id="AN0186340637-24"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref19" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Abele AE, Hauke N, Peters K, Louvet E, Szymkow A, Duan Y. Facets of the fundamental content dimensions: Agency with competence and Assertiveness—Communion with warmth and morality. Frontiers in Psychology. 2016; 7: 1810. 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01810</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref15" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Abele AE, Ellemers N, Fiske ST, Koch A, Yzerbyt V. Navigating the social world: Toward an integrated framework for evaluating self, individuals, and groups. Psychological Review. 2021; 128; 2: 290-314. 10.1037/rev0000262</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref1" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Almukhambetova A, Torrano DH, Nam A. Fixing the leaky pipeline for talented women in STEM. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. 2023; 21: 305-324. 10.1007/s10763-021-10239-1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref39" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Banchefsky S, Lewis KL, Ito TA. The role of social and ability belonging in men's and women's pSTEM persistence. Frontiers in Psychology. 2019; 10: 2386. 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02386</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref104" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Belanger AL, Diekman AB, Steinberg M. Leveraging communal experiences in the curriculum: Increasing interest in pursuing engineering by changing stereotypic expectations. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 2017; 47; 6: 305-319. 10.1111/jasp.12438</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref69" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Bian L, Leslie SJ, Murphy MC, Cimpian A. Messages about brilliance undermine women's interest in educational and professional opportunities. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 2018; 76: 404-420. 10.1016/j.jesp.2017.11.006</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref131" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Brown ER, Thoman DB, Smith JL, Diekman AB. Closing the communal gap: The importance of communal affordances in science career motivation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 2015; 45; 12: 662-673. 10.1111/jasp.12327</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref2" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Buckles K. Fixing the leaky pipeline: Strategies for making economics work for women at every stage. Journal of Economic Perspectives. 2019; 33; 1: 43-60. 10.1257/jep.33.1.43</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref133" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Casad BJ, Oyler DL, Sullivan ET, McClellan EM, Tierney DN, Anderson DA, Greeley PA, Fague MA, Flammang BJ. Wise psychological interventions to improve gender and Racial equality in STEM. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations. 2018; 21; 5: 767-787. 10.1177/1368430218767034</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cheryan S, Ziegler SA, Montoya AK, Jiang L. Why are some STEM fields more gender balanced than others?. Psychological Bulletin. 2017; 143; 1: 1. 10.1037/bul0000052</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power for the social sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Laurence Erlbaum and Associates, 1988, 98–101.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cohen GL, Garcia J. I am us: Negative stereotypes as collective threats. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2005; 89; 4: 566-582. 10.1037/0022-3514.89.4.566</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Costello AB, Osborne J. Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment Research and Evaluation. 2005; 10; 1: 7. 10.7275/jyj1-4868</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cvencek D, Meltzoff AN, Greenwald AG. Math–gender stereotypes in elementary school children. Child Development. 2011; 82; 3: 766-779. 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01529.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> del Carmen Triana M, Song R, Um CT, Huang L. Stereotypical perception in management: A review and expansion of role congruity theory. Journal of Management. 2024; 50; 1: 188-215. 10.1177/01492063231180836</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Diekman AB, Steinberg M, Brown ER, Belanger AL, Clark EK. A goal congruity model of role entry, engagement, and exit: Understanding communal goal processes in STEM gender gaps. Personality and Social Psychology Review. 2017; 21; 2: 142-175. 10.1177/1088868316642141</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Diekman, A. B, Joshi, M. P, & Benson-Greenwald, T. M. (2020). Goal congruity theory: Navigating the social structure to fulfill goals. In B. Gawronski (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 62, pp. 189–244). Elsevier Academic. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aesp.2020.04.003</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dougherty, T, Baron, S, & Miller, K. (2015). Female under-representation among philosophy majors: A map of the hypotheses and a survey of the evidence. Feminist Philosophy Quarterly, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.5206/fpq/2015.1.4</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Eagly AH, Karau SJ. Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review. 2002; 109; 3: 573-598. 10.1037/0033-295X.109.3.573</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Eagly, A, & Wood, W. (2012). Social role theory. In Van P. A. M. Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, E. T. Higgins, A. H. Eagly, & W. Wood (Eds.), Handbook of theories in social psychology (pp. 458–476). SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249222.n49</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Eagly AH, Nater C, Miller DI, Kaufmann M, Sczesny S. Gender stereotypes have changed: A cross-temporal meta-analysis of US public opinion polls from 1946 to 2018. American Psychologist. 2020; 75; 3: 301-315. 10.1037/amp0000494</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fiske ST. Stereotype content: Warmth and competence endure. Current Directions in Psychological Science. 2018; 27; 2: 67-73. 10.1177/0963721417738825</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fiske ST, Cuddy AJ, Glick P. Universal dimensions of social cognition: Warmth and competence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 2007; 11; 2: 77-83. 10.1016/j.tics.2006.11.005</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Friedman, M. (2013). Women in philosophy: Why should we care? In K. Hutchison, & F. Jenkins (Eds.), Women in Philosophy: What Needs to Change? (pp. 21–38). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199325603.003.0002</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Good C, Rattan A, Dweck CS. Why do women opt out? Sense of belonging and women's representation in mathematics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2012; 102; 4: 700-717. 10.1037/a0026659</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gottfredson LS. Circumscription and compromise: A developmental theory of occupational aspirations. Journal of Counseling Psychology. 1981; 28; 6: 545-579. 10.1037/0022-0167.28.6.545</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Guttman L. Some necessary conditions for common-factor analysis. Psychometrika. 1954; 19; 2: 149-161. 10.1007/BF02289162</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hannak A, Joseph K, Larremore DB, Cimpian A. Field-specific ability beliefs as an explanation for gender differences in academics' career trajectories: Evidence from public profiles on orcid.org. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2023; 125; 4: 681-698. 10.1037/pspa0000348</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Harter S. Developmental differences in the nature of self-representations: Implications for the understanding, assessment, and treatment of maladaptive behavior. Cognitive Therapy and Research. 1990; 14: 113-142. 10.1007/BF01176205</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Heilman ME. Sex bias in work settings: The lack of fit model. Research in Organizational Behavior. 1983; 5: 269-298</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Heilman ME, Caleo S. Combatting gender discrimination: A lack of fit framework. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations. 2018; 21; 5: 725-744. 10.1177/1368430218761587</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hogan, R. (1982). A socioanalytic theory of personality. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 55–89.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hu LT, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal. 1999; 6; 1: 1-55. 10.1080/10705519909540118</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kaiser HF. The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 1960; 20; 1: 141-151. 10.1177/001316446002000116</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kessels, U, & Hannover, B. (2002). Die auswirkungen von stereotypen Über schulfächer auf die berufswahlabsichten Jugendlicher. In B. Spinath, & E. Heise(Hrsg.) Pädagogische psychologie unter gewandelten gesellschaftlichen Bedingungen (pp. 53–67). Dr. Kovac.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> King TL, Scovelle AJ, Meehl A, Milner AJ, Priest N. Gender stereotypes and biases in early childhood: A systematic review. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood. 2021; 46; 2: 112-125. 10.1177/183693912199984</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Klonschinski A. Frauen in der akademischen philosophie in Deutschland– Eine Bestandsaufnahme. Zeitschrift Für Philosophische Forschung. 2020; 74; 4: 593-616. 10.3196/004433020830955950</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Leaper C. Do I belong? Gender, peer groups, and STEM achievement. International Journal of Gender Science and Technology. 2015; 7; 2: 166-179</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Leopold A, Köller MM, Renger D. Cold philosophers: Female students' perceived lack of fit in stereotypes is associated with underrepresentation. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology. 2025; 35; 1: e70036. 10.1002/casp.70036</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Leslie SJ, Cimpian A, Meyer M, Freeland E. Expectations of brilliance underlie gender distributions across academic disciplines. Science. 2015; 347; 6219: 262-265. 10.1126/science.1261375</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lesperance K, Hofer S, Retelsdorf J, Holzberger D. Reducing gender differences in student motivational-affective factors: A meta‐analysis of school‐based interventions. British Journal of Educational Psychology. 2022; 92; 4: 1502-1536. 10.1111/bjep.12512</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Leuschner A. Social exclusion in academia through biases in methodological quality evaluation: On the situation of women in science and philosophy. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A. 2015; 54: 56-63. 10.1016/j.shpsa.2015.08.017</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lewis KL, Hodges SD. Expanding the concept of belonging in academic domains: Development and validation of the ability uncertainty scale. Learning and Individual Differences. 2015; 37: 197-202. 