PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

JM Royer

Publications and source records attributed to JM Royer.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Math-Fact Retrieval as the Cognitive Mechanism Underlying Gender Differences in Math Test Performance.

Males from select populations receive better scores on standardized math achievement tests than females. The research reported in this article evaluates the hypothesis that the reason for these differences is that males are faster at retrieving basic math facts. Studies 1-3 demonstrate that math-fact retrieval predicts performance on math achievement tests with students in grades 5-8 and in college. Studies 4-6 show that males and females in grades 2-8 and in college have different patterns of math-fact retrieval performance and that males at the high positive end of the retrieval distribution are faster than comparable females. Study 5 also demonstrates that math-fact retrieval varies in three populations (Anglo-American, Chinese-American, Hong Kong Chinese) and that speed of retrieval improves with practice. Studies 7-9 tested the hypothesis that males are faster than females on retrieval tasks in general. Study 7 showed that there were no gender differences on simple retrieval tasks, and Studies 8 and 9 showed that females were slightly faster than males on verbal-processing tasks. The General Discussion indicates that the math-fact retrieval hypothesis is consistent with previous research. It also relates the math-fact retrieval hypothesis to theories of cognitive performance and introduces the practice and engagement hypothesis. This hypothesis explains the origin of gender differences in math and reading and relates those differences to the existing literature on gender differences in academic performance. The article concludes with a description of needed future research and a discussion of the educational implications of the math-fact retrieval hypothesis. Copyright 1999 Academic Press.

Journal Article↗

Editorial.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Journal Article↗

Reply to the Commentaries on the Math-Fact Retrieval Hypothesis.

Geary and Wigfield and Brynes (this issue) point out a number of limitations of the math-fact retrieval hypothesis that we agree with. For instance, we acknowledge that whereas the correlational evidence we offer in our article (this issue) provides suggestive evidence for a link between math-fact retrieval and gender differences in math test performance, that evidence is not compelling. We also acknowledge that even if it is the case that math-fact retrieval is one of the cognitive mechanisms responsible for the gender differences in math performance, there are still many aspects of gender differences in math performance that need to be understood. We also point out a number of areas where we disagree. Most prominently, we do not believe that the spatial cognition hypothesis or affective/motivational hypotheses account for two significant literatures-gender differences in test performance and gender differences in grade performance. We discuss the basis for our beliefs and close with a discussion of the need for intervention research that will resolve some of the issues discussed in the series of articles in this issue. At the end of the article we also present a very speculative hypothesis that would knit together all of the positions presented in the articles in this issue of CEP. Copyright 1999 Academic Press.

Journal Article↗