"Where will I belong more?": The role of belonging comparisons between STEM fields in high school girls' STEM interest.

In trying to understand women's underrepresentation in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics), most existing research focuses on one STEM-field or collapses across all STEM-fields. However, these fields differ vastly in female representation: women tend to be most strongly underrepresented in technological and computer science university majors and to a lesser extent in mathematics and chemistry, while they are less underrepresented in biological sciences. To understand this variability, we examine how girls in the process of making higher education choices compare different STEM-fields to each other. We draw upon dimensional comparison theory, which argues that educational motivation involves intra-individual comparisons of achievement across school subjects. However, previous research has shown that a focus on achievement in STEM is not enough, anticipated belonging in a STEM-field plays a pivotal role in interest in pursuing that field. Consistent with this, we examined participants' comparisons of anticipated belonging across STEM-fields. A sample of 343 high school girls in STEM-focused university tracks completed a survey on their anticipated belonging and interest in pursuing different STEM majors. Latent Profile Analysis resulted in 3 profiles, showing different belonging comparison patterns across STEM-fields. Examining these comparisons-both within and across profiles-showed how girls felt pushed away from certain STEM-fields and pulled toward others. The findings suggest that for interest in pursuing specific STEM-fields it is not just about the level of anticipated belonging SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11218-021-09663-6.