10.1016/j.lindif.2014.12.002</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Liu SNC, Brown SEV, Sabat IE. Patching the leaky pipeline: Interventions for women of color faculty in STEM academia. Archives of Scientific Psychology. 2019; 7; 1: 32-39. 10.1037/arc0000062</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> MacKinnon DP, Lockwood CM, Williams J. Confidence limits for the indirect effect: Distribution of the product and resampling methods. Multivariate Behavioral Research. 2004; 39; 1: 99-128. 10.1207/s15327906mbr3901_4</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Maranges HM, Iannuccilli M, Nieswandt K, Hlobil U, Dunfield K. Brilliance beliefs, not mindsets, explain inverse gender gaps in psychology and philosophy. Sex Roles. 2023; 89; 11: 801-817. 10.1007/s11199-023-01406-5</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Master A. Gender stereotypes influence children's STEM motivation. Child Development Perspectives. 2021; 15; 3: 203-210. 10.1111/cdep.12424</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Master A, Cheryan S, Meltzoff AN. Computing whether she belongs: Stereotypes undermine girls' interest and sense of belonging in computer science. Journal of Educational Psychology. 2016; 108; 3: 424-437. 10.1037/edu0000061</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Master A, Meltzoff AN, Cheryan S. Gender stereotypes about interests start early and cause gender disparities in computer science and engineering. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2021; 118; 48: Articlee2100030118. 10.1073/pnas.2100030118</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McPherson E, Banchefsky S, Park B. Using social psychological theory to understand choice of a pSTEM academic major. Educational Psychology. 2018; 38; 10: 1278-1301. 10.1080/01443410.2018.1489526</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Miller DI, Nolla KM, Eagly AH, Uttal DH. The development of children's gender-science stereotypes: A meta‐analysis of 5 decades of US Draw‐a‐Scientist studies. Child Development. 2018; 89; 6: 1943-1955. 10.1111/cdev.13039</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Moak TN, Cress PE, Tenenbaum M, Casas LA. The leaky pipeline of women in plastic surgery: Embracing diversity to close the gender disparity gap. Aesthetic Surgery Journal. 2020; 40; 11: 1241-1248. 10.1093/asj/sjz299</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Muthén, L, & Muthén, B. (2018). Mplus. Muthén & Muthén (version 8.1) [Computer Software].</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Peters K, Ryan M, Haslam SA, Fernandes H. To belong or not to belong: Evidence that women's occupational disidentification is promoted by lack of fit with masculine occupational prototypes. Journal of Personnel Psychology. 2012; 11; 3: 148-158. 10.1027/1866-5888/a000067</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Peters K, Ryan MK, Haslam SA. Marines, medics, and machismo: Lack of fit with masculine occupational stereotypes discourages men's participation. British Journal of Psychology. 2015; 106; 4: 635-655. 10.1111/bjop.12106</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pittman LD, Richmond A. University belonging, friendship quality, and psychological adjustment during the transition to college. The Journal of Experimental Education. 2008; 76; 4: 343-362. 10.3200/JEXE.76.4.343-362</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Renger D, Renger S, Köller MM, Möller J. Teachers of tomorrow: How gender framings of the teaching profession affect students' intention to teach. Zeitschrift Für Pädagogische Psychologie. 2023; 37; 1–2: 111-121. 10.1024/1010-0652/a000287</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Reverter-Bañón, S. (2022). Guides to mainstreaming gender in university teaching. Universitat Jaume I.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Schulz, K, & Burkard, A. (2024). Die Vielfalt der Philosophie entdecken. Überlegungen zur Diversizifierung des Kanons für den Schulunterricht. Philovernetzt. https://<ulink href="http://www.philovernetzt.de/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Schulz-Burkard-2024%5fDie-Vielfalt-der-Philosophie-entdecken.-Ueberlegungen-zur-Diversifizierung-des-Kanons-fuer-den-Schulunterricht.pdf">www.philovernetzt.de/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Schulz-Burkard-2024%5fDie-Vielfalt-der-Philosophie-entdecken.-Ueberlegungen-zur-Diversifizierung-des-Kanons-fuer-den-Schulunterricht.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Shrout PE, Bolger N. Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods. 2002; 7; 4: 422-445. 10.1037/1082-989X.7.4.422</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Smith ER, Henry S. An in-group becomes part of the self: Response time evidence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 1996; 22; 6: 635-642. 10.1177/0146167296226008</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Solbes-Canales I, Valverde-Montesino S, Herranz-Hernández P. Socialization of gender stereotypes related to attributes and professions among young Spanish school-aged children. Frontiers in Psychology. 2020; 11: 609. 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00609</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Thompson M, Adleberg T, Sims S, Nahmias E. Why do women leave philosophy? Surveying students at the introductory level. Philosophers' Imprint. 2016; 16; 6: 1-36</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Thomson, M, Zakaria, Z, & Radut-Taciu, R. (2019). Perceptions of scientists and stereotypes through the eyes of young school children. Education Research International, 2019(1). https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/6324704. Article 6324704.