for assistance, and Nora Newcombe and Elliott Blass for advice and comments on the manuscript. Above all, I am grateful to Ariel Grace and Kristin Shutts for their unending support and after-hours labor on this project. Draft, 4/20/05. This paper has not yet been peer reviewed. Please do not copy or cite without author's permission. This report considers three prominent claims that boys and men have greater natural aptitude for high-level careers in mathematics and science. According to the first claim, males are more focused on objects and mechanical systems from the beginning of life. According to the second claim, males have a profile of spatial and numerical abilities that predisposes them to greater aptitude in mathematics. According to the third claim, males show greater variability in mathematical aptitude, yielding a preponderance of males at the upper end of the distribution of mathematical talent. Research on cognitive development in human infants and preschool children, and research on cognitive performance by students at all levels, provides evidence against these claims. Mathematical and scientific reasoning develop from a set of biologically based capacities that males and females share. From these capacities, men and women appear to develop equal talent for mathematics and science.

Disciplines that study science are relatively well established in philosophy, history, and sociology. Psychology of science, by comparison, is a late bloomer but has recently shown signs of codification. The authors further this codification by integrating and reviewing the growing literature in the developmental, cognitive, personality, and social psychology of science. Only by integrating the findings from each of these perspectives can the basic questions in the study of scientific behavior be answered: Who becomes a scientist and what role do biology, family, school, and gender play? Are productivity, scientific reasoning, and theory acceptance influenced by age? What thought processes and heuristics lead to successful discovery? What personality characteristics distinguish scientists from nonscientists and eminent from less eminent scientists? Finally, how do intergroup relations and social forces influence scientific behavior? A model that integrates the consensual empirical findings from the psychology of science is pro-posed. Without the addition of a psychological dimension, I believe, it is impossible to appreciate fully the essence

As the workforce becomes increasingly diverse, motivating individuals from different backgrounds to work together effectively is a major challenge facing organizations. In a experiment conducted at two large public universities in the United States, we manipulate the salience of participants’ multidimensional natural identities and investigate the effects of identity on coordination and cooperation in a series of prisoner’s dilemma games. By priming a fragmenting (ethnic) identity, we find that, compared to the control, Asians exhibit significantly more ingroup cooperation and outgroup discrimination, while Caucasians are not responsive to ethnic priming. In comparison, priming a common organization (school) identity effectively reduces group bias for Asians in the coordination game, resulting in a significant increase of both ingroup and outgroup cooperation. However, in games with a unique inefficient Nash equilibrium, the effects of priming a common identity are more complex. While priming alleviates the negative effects of the competitiveness stereotype on cooperation among UCLA Asians, it enhances such negative effects among University of Michigan Asians.

In this article we summarize data from mathematically gifted middle school students working through home-computer-based first-year algebra, second-year algebra, and precalculus courses. Although these students represented only the extreme upper end of the full range of mathematical ability, they nevertheless displayed considerable individual variation on all observed outcomes with little relation to psat score, sex or age. About equal numbers of students accelerated and decelerated through each course. Any particular student’s probability of ending a computer session at any point was largely independent of the number of instructional units already worked in that session; however, the value of that probability differed dramatically across students. A gamma model fit the observed distribution of latencies fairly well. Implications are discussed.

Grounded theory methods of Strauss and Corbin (1990) and multidimensional scaling techniques (Kruskal & Wish, 1991) were used in this investigation to study the factors that influence a woman's choice to remain in or to leave a male-dominated major (Zuckerman, 1981). Focus group interviews were conducted with 62 sophomore women who had originally chosen male-dominated majors as freshmen to gain insight into the meanings and motivations of the student decisions. The participants responded to a 25-item survey which yielded a-three dimension solution with five clusters in the multidimensional scaling analysis. Five themes emerged from the focus groups as factors influencing a woman's choice to remain in or to leave a male-dominated major: (a) self confidence and refuse to lose attitude; (b) interest in the field; (c) career goals, jobs, and money; (d) ability and experience in the field; and (e) the desire to make a difference. The three dimensions were (a) time of experience, (b) motivation, and (c) career rewards. The five clusters were: (a) pre-college experiences, (b) college experiences, (c) career rewards, (d) self-confidence, and (e) selffulfillment.

Studies conducted over the past 25 years have revealed a biological pervasiveness to the neurobehavioral sexual differentiation process that extends far beyond behaviors associated with reproduction. This pervasiveness is now recognized to include sex differences in cognition and

The systemizing quotient: an investigation of adults with Asperger syndrome or high −functioning autism, and normal sex differences

Summers, colleagues at the Mellon Foundation, and participants in numerous seminars. Fryer is especially thankful to the Michor family in Kritzendorf, Austria for their support and generous hospitality while working on the paper. This paper makes use of the College and Beyond (C&B) database. The C&B database is a restricted-use database. Researchers who are interested in using the database may apply to the Andrew W. Mellon foundation for access.

This article maybe used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material. Downloaded By: [Texas Technology University] At: 18:51 21 July 2008

college students (CS) was examined by presenting hierarchical letter pairs in 3 viewing conditions: (a) unilaterally to the right hemisphere (RH), (b) unilaterally to the left hemisphere (LH), or (c) bilaterally, with 1 member of the pair presented to each hemisphere simultaneously. Participants made global–local, match–no-match judgments. For the AA and CS, the LH was faster for local matches and the RH for global matches. The MG showed no hemispheric differences. Also, AA and CS were slower on cooperative compared with unilateral trials, whereas the MG showed the opposite pattern. These results suggest that enhanced interhemispheric interaction is a unique functional characteristic of the MG brain. Functional asymmetry and processing specialization of the left hemisphere (LH) and right hemisphere (RH) are well-documented characteristics of the human brain (Hellige, 1993a). Yet, as compelling as these hemispheric processing propensities may be, the brain does not consist of two hemispheres operating in isolation. In fact, the different cognitive specialties of the LH and RH are so well integrated that they seldom cause significant processing conflicts in neurologically normal individuals. Thus, hemispheric specialization