General instructions: You will have an hour and 15 minutes (75 min.) to complete this exam. Once you have started the clock with start. In other words, it will not save for you. I am expecting that you have spent the normal time preparing for this exam as you would have for an in-class exam.
Multiple choice: You should not treat this as an open book exam as looking up the answers will leave you without enough time to complete it.
Essays: While I am expecting that you have prepared the exam essays ahead of time, you should NOT be quoting from articles. I want to see that you can paraphrase and discuss the research just like you would if this was an in-class exam. This is important. Because you have time to prepare them and will have your notes, they should be well-written and thoughtful. In other words, you can just cut and paste your answers in to the response box. Assume one page hand written is enough to answer each question, or 2-3 paragraphs typed (but no more than 3, and if you can answer it fully in 1 paragraph that is okay too).
Answer the question in a concise manner and make sure you answer all parts of the question. You should clearly be using the articles and research in the articles to answer these questions. In other words, when a question asks you to give examples from research, then you should discuss main methods/findings from that research (i.e., the research cited in the question) to back-up your points. Make sure you clearly answer all parts of the question.
Note: You do not need to include a reference for each article, but do use APA in-text citations where appropriate.
Attempt History
Attempt | Time | Score | |
---|---|---|---|
LATEST | Attempt 1 | 24 minutes | 67 out of 100 |
According to Cheryan et al. (2015) what factors explain underrepresentation of girls and women in STEM fields? What do they suggest could increase girls’ and women’s interest in these fields? Is there evidence for ethnic variation in gender-STEM stereotypes and STEM participation (i.e., O’Brien, Blodorn, Adams, & Garcia, 2015)? If so, why might this occur? Explain and give specific examples using findings from this research.
The factor which explains the underrepresentation of the female gender STEM fields is cultural stereotypes. Females face negative stereotypes about their capability of pursuing computer science courses. Society portrays the cause as masculine making the female gender feel isolated from the course (Cheryan et al., 2015) The STEM field requires extensive diversification, which will increase the females’ attraction in the related fields. According to O’Brien, Blodorn, Adams, and Garcia (2015), evidence exists showing ethnic variations in gender stereotypes and participation in STEM. For instance, European American women and African American women believe STEM to be masculine related, although the latter aligns with the field more than the former. Researchers suggest that in order to help deal with underrepresentation, we need to help bring out a diverse representation of the people within this specific field, people that can be role models for young girls that they can look up to.
In the case of men, European American men opted for STEM practice more than African American men (O’Brien et al., 2015). European culture illuminates the department as agent and independent (masculine traits) more than the African culture. In summation, it is clear that diversified cultures influence STEM participation and STEM-gender stereotypes.
According to researchers such as O’Brien et al. (2015), evidence of ethnic variation has surfaced in gender-STEM stereotypes . However, the variation is of course more significant amongst female participants.
The researcher provides information on cisgender and transgender children who do not understand gender identity. In terms of both explicit and implicit measures, it shows transgender children aligned themselves toward their designated gender identity as compared to the cisgender group. The research suggests that transgender children show gender acceptance and not delay or confusion (Olson et al., 2015). Olson (2016) shows how clinical works offer flawed information concerning transgender children- poor understanding of the relationship of gender dysphoric identity with adulthood and desistance of transgender identity during development. The flaws create mental disturbance upon the children and hence poor acceptance of transgender identity as they become adults. Instead, clinic officers need to support and help the children realize their gender identity and its importance (Olson, 2016).
Society views women as more emotional than men, which leads to gender stereotypes of emotions that may cause bias of leadership roles. However, individuals need to base their judgment on facts and not societal prejudice. Although a female leader may be objective in her duties (just the same as male), statistics still show individuals referring to them as emotional and unstable. According to the meta-analysis, both genders experience the same amount and type of emotions (Brescoll, 2016). Though the data is similar, women are viewed as emotional since they display emotions more than the opposite gender. Secondly, women tend to allow emotions to affect their managerial decisions and judgment. The perception that women are sensitive may affect the performance of a company (Brescoll, 2016). Lastly, gender stereotypes view the female as soft and considerate when making difficult decisions as compared to male counterparts. The paper shows that people judge women based on internal determinants hence leading to biased evaluation. The decision must be made after deliberate facts on both external and internal components.
According to Bruckmüller et al. (2012) what is linguistic normativity? What are the consequences of linguistic normativity for perceptions of 1) power and 2) gender stereotypes? Give examples from research to illustrate your points.
Linguistic normativity refers to societies differentiating between groups as norms or “the effect to be explained” and, therefore, the definition of power and status (Bruckmüller et al., 2012). The implicit norm category tends to command power than the latter group. The society regards men as the linguistic norm and women as the effect to be explained hence creating gender stereotypes (Bruckmüller et al., 2012). Leadership condition research showed that men assert power over women (Bruckmüller et al., 2012). The leisure context presents men and women as equals in terms of status and power. In summation, l
Tentative language refers to a language that an individual uses to provide a statement that is open to interpretation, since the claim is not proven, factual claim, or definite. According to Leaper and Robnett (2011), Lakoff based the language in forms of hedges, intensifiers, uncertain expressions, and tag questions. Most psychologists deem Lackoff’s as being biased since tentative language depends more on power and status rather than gender. The meta-analysis proves that women are more probable to express tentative language than men. The language offers a different viewpoint according to the gender of the listener- women see it as sensitivity, whereas men view it as unassertiveness. The data collected by Mehl et al. (2007) prove that there are no facts that women talk more than women. Both pieces conclude that language between individuals depends on the gender of the listener and that women do not talk as much as men.
inguistic normativity leads to problems such as gender stereotypes and the acceptance of status differences.
Leaper and Robnett (2011) pose the following question: “Women are more likely than men to use tentative language, aren’t they?” What is tentative language and are women more likely than men to use it? How does this research extend and revise Lakoff (1973)? Similarly, Mehl et al. (2007) ask the question: “Are women really more talkative than men?” What do they find? Finally, what do these two pieces of research tell us about the relationship between language and gender?
Tentative language refers to a language that an individual uses to provide a statement that is open to interpretation, since the claim is not proven, a factual claim, or definite. According to Leaper and Robnett (2011), Lakoff based the language in forms of hedges, intensifiers, uncertain expressions, and tag questions. Most psychologists deem Lackoff’s as being biased since tentative language depends more on power and status rather than gender. The meta-analysis proves that women are more probable to express tentative language than men. The language offers a different viewpoint according to the gender of the listener- women see it as sensitivity, whereas men view it as unassertiveness. The data collected by Mehl et al. (2007) prove that there are no facts that women talk more than women. Both pieces conclude that language between individuals depends on the gender of the listener and that women do not talk as much as men.