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Van Veelen R, Derks B. Academics as agentic superheroes: Female academics' lack of fit with the agentic stereotype of success limits their career advancement. British Journal of Social Psychology. 2022; 61; 3: 748-767. 10.1111/bjso.12515</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Walton GM, Cohen GL. A question of belonging: Race, social fit, and achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2007; 92; 1: 82-96. 10.1037/0022-3514.92.1.82</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Walton GM, Cohen GL. A brief social-belonging intervention improves academic and health outcomes of minority students. Science. 2011; 331; 6023: 1447-1451. 10.1126/science.1198364</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Walton GM, Logel C, Peach JM, Spencer SJ, Zanna MP. Two brief interventions to mitigate a chilly climate transform women's experience, relationships, and achievement in engineering. Journal of Educational Psychology. 2015; 107; 2: 468-485. 10.1037/a0037461</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Walton, G. M, Brady, S. T, & Crum, A. J. (2020). The Social-Belonging intervention. In G. M. Walton, & A. J. Crum (Eds.), Handbook of wise interventions: How social psychology can help people change (pp. 36–62). The Guilford Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Weisgram ES, Bigler RS. The role of attitudes and intervention in high school girls´ interest in computer science. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering. 2006; 12; 4: 325-336. 10.1615/JWomenMinorScienEng.v12.i4.40</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Weisgram ES, Bigler RS, Liben LS. Gender, values, and occupational interests among children, adolescents, and adults. Child Development. 2010; 81; 3: 778-796. 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01433.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Whitehead JM. Sex stereotypes, gender identity and subject choice at A-level. Educational Research. 1996; 38; 2: 147-160. 10.1080/0013188960380203</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Williams B, Onsman A, Brown T. Exploratory factor analysis: A five-step guide for novices. Australasian Journal of Paramedicine. 2010; 8: 1-13. 10.33151/ajp.8.3.93</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wylie A. Women in philosophy: The costs of exclusion—Editor's introduction. Hypatia. 2011; 26; 2: 374-382. 10.1111/j.1527-2001.2011.01180.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zumbrunn S, McKim C, Buhs E, Hawley LR. Support, belonging, motivation, and engagement in the college classroom: A mixed method study. Instructional Science. 2014; 42; 5: 661-684. 10.1007/s11251-014-931</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0186340637-25"> <title> Footnotes </title> <blist> <bibtext> This designation is not intended to imply that there are only two genders or a dichotomy of the genders.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> The subject has different names in different federal states (philosophy; ethics; values and norms). At the beginning of the questionnaire, there was a note that they were considered equivalent.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Data was collected as part of a larger questionnaire. All items of the used scales, the data, and the code can be found in the Supplementary Material.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> The results of the factor analysis as a rotated loading matrix can be found in the Supplementary Material.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> "I feel similar to people who are good at philosophizing".</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> For verification purposes, the analyses were also carried out without this item. There was no substantial difference in the results. As the item loaded highly on the Social Belonging factor and fitted with it in terms of content, the analyses are reported with the item.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Arian Leopold; Katharina Schulz; Anne Burkard; Michaela M. Köller and Daniela Renger</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author; Author</p> <p></p> <p>Arian Leopold Arian Leopold Arian Leopold studied psychology, political science, and philosophy, and is currently a PhD student at the Department of Psychology at Kiel University. His research focuses on the effects of stereotypes on the underrepresentation of women.</p> <p>Katharina Schulz Katharina Schulz Katharina Schulz is a research associate and PhD candidate at the Department of Philosophy at the University of Göttingen. Her research focuses on teaching philosophy in schools and the philosophical canon.</p> <p>Anne Burkard Anne Burkard Anne Burkard is a professor at the Department of Philosophy at the University of Göttingen. Her research interests include promoting argumentative skills among high school students, addressing student relativism, and diversifying philosophy teaching in schools and universities.</p> <p>Michaela M. Köller Michaela M. Köller Dr. Michaela M. Köller has a PhD in educational psychology and works as research assistant at the Institute for the Psychology of Learning and Instruction at Kiel University. She studies social-emotional competencies and stereotyping. Michaela applies her research to competence development within the teaching profession and to students' choice of studies.</p> <p>Daniela Renger Daniela Renger Dr. Daniela Renger has a PhD in social psychology and currently works as senior lecturer and principle investigator at the Department of Psychology at Kiel University. She investigates social recognition experiences, their internalization in self-recognition, (gender) stereotypes and social (in)equality. Daniela applies her research to school projects to improve self-recognition, social cohesion, and tolerance.