A causal model of mathematics performance in early adolescence: the role of sex

Using path analysis, the present investigation was done to clarify possible causal linkages among general scholastic aptitude, academic achievement in mathematics, self-concept of ability, and performance on a mathematics examination. Subjects were 122 eighth-grade students who completed a mathematics examination as well as a measure of self-concept of ability. Aptitude and achievement measures were obtained from school records. Analysis showed sex differences in prediction of performance on the mathematics examination. For boys, this performance could be predicted from scholastic aptitude and previous achievement in mathematics. For girls, performance only could be predicted from previous achievement in mathematics. These results indicate that the direction, strength, and magnitude of relations among these variables differed for boys and girls, while mean levels of performance did not.

An empirical examination of the integration of causal attribution and social learning theories in achievement situations

Using path analysis, the present investigation sought to clarify possible operational linkages among constructs from social learning and attribution theories within the context of a self-esteem system. Subjects were 300 undergraduate university students who completed a measure of self-esteem and indicated expectancies for success and minimal goal levels for an experimental task. After completing the task and receiving feedback about their performance, subjects completed causal attribution and self-esteem questionnaires. Results revealed gender differences in the degree and strength of the proposed relations, but not in the mean levels of the variables studied. Results suggested that the integration of social learning and attribution theories within a single conceptual model provides a better understanding of students' behaviors and self-esteem in achievement situations.

Role Stress and Job Outcomes in Public Accounting: Have the Gender Experiences Converged?

Using data collected from professionals in a large U.S. national public accounting firm, we explored gender differences in perceived levels of role stress and job outcomes as well as the effects of a healthy lifestyle as a coping mechanism for role stress, burnout and related job outcomes. Our large sample size (1,681) and equal participation by women (49.7%) and men (50.3%) allowed us to analyze the causal relationships of these variables using a previously tested multi-disciplinary research model (Jones, Norman, & Wier, 2010). We found that women and men perceive similar levels of role stress as defined by role ambiguity and role overload, and that women perceive less role conflict. Men and women perceive similar levels of job satisfaction and job performance. Contrary to earlier studies, women do not report higher levels of turnover intentions. Results show that efforts of the public accounting firms over the past decade may be somewhat successful in reducing the levels of role stress and turnover intentions among women. Another plausible explanation could be that an expansionist theory of gender, work and family (Barnett & Hyde, 2001) may now be responsible for improved well-being of females to the point where the genders have converged in their experience of role stress and job outcomes in public accounting.