Examining Potential Sources of Gender Differences in Writing: The Role of Handwriting Fluency and Self-Efficacy Beliefs

Written Communication Oct 2018

Examining Potential Sources of Gender Differences in Writing: The Role of Handwriting Fluency and Self-Efficacy Beliefs

Carolina Cordeiro Universidade do Porto ; São Luís Castro Universidade do Porto ; Teresa Limpo Universidade do Porto

Abstract

A growing body of scholarship in the field of writing research from a cognitive perspective suggests that girls tend to outperform boys in particular writing tasks. Still, our understanding about gender differences continues to evolve. The present study specifically focused on gender differences in writing between students from Grade 4 to Grade 9. We examined differences in handwriting and self-efficacy, as well as in three measures of written composition across two genres (viz., spelling, text length, and text quality in stories and opinion essays). Moreover, we tested whether there were differences in written composition above and beyond handwriting and self-efficacy. Findings suggest that girls consistently outperformed boys in handwriting, self-efficacy, spelling, text length, and text quality. These effects were moderated by neither students’ grade nor text genre. In addition, after accounting for handwriting and self-efficacy, females still performed better than males in the three measures of written composition. Overall, findings confirmed the gender difference typically found in writing and indicated that potential explanatory variables for it may be handwriting and self-efficacy.

Journal: Written Communication
Published: 2018-10-01
DOI: 10.1177/0741088318788843
Open Access: Closed
Topics: multimodality multilingual writers

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (4)

Malpique et al. (2026)

The Contributions of Student-Level and Classroom-Level Factors for Australian G…

Written Communication
Concha et al. (2025)

Attitudes and Self-Efficacy Beliefs About Writing in Costa Rican Students

Written Communication
Malpique et al. (2024)

The effects of automaticity in paper and keyboard-based text composing: An expl…

Computers and Composition
Rasteiro et al. (2023)

Examining Longitudinal and Concurrent Links Between Writing Motivation and Writ…

Written Communication

Cites in this index (0)

No references match articles in this index.

Also cites 40 works outside this index ↓

10.1037/0022-0663.85.3.478

↗
10.1080/00220671.1990.10885955

↗
10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.08.006

↗
10.1080/09500782.2010.502968

↗
10.1016/0022-4405(92)90004-O

↗
10.1080/00207599408248175

↗
10.17239/jowr-2012.03.03.5

↗
10.1016/j.intell.2005.12.001

↗
10.1080/00461520.2018.1481406

↗
10.1037/0022-0663.89.1.170

↗
10.1037/a0029185

↗
10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.445

↗
10.1007/BF01761831

↗
10.1080/00220679809597574

↗
10.1207/S15326942DN1603_27

↗
10.1080/0305569950210107

↗
10.1037/0003-066X.60.6.581

↗
10.1080/02796015.2005.12086273

↗
10.17239/jowr-2012.03.03.2

↗
10.2307/20466646

↗
10.1016/j.intell.2011.06.008

↗
10.1037/a0037210

↗
10.2466/pr0.1993.73.2.587

↗
10.1080/13803611.2015.1010545

↗
10.1037/a0031391

↗
10.17239/jowr-2017.09.02.01

↗
10.1016/j.lindif.2016.11.004

↗
10.1037/a0014240

↗
10.1016/j.jsp.2006.04.004

↗
10.1007/s11145-007-9067-9

↗
10.1080/10573560390143085

↗
10.1037//0022-0663.91.1.50

↗
10.1006/ceps.1998.0995

↗
10.1006/ceps.2000.1069

↗
10.2307/358197

↗
10.17239/jowr-2012.03.03.1

↗
10.1080/00221325.2015.1036833

↗
10.1002/pits.21827

↗
10.1038/373607a0

↗
10.1080/17405620500371455

↗

CrossRef global citation count: 37 View in citation network →