Women’s aversion to majors that (seemingly) require systemizing skills causes gendered field of study choice

Abstract

Abstract This article examines whether gender differences in preferences for field of study characteristics can explain gendered major choice. Specifically, this study focuses on a broad range of subject characteristics that are often simultaneously present: systemizing skills required (math intensity, reasoning style, affinity for technical work tasks), future job characteristics corresponding with the male breadwinner model (materialism, work–family compatibility), and characteristics invoked by behavioural preferences (risky situations and a competitive environment). To disentangle these co-occurring characteristics and minimize the influence of other factors in the decision-making process (e.g. admission likelihood), this study uses a choice experiment incorporated in the Swiss panel study TREE. In it, a representative sample of high school students choose their preferred field of study from two artificial fields with varying characteristics. The results show the largest gender differences in preferences for characteristics related to reasoning style (abstract versus creative) and affinity for work tasks (technical versus social), and smaller differences for math intensity, competitive climate, and work–family compatibility, while there are no gender differences in preferences for materialistic characteristics (salary and prestige). Unexpectedly, the gender differences are primarily caused by female students’ preferences, while male students are neutral towards most characteristics.