So far, this discussion has focused on the empirical college admission data and practical actions that can be deduced from them. Surprisingly little is known about the underlying causes of biased predictions. Some leads appear to be more promising than others, but frankly, it is too early to arrive at any definite conclusions.
Mean differences in either test scores or college grades are prominent suspects. Tests could contain material that men are more familiar with;
mean differences in grades could indicate a biased assessment by the teacher rather than inherent group differences. A proper test of these ideas requires either an infallible predictor or an infallible outcome—something which does not exist in college admission testing (Linn, 1984). Consequently, mean differences alone do not say anything about the fairness of a testing procedure (Linn, 1990a; Meade & Tonidandel, 2010). A straightforward way to identify items that may discriminate against a particular subgroup is the analysis of DIF, which can help identify items that, for example, men are more familiar with than women (Curley & Schmitt, 1993; Osterlind & Everson, 2009).
There is no systematic effect of mean test score differences according to the moderator analysis of Study 4. Mean differences in CGPA are also not related to differential prediction. There is some evidence suggesting that courses with lenient grading styles are more frequently attended by women (Alon & Gelbgiser, 2011; Berry & Sackett, 2009). Still, the majority of studies on differential prediction use proximal criteria which are assessed while there is little room for differential course choices. Sex differences in self-imposed workload are equally unlikely23. There is, however, a distinct difference between undergraduate and graduate tests in the meta-analysis.
The decision to become a graduate student depends on cognitive ability as well as on motivation—previous educational attainment is usually a pre-requisite, but without interest in a specific field of study other careers might be more appealing. This self-selection process is usually found in validity
23During their first year, the students in Study 2 took exams for 50 ECTS points on average. The workload of men and women did not differ (t(640) = 0.25;p=.80).
GENERAL DISCUSSION
studies of graduate admission tests (Kuncel et al., 2001).
7.2.1 Sex Differences in Interests
Sex differences in cognitive ability may come into play at highly selective elite institutions, but appear to have little impact elsewhere (Ellis et al., 2008).
Meanwhile, some of the largest psychological sex-differences can be found in vocational interests (Su et al., 2009). Similarly, men and women tend to choose different majors (see Table 5.2 and also Bridgeman et al., 2000).
Validities differ between fields of study: predictive validity coefficients are higher in science and math majors, where there is a male majority. Still, the sex-specific differential validity in favor of women persists within each group (Bridgeman et al., 2000).
Evaluating science courses separately leads to a reduction of sex-specific differential prediction (Bridgeman et al., 2000; Elliott & Strenta, 1988). The interplay of self-selection processes and curricular differences is a promising field for future research.
More detailed findings are already available from studies of success at work (e. g., S. Anger & Heineck, 2010; Hinz & Gartner, 2012): About half of the initial gender pay gap observed in income data can be explained by sex differences in interests and job status. Unlike income, job satisfaction is unrelated to a person’s interest and sex (see Study 3). It is conceivable that women choose careers that are associated with lower wages and fewer promotion opportunities in favor of jobs—and educational tracks—they find more satisfying (cf. A. E. Clark, 1997; Fietze et al., 2010; Kaiser, 2005).
Finally, the personal attributes associated with highly succcessful stu-dents appear to be distributed unevenly between men and women: on aver-age, men are willing to devote more working hours to their careers, which makes them more likely to excel in their chosen field (Lubinski & Benbow, 2007). Apparently, men tend to be more willing to pursue a single goal whereas women tend to embrace a broader set of challenges. The next sec-tion shows that this is also the case when it comes to individual tasks.
106
7.2.2 Sex Differences in Dealing with Complexity
Another promising lead is task complexity. When it comes to complex prob-lem solving, men are more likely to apply the strategy to explore one thing at a time whereas women prefer a more holistic approach (W¨ustenberg, Greiff, Molnar, & Funke, submitted). There is a similar pattern for complex quan-titative tasks, where female students are more likely to use strategies that use additional cues (Spelke, 2005). This approach may be a disadvantage for women in well-defined test settings; but when faced with the various challenges of being a student at university, a holistic approach might be more efficient and, eventually, more successful. Furthermore, the knowledge and skills acquired at university defy simplicity and call for a broad set of cognitive abilities, personality traits, and process-related aptitude, instead (Stemler, 2012). Already in school, young women tend to have superior so-cial skills and show less disruptive classroom behavior, which may eventually facilitate their academic careers (Buchmann, DiPrete, & McDaniel, 2008).
So possibly, the very thing that keeps women from getting the same aver-age scores in college admission tests, is what helps them outperform men at university. The sex-specific construct validity of scholastic aptitude tests re-ported in Study 2 is in line with this hypothesis. A different set of intelligence facets is associated with women’s aptitude test performance.
Conventional admission tests often contain many shorter items rather than a few elaborate questions, because time is limited (due to economic and logistic constraints) and more items tend to make a test more reliable. These items usually have a pre-defined correct answer, which can be found most easily by convergent thinking (Dollinger, 2011).
Essay writing parts were introduced to the SAT and the ACT in 2005.
The SAT Writing subtest (SAT-W) contains an essay that is scored holisti-cally; readers are asked to judge the total impression of an essay rather than distinct factors (Camara, 2003; Kobrin, Deng, & Shaw, 2011). The predictive validity of the SAT-W is similar to that of the SAT Critical Reading (SAT-CR) subtest and the SAT Mathematics (SAT-M) subtest, but it provides very little incremental validity (∆r ≤.02) over SAT-CR and SAT-M (Norris,
GENERAL DISCUSSION
Oppler, Kuang, Day, & Adams, 2006). On average, women get higher scores than men on the SAT-W, so it is no surprise that the underprediction of women’s FYGPA is smaller for the SAT-W than for the SAT-CR and the SAT-M (Mattern et al., 2008; B. F. Patterson & Mattern, 2011).
It seems as if men are one-trick ponies who are better off in reasoning tests that require convergent thinking. Yet, women appear to be better equipped to handle the ambiguous reality of studying at university with its manifold challenges. Motivational aspects that are relevant for scholastic success tend to be more prominent among young women (e. g., self-discipline; Duckworth
& Seligman, 2006). Women also outperform men in high school, again a setting that is a complex collection of various subjects and assessments that require a heterogeneous set of skills and often go beyond short, clear-cut tasks (Buchmann et al., 2008). This notion persists beyond graduation: the link between high mathematics competence and high verbal competence is stronger in women than in men. Thus, women have more flexibility in the job market and can choose from a wider array of professions (Ceci et al., 2009).
If the aim is to reduce sex-specific differential prediction, future tests of scholastic aptitute might benefit from tapping into the mastery of real-life challenges and divergent tasks opposed to convergent problem solving that requires only few different skills. In this sense, introducing essay tasks like the SAT-W is a step into the right direction.