Editing SAT (section)

=== Sex differences ===

==== In performance ====
[[File:SAT averages by group (2022).png|thumb|500x500px|Sex and race differences exist in SAT scores]]
In 2013, the American College Testing Board released a report stating that boys outperformed girls on the mathematics section of the test,<ref>{{cite news|last=Cummins|first=Denise|date=March 17, 2014|title=Boys outperform girls on mathematic portion|url=https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/good-thinking/201403/why-the-gender-difference-sat-math-doesnt-matter|access-date=November 6, 2016|website=Psychology Today|archive-date=August 21, 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230821181647/https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/good-thinking/201403/why-the-gender-difference-on-sat-math-doesnt-matter|url-status=live}}</ref> a significant gap that has persisted for over 35 years.<ref>{{Cite web|last1=Halpern|first1=Diane F.|last2=Benbow|first2=Camilla P.|last3=Geary|first3=David C.|display-authors=2|date=October 1, 2012|title=Sex, Math and Scientific Achievement|url=https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sex-math-and-scientific-achievement-2012-10-23/|url-status=live|archive-url=https://archive.today/20220103232847/https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sex-math-and-scientific-achievement-2012-10-23/|archive-date=January 3, 2022|access-date=January 5, 2022|website=Scientific American}}</ref> As of 2015, boys on average earned 32 points more than girls on the SAT mathematics section. Among those scoring in the 700–800 range, the male-to-female ratio was 1.6:1.<ref>{{Cite news|last=Cummins|first=Denise|date=April 17, 2015|title=Column: Why the STEM gender gap is overblown|work=PBS Newshour|url=https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/making-sense/truth-women-stem-careers|access-date=March 4, 2021|archive-date=February 26, 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210226003133/https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/making-sense/truth-women-stem-careers|url-status=live}}</ref> In 2014, psychologist Stephen Ceci and his collaborators found boys did better than girls across the percentiles. For example, a girl scoring in the top 10% of her sex would only be in the top 20% among the boys.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Ceci|first1=Stephen|last2=Ginther|first2=Donna K.|last3=Kahn|first3=Shulamit|last4=Williams|first4=Wendy M.|date=November 3, 2014|title=Women in Academic Science: A Changing Landscape|url=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1529100614541236?legid=sppsi%3B15%2F3%2F75&patientinform-links=yes|journal=Psychological Science in the Public Interest|publisher=Association for Psychological Science (APS)|volume=15|issue=3|pages=75–141|doi=10.1177/1529100614541236|pmid=26172066|s2cid=12701313|via=|access-date=January 31, 2021|archive-date=February 28, 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220228144921/https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1529100614541236?legid=sppsi%3B15%2F3%2F75&patientinform-links=yes|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="Ceci-2018">{{Cite book|last1=Ceci|first1=Stephen J.|url=http://www.cambridge.org/9781316629642|title=The Nature of Human Intelligence|last2=Ginther|first2=Donna K.|last3=Kahn|first3=Shulamit|last4=Williams|first4=Wendy M.|publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=2018|isbn=978-1-107-17657-7|editor-last=Sternberg|editor-first=Robert|location=|pages=|chapter=Chapter 3: Culture, Sex, and Intelligence|access-date=January 30, 2021|archive-date=August 21, 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230821181135/https://www.cambridge.org/us/universitypress/subjects/psychology/cognition/nature-human-intelligence?format=PB&isbn=9781316629642|url-status=live}}</ref> In 2010, psychologist Jonathan Wai and his colleagues showed, by analyzing data from three decades involving 1.6 million intellectually gifted seventh graders from the Duke University Talent Identification Program (TIP), that in the 1980s the gender gap in the mathematics section of the SAT among students scoring in the top 0.01% was 13.5:1 in favor of boys but dropped to 3.8:1 by the 1990s.<ref name="Wai-2010">{{Cite journal |last1=Wai |first1=Jonathan |last2=Cacchio |first2=Megan |last3=Putallaz |first3=Martha |last4=Makel |first4=Matthew C. |date=July–August 2010 |title=Sex differences in the right tail of cognitive abilities: A 30 year examination |url=https://www.psychologytoday.com/sites/default/files/attachments/56143/sex-differences-in-the-right-tail-cognitive-abilities.pdf |url-status=live |journal=Intelligence |volume=38 |issue=4 |pages=412–423 |doi=10.1016/j.intell.2010.04.006 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210204223404/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160289610000346 |archive-date=February 4, 2021 |access-date=January 31, 2021 |via=}}</ref><ref name="Ceci-2018" /> The dramatic sex ratio from the 1980s replicates a different study using a sample from Johns Hopkins University.<ref name="Wai-2012">{{Cite journal|last1=Wai|first1=Jonathan|last2=Putallaz|first2=Martha|last3=Makel|first3=Matthew C.|date=2012|title=Studying Intellectual Outliers: Are There Sex Differences, and Are the Smart Getting Smarter?|url=http://www.psychologytoday.com/files/attachments/56143/intellectual-outliers2012.pdf|journal=Current Directions in Psychological Science|volume=21|issue=6|pages=382–390|doi=10.1177/0963721412455052|s2cid=145155911|via=}}</ref> This ratio is similar to that observed for the ACT mathematics and science scores between the early 1990s and the late 2000s.<ref name="Wai-2010" /> It remained largely unaltered at the end of the 2000s.<ref name="Wai-2010" /><ref name=":3">{{Cite web |last=Bates |first=Karl Leif |date=July 6, 2010 |title=Gender Gap in Math Scores Persists |url=https://today.duke.edu/2010/07/TIPability.html |access-date=April 25, 2024 |website=Duke Today |publisher=Duke University |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|last=|first=|date=December 22, 2012|title=Cleverer still|newspaper=The Economist|url=https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2012/12/22/cleverer-still|url-status=live|access-date=February 15, 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201112022354/https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2012/12/22/cleverer-still|archive-date=November 12, 2020}}</ref> Sex differences in SAT mathematics scores began making themselves apparent at the level of 400 points and above.<ref name="Wai-2010" /> In the late 2000s, for every female who scored a perfect 800 on the SAT mathematics test, there were two males.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Niederle |first1=Muriel |last2=Vesterlund |first2=Lise |date=Spring 2010 |title=Explaining the Gender Gap in Math Test Scores: The Role of Competition |url=https://web.stanford.edu/~niederle/NV.JEP.pdf |journal=Journal of Economic Perspective |volume=24 |issue=2 |pages=129–44|doi=10.1257/jep.24.2.129 }}</ref><ref name=":3" />

