ReviewBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2026
The Enduring Gender Gap in STEM: A Meta-Analysis of Gender Differences in Self-Efficacy in STEM Fields.
Review in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Women have made substantial gains in representation in some STEM fields (e.g., biology, chemistry, math) but not others (e.g., physics, computer science, engineering). Researchers have called for a STEM field-specific approach to investigate the persistent gender gap. While some studies indicate that males report higher self-efficacy than females, which may contribute to the persistent gender gap, other studies do not. The current research used Hunter-Schmidt meta-analysis to clarify the relationship between gender and self-efficacy in STEM fields where women are underrepresented compared to fields where representation has improved. A meta-analysis of 145 effects found gender differences in self-efficacy in all but one field (biology), but the magnitude of the difference was field-specific. In computer science and physics, two fields in which underrepresentation most strongly persists, there were greater gender differences in self-efficacy compared to the other fields. Findings also highlight participant educational stage as a potentially important factor in explaining heterogeneity of gender differences in self-efficacy within STEM fields and as an area for continued research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.