Claims

Maths self-efficacy predicted STEM career choice in females but not males, though the association was explained by maths achievement after adjustment

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2024 · checked against its sources 2026-10-26 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q3 i? The effect of maths self-efficacy in the unadjusted female model (OR = 1.77) was significantly larger than in the unadjusted male model (OR = 0.98), but was attenuated when accounting for maths achievement. → Ferdinand 2024

Evidence

Ferdinand 2024

Ferdinand, R., Malanchini, M. & Rimfeld, K. (2024). Mathematics interest, self-efficacy, and anxiety predict STEM career choice in emerging adulthood. npj Science of Learning. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-024-00275-1

q3 · i? · associational · r2

Sex-stratified TEDS regressions comparing unadjusted self-efficacy effects: significant female effect (OR = 1.77), null male effect (OR = 0.98), difference significant (X2 = 4.07, p = 0.043). The article states the female effect was explained by maths achievement levels.

"the effect of maths self-ef ficacy in the unadjusted female model (OR = 1.77, 95% CI [1.20, 2.60]) was larger than the effect observed in the unadjusted male model (OR = 0.98, 95% CI [0.65, 1.50]), and this difference was found to be significant (X2 =4 . 0 7 ,p =0 . 0 4 3 )"

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-26
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.