Children Do Not Endorse a "Male = Brilliance" Stereotype When Reasoning About Novel Occupations

Prior research with children suggests that-by 6 years of age-they endorse a gender-intelligence stereotype, whereby brilliance is associated with men, not women. This stereotype aligns with adult perceptions and may contribute to the underrepresentation of women in fields viewed as requiring intrinsic aptitude (i.e., brilliance). Here, we examined whether gender composition within occupations is used by children as a cue to intelligence. Across two experiments with 6-10-year-olds living in the United States (U.S.) and tested online, we manipulated the gender composition of workers in novel jobs and assessed children's trait inferences and social preferences about those jobs. In Experiment 1, children judged intelligence and niceness for groups with majority-male or majority-female workers. In Experiment 2, we introduced scenarios emphasizing brilliance, perseverance, or physical strength, and assessed children's judgments about the groups using both direct and indirect measures of trait attributions and social preferences. Across both studies, children showed no evidence of associating male-dominated jobs with intelligence. Instead, their judgments reflected in-group gender bias (i.e., preference for the group with their own-gender majority) and domain-specific stereotypes, such as "female = nice" and "male = strong." Within this contemporary U.S. sample, children's stereotypes about intelligence appeared more context-dependent and socially motivated than a simple, global "male = brilliance" association would suggest. We discuss the importance of considering both social affiliation and trait-specific reasoning-as well as cultural and developmental context-when characterizing the emergence of children's gender stereotypes.