Some researchers point to evidence in support of [[Greater Male Variability Hypothesis|greater male variability]] in verbal and quantitative reasoning skills.<ref name="Halpern-2007">{{Cite journal |last1=Halpern |first1=Diane F. |last2=Benbow |first2=Camilla P. |last3=Geary |first3=David C. |last4=Gur |first4=Ruben C. |last5=Hyde |first5=Janet Shibley |last6=Gernsbacher |first6=Morton Ann |date=August 2007 |title=The Science of Sex Differences in Science and Mathematics |journal=Psychological Science in the Public Interest |volume=8 |issue=1 |pages=1–51 |doi=10.1111/j.1529-1006.2007.00032.x |pmid=25530726|pmc=4270278 }}</ref> Greater male variability has been found in body weight, height, and cognitive abilities across cultures, leading to a larger number of males in the lowest and highest distributions of testing.<ref name="LehreLehre2009">{{cite journal|last1=Lehre|first1=Anne-Catherine|last2=Lehre|first2=Knut P.|last3=Laake|first3=Petter|last4=Danbolt|first4=Niels C.|year=2009|title=Greater intrasex phenotype variability in males than in females is a fundamental aspect of the gender differences in humans|journal=Developmental Psychobiology|volume=51|issue=2|pages=198–206|doi=10.1002/dev.20358|issn=0012-1630|pmid=19031491}}</ref> Consequently, a higher number of males are found in both the upper and lower extremes of the performance distributions of the mathematics sections of standardized tests such as the SAT, resulting in the observed gender discrepancy.<ref name="WaiHodges2018">{{cite journal|last1=Wai|first1=Jonathan|last2=Hodges|first2=Jaret|last3=Makel|first3=Matthew C.|date=March–April 2018|title=Sex differences in ability tilt in the right tail of cognitive abilities: A 35-year examination|url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160289617301241|journal=Intelligence|volume=67|pages=76–83|doi=10.1016/j.intell.2018.02.003|issn=0160-2896|access-date=January 31, 2021|via=|archive-date=March 3, 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210303193857/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160289617301241|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="Ceci-2018" /><ref name="Schrager-2015">{{Cite news|last=Schrager|first=Allison|date=July 9, 2015|title=Men are both dumber and smarter than women|work=Quartz|url=http://qz.com/441905/men-are-both-dumber-and-smarter-than-women/|url-status=live|access-date=February 15, 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210113083841/http://qz.com/|archive-date=January 13, 2021}}</ref> Paradoxically, this is at odds with the tendency of girls to have higher classroom scores than boys,<ref name="Ceci-2018" /> proving that they do not lack scholastic aptitude. However, boys tend to do better on standardized test questions not directly related to the curriculum.<ref name="Halpern-2007" />

On the other hand, Wai and his colleagues found that both sexes in the top 5% appeared to be more or less at parity when it comes to the verbal section of the SAT, though girls have gained a slight but noticeable edge over boys starting in the mid-1980s.<ref name="Wai-2012" /> Psychologist David Lubinski, who conducted longitudinal studies of seventh graders who scored exceptionally high on the SAT, found a similar result. Girls generally had better verbal reasoning skills and boys mathematical skills.<ref name="Schrager-2015" /> This reflects other research on the cognitive ability of the general population rather than just the 95th percentile and up.<ref name="Wai-2012" /><ref name="Schrager-2015" />

