The Gender Gap in Political Knowledge Among College Students

1. The Gender Gap in Political Knowledge Among College Students Carol S. Botsch, Professor of Political Science, USC Aiken Robert E. Botsch, Professor of Political Science, USC Aiken Presented at the SWPSA Conference, March 28, 2013, New Orleans

2. How we started this study • Wanted to try teaching American Government online in 1997 • Great skepticism from colleagues • Developed very hard comprehensive 63 item pre and post test—nearly all open-ended • Also gathered attitudinal and demographic data, including gender • Noticed that women did considerably less well • After 13 years of gathering data, now exploiting it to look at many things, including the gender gap—hence this little study!

3. Review of Literature on Gender Gap in Political Knowledge • General low levels of knowledge among Americans and youth • Negative implications for operation of a democratic republic • Gender gap well established in research • Sources of gap • Socialization • Self-esteem and confidence • Education • Political Interest • And gender biased measurements that inflate gap

4. Methodological debate about validity/reliability of measurements • Gender based measurement bias • Women more likely to know different things than men • Risk aversion theory • Women more likely to choose “DK” on closed-ended items—advice: discourage DK’s • Leave blank open-ended items when only have partial knowledge—advice: use closed-ended items • Claim that up to 50% of gap is measurement based

5. Others disagree or see measurement problems as minor • DelliCarpini and Keeter(1993) argue that encouraging guessing leads to unreliability • Cassese, Weber, and Khatib (2007) see gender bias as a small factor and conclude that conventional measures only modestly overestimate the gender gap • Our open-ended measures are conventional, but we try to see evidence of female “risk aversion” in our analysis

6. How the gap might be reduced • Taking American Government classes • Increasing political interest • Improving self-confidence and efficacy • Increasing incentives to answer all questions, including those with partial knowledge and guessing on closed ended items

7. Study Setting • USC Aiken is public liberal arts institution with a few MA programs • 3400 students, mostly native, but 20 states • 67% female • 28% African-American, only a couple % other • Sample representative of student body, in part because American Government (or American History) is required in General Education across campus

8. Data—Two Studies • 13 Year Survey of entering and exiting American Government Students (1978-2010) • N = 3100 (or 6200 pre and posttests) • N = 2400 for this report—excluded online students • 59 items, 1st Amend item 0-5, total score 0-63 • Only 8 items can be considered close-ended—no DK • Scored as total # correct rather than each item as a separate variable in data set • Did go back and count # quest attempted for all 6200+ tests • 2011 Study of Undergraduates • N = 531; RespRate = 53%; Sample error: +/- 4.3% • 8 item knowledge test, 7 open-ended

9. Quasi-Experimental Design • Most of this paper relies on 13 year study • Divided students into two panels • Lo Incentive Panel: Posttest taken as pretest—”just to see how much they knew” (n=1100) • Hi Incentive Panel: Posttest counted as part of final exam grade (n=1100) • Two treatments • LIP: the impact of completing Am Govt class • HIP: Am Govt class + high incentives for maximizing score on posttest

10. Findings • Found gender gap no matter how measured • Males answered more questions correctly • Males attempted more questions • Males got a higher percentage of questions attempted correct—suggesting that they were not just guessing based on little information • Conclusion: most of any difference was real, not due to female risk aversion • Caveat: unless females were not answering questions on which they had nearly full information

11. Data showing Gender Gap—LIP

12. Taking American Government Class Did Not Reduce Gap • LIP panel did significantly better on the posttest than the pretest • But gaps on all measures of performance remained—not significantly improved from pretest

13. Data on Impact of Taking Am Gov

14. Raising Incentives Erased the Gap

15. Taking American Government Boosts Political Interest and Reduces a Gender Gap in Interest

16. Multivariate Approach: the relative importance of gender and interest

17. Focus on Political Interest • It is important in explaining knowledge • Women have an interest gap • Why? We can do something about it Possible strategy: focus on boosting interest in teaching American Government

18. Problems in Using Am Govt to boost female political interest • The short term reduction in the interest gap washes out in the medium term (1-8 semesters) • Data from 2011 study shows this

19. Increasing Interest Does NOT Reduce Know. Gap, & Females Lag at All Levels

20. Conclusions • Gender Gap in Knowledge seems mostly real • Taking Am GovtGov has at best a slight impact in reducing the gap—hi incentives can wipe out gap • Political interest is an important stimulant for political knowledge • A political interest gap also exists • Taking Am Govt produces a short term reduction in interest gap, but washes out, and men have higher knowledge at all interest levels • Need special programs for women to boost interest and knowledge—American Govt is not enough