GENDER AS A PSYCHOLOGICAL MODERATOR IN ACADEMIC MOTIVATION AND WELL-BEING: A CRITICAL REVIEW

Абстракт

The role of gender in academic motivation and subjective well-being has long occupied a contested place in educational psychology. Influential theoretical frameworks, Gender Schema Theory, Expectancy-Value Theory, Stereotype Threat Theory, and SelfDetermination Theory, have each proposed that gender should meaningfully shape how students think about themselves, what they value academically, and how they experience school. These theories converge on a common prediction: gender differences should be especially pronounced in domains saturated with cultural stereotypes, such as mathematics and science. The empirical landscape, however, paints a more complex picture. A growing body of large-scale, methodologically rigorous research has begun to challenge these theoretical expectations. Meta-analyses and multi-group structural equation models increasingly report no significant gender moderation in the very motivational and well-being processes that classic theories suggest should differ by gender. This divergence between theoretical prediction and empirical finding highlights a critical tension in the literature and suggests that gender's role in academic motivation and well-being may be more conditional than previously assumed. This theoretical review examines the sources of this apparent contradiction and investigates the conditions under which gender serves as a significant moderator of students' academic motivation and well-being, as well as the conditions under which it does not. Drawing on contemporary theories of motivation, the review evaluates three possible explanations for the inconsistent findings. First, domain specificity suggests that gender effects may be concentrated in subjects associated with gender stereotypes. Second, developmental timing proposes that gender-related mechanisms may emerge only during particular stages of adolescence. Third, methodological variation, including publication bias, differences in measurement, sample characteristics, and statistical rigor, may contribute to inconsistent results across studies. The review argues that gender should not be understood as a fixed psychological determinant of motivation or well-being. Rather, its moderating role is likely to be context-dependent and shaped by the interaction of subject matter, developmental stage, and methodological approach. Recognizing these conditions is essential for interpreting gender-related effects accurately and for designing interventions that are developmentally appropriate and theoretically informed. The paper concludes by outlining implications for future research and