Although aspects of testing such as stereotype threat are a concern, research on the predictive validity of the SAT has demonstrated that it tends to be a more accurate predictor of female GPA in university as compared to male GPA.<ref>{{cite web|date=2013|title=Validity of the SAT for Predicting First-Year Grades: 2013 SAT Validity Sample|url=https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED582459.pdf|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190411214918/https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED582459.pdf|archive-date=April 11, 2019|access-date=May 14, 2019|website=files.eric.ed.gov}}</ref>

==== In strategizing ====
[[File:SAT Grid-in mathematics question.png|thumb|SAT mathematics questions can be answered intuitively or algorithmically.]]
Mathematical problems on the SAT can be broadly categorized into two groups: conventional and unconventional. Conventional problems can be handled routinely via familiar formulas or algorithms while unconventional ones require more creative thought in order to make unusual use of familiar methods of solution or to come up with the specific insights necessary for solving those problems. In 2000, ETS psychometrician Ann M. Gallagher and her colleagues analyzed how students handled disclosed SAT mathematics questions in self-reports. They found that for both sexes, the most favored approach was to use formulas or algorithms learned in class. When that failed, however, males were more likely than females to identify the suitable methods of solution. Previous research suggested that males were more likely to explore unusual paths to solution whereas females tended to stick to what they had learned in class and that females were more likely to identify the appropriate approaches if such required nothing more than mastery of classroom materials.<ref name="Gallagher-2000">{{Cite journal|last1=Gallagher|first1=Ann M.|last2=De Lisi|first2=Richard|last3=Holst|first3=Patricia C.|last4=McGillicuddy-De Lisi|first4=Ann V.|last5=Morely|first5=Mary|last6=Cahalan|first6=Cara|date=2000|title=Gender Differences in Advanced Mathematical Problem Solving|journal=Journal of Experimental Child Psychology|publisher=Academic Press|volume=75|issue=3|pages=165–190|doi=10.1006/jecp.1999.2532|pmid=10666324|citeseerx=10.1.1.536.2454|s2cid=27933911 }}</ref>

==== In confidence ====
Older versions of the SAT did ask students how confident they were in their mathematical aptitude and verbal reasoning ability, specifically, whether or not they believed they were in the top 10%. Devin G. Pope analyzed data of over four million test takers from the late 1990s to the early 2000s and found that high scorers were more likely to be confident they were in the top 10%, with the top scorers reporting the highest levels of confidence. But there were some noticeable gaps between the sexes. Men tended to be much more confident in their mathematical aptitude than women. For example, among those who scored 700 on the mathematics section, 67% of men answered they believed they were in the top 10% whereas only 56% of women did the same. Women, on the other hand, were slightly more confident in their verbal reasoning ability than men.<ref>{{Cite news|last=Pope|first=Devin G.|date=August 8, 2017|title=Women who are elite mathematicians are less likely than men to believe they're elite mathematicians|newspaper=The Washington Post|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/08/08/women-who-are-elite-mathematicians-are-less-likely-than-men-to-believe-theyre-elite-mathematicians/|url-status=live|access-date=February 16, 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210216173553/https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/08/08/women-who-are-elite-mathematicians-are-less-likely-than-men-to-believe-theyre-elite-mathematicians/|archive-date=February 16, 2021}}</ref>

==== In glucose metabolism ====
Cognitive neuroscientists [[Richard J. Haier|Richard Haier]] and [[Camilla Persson Benbow]] employed positron emission tomography ([[Positron emission tomography|PET]]) scans to investigate the rate of [[glucose metabolism]] among students who have taken the SAT. They found that among men, those with higher SAT mathematics scores exhibited higher rates of glucose metabolism in the [[temporal lobe]]s than those with lower scores, contradicting the brain-efficiency hypothesis. This trend, however, was not found among women, for whom the researchers could not find any cortical regions associated with mathematical reasoning. Both sexes scored the same on average in their sample and had the same rates of cortical glucose metabolism overall. According to Haier and Benbow, this is evidence for the structural differences of the brain between the sexes.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Haier|first1=Richard|last2=Benbow|first2=Camilla Persson|date=1995|title=Sex differences and lateralization in temporal lobe glucose metabolism during mathematical reasoning|url=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/87565649509540629|journal=Developmental Neuropsychology|volume=11|issue=4|pages=405–414|doi=10.1080/87565649509540629|via=|access-date=January 30, 2021|archive-date=May 25, 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210525174125/https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/87565649509540629|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="Haier-2018">{{Cite book|last=Haier|first=Richard|url=http://www.cambridge.org/9781316629642|title=The Nature of Human Intelligence|publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=2018|isbn=978-1-107-17657-7|editor-last=Sternberg|editor-first=Robert|location=|pages=|chapter=Chapter 11: A View from the Brain|access-date=January 30, 2021|archive-date=August 21, 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230821181135/https://www.cambridge.org/us/universitypress/subjects/psychology/cognition/nature-human-intelligence?format=PB&isbn=9781316629642|url-status=live}}</ref>