</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib52" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib65" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib55" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib71" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib50" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib69" firstref="ref36"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref38"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib56" firstref="ref40"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib66" firstref="ref41"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib75" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib48" firstref="ref45"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref46"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib70" firstref="ref47"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref49"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref50"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref51"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib62" firstref="ref52"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib51" firstref="ref53"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib64" firstref="ref54"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib72" firstref="ref55"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref57"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref59"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib49" firstref="ref60"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref62"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl40" bibid="bib57" firstref="ref63"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl41" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref64"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl42" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref67"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl43" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref68"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl44" bibid="bib59" firstref="ref71"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl45" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref73"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl46" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref74"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl47" bibid="bib74" firstref="ref75"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl48" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref76"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl49" bibid="bib63" firstref="ref77"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl50" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref78"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl51" bibid="bib54" firstref="ref80"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl52" bibid="bib61" firstref="ref87"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl53" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref96"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl54" bibid="bib595" firstref="ref97"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl55" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref99"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl56" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref100"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl57" bibid="bib73" firstref="ref103"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl58" bibid="bib521" firstref="ref106"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl59" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref107"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl60" bibid="bib294" firstref="ref109"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl61" bibid="bib227" firstref="ref110"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl62" bibid="bib53" firstref="ref112"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl63" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref114"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl64" bibid="bib60" firstref="ref115"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl65" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref118"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl66" bibid="bib58" firstref="ref122"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl67" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref129"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl68" bibid="bib67" firstref="ref134"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl69" bibid="bib68" firstref="ref135"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1476169
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: The Lack of Fit Framework in School: Girls' Perceived Misfit and Its Consequences in a Male-Stereotyped Discipline
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Arian+Leopold%22">Arian Leopold</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0009-0005-9023-5501">0009-0005-9023-5501</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Katharina+Schulz%22">Katharina Schulz</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Anne+Burkard%22">Anne Burkard</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Michaela+M%2E+Köller%22">Michaela M. Köller</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1025-3311">0000-0003-1025-3311</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Daniela+Renger%22">Daniela Renger</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4474-2503">0000-0002-4474-2503</externalLink>)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Social+Psychology+of+Education%3A+An+International+Journal%22"><i>Social Psychology of Education: An International Journal</i></searchLink>. 2025 28(1).
