The Relationship of Math Anxiety and Gender

Abstract

Abstract The effects of mathematics anxiety and gender on attitudes toward mathematics were examined using the Attitudes Toward Mathematics Inventory (ATMI). A sample of 134 students enrolled in mathematics classes in a state university was asked to complete the ATMI. Data were analyzed using a multivariate factorial model. In this sample, the results showed that gender had no effect on attitudes toward mathematics, and gender and math anxiety had no influence on attitudes toward mathematics. There was an overall significant effect of math anxiety on self-confidence, enjoyment and motivation with large effect size. Students with no math anxiety scored significantly higher in enjoyment than students with high math anxiety. Students with little or no math anxiety scored significantly higher than students with some or high math anxiety in measures of self-confidence and motivation. Students with some math anxiety scored significantly higher in motivation than those with high math anxiety. Introduction It is indisputable that males have higher achievement in mathematics and higher levels of enrollment in mathematics courses (Hanna, 2003), but whether these results are caused by socialization factors or innate differences has been a matter of dispute. Gender differences in mathematics have long been explained as deficits, particularly inferior spatial visualization among girls (Collins & Kimura, 1997). Some presume this to be a sex-linked characteristic of females. Justification for this point of view is often based on deficits found in boys, such as higher levels of reading disabilities and attention deficit disorders, as well as the superiority of males on spatial tests (Nass, 1993; Nordvik & Amponsah, 1998). As a result, innate differences have long been used to explain the performance gap between the sexes. A report by the American Association of University Women (1992) blames achievement differences on differential treatment of girls in the classroom, curricula that either ignores or stereotypes women, and gender bias that undermines girls' self-esteem. Boys and girls have similar mathematics and science proficiency scores on tests at the age of 9, but a gap begins to appear at around age 13, or at least this has been the pattern from 1973 to 1994 on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). However, in 1994 there was no measurable difference in the math proficiency of 13-year-old boys and girls (Campbell, Reese, O'Sullivan, & Dossey, 1996). If there was a problem in spatial visualization or other innate sexual-biological traits explaining math differences, they suddenly cleared up about a decade ago. According to the Third International Math and Science Study (TIMSS) results, among participating countries, girls and boys had similar average mathematics achievement scores (U.S. National Research Center, 1996). However, on the NAEP, 17-year-old females have consistently scored lower, on average, than 17-year-old males, and in 1994, they were 5 scale-score points lower than males (Campbell et al., 1996). Even more interesting, average mathematics scores among 17-year-girls turned down between 1973 and 1982, but increased in 1994 to a level similar to the age cohort in 1973 (Campbell et al., 1996). Students who do well in mathematics have more positive attitudes about the subject, thus they are likely to take more courses and may perform better. Attitudinal research has been limited and instruments have been lacking, but generally the questions asked of students show mixed findings about 13-year-old boys and girls. Linn and Hyde (1989) reported that attitudes are more negative for girls earlier than age 13, but the Longitudinal Study of American Youth found no differences for 7th-grade students (Miller, Kimmel, Hoffer, & Nelson, 1999). Students' attitudes are clearly important, but little is known about the factors that intervene to create significant differences. …

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 62 citations exist upstream.