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. One New York Plaza, Suite 4600, New York, NY 10004. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-460-1700; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 18
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22High+Schools%22">High Schools</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Secondary+Education%22">Secondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Females%22">Females</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Disproportionate+Representation%22">Disproportionate Representation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Gender+Bias%22">Gender Bias</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Gender+Discrimination%22">Gender Discrimination</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Sex+Stereotypes%22">Sex Stereotypes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Sense+of+Belonging%22">Sense of Belonging</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Career+Pathways%22">Career Pathways</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Career+Choice%22">Career Choice</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Goodness+of+Fit%22">Goodness of Fit</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Models%22">Models</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22High+School+Students%22">High School Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Self+Concept%22">Self Concept</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Gender+Differences%22">Gender Differences</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Persistence%22">Persistence</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Women+Faculty%22">Women Faculty</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1007/s11218-025-10094-w
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1381-2890<br />1573-1928
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Due to the leaky pipeline, i.e., the continuous decline in the number of women along the academic career path, women are still underrepresented in many academic disciplines like STEM and philosophy. One theoretical model that explains this is the lack of fit framework (Heilman, Sex bias in work settings: The lack of fit model; Heilman & Caleo, Combatting gender discrimination: A lack of fit framework). According to this, women in male-stereotyped disciplines perceive a misfit to the person stereotypical for the discipline. This perceived misfit has been associated with a lower sense of belonging and thus less engagement, intention to persist, and probability of choosing a career in the discipline. So far, the Lack of Fit Model has been studied in work and university contexts but not in schools. In the present study, we applied the lack of fit framework to secondary school, focusing on high school students (N = 523) and their perception of philosophy (a highly male-stereotyped discipline). We showed that female high school students have a higher perceived self-philosopher misfit than male high school students. Using a structural equation model, we showed that this gender-discipline misfit correlates with less engagement and lower intention to persist and possibly career choice via a lower sense of belonging. The results extend previous findings on the lack of fit framework to the school context.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1476169
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1476169
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1007/s11218-025-10094-w
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 18
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Females
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Disproportionate Representation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Gender Bias
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Gender Discrimination
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Sex Stereotypes
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Sense of Belonging
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Career Pathways
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Career Choice
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Goodness of Fit
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Models
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: High School Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Self Concept
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Gender Differences
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Persistence
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Women Faculty
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: The Lack of Fit Framework in School: Girls' Perceived Misfit and Its Consequences in a Male-Stereotyped Discipline
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Arian Leopold
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Katharina Schulz
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Anne Burkard
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Michaela M. Köller
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Daniela Renger
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 12
              Type: published
              Y: 2025
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1381-2890
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1573-1928
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 28
            – Type: issue
              Value: 1
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Social Psychology of Education: An International Journal
              Type: main
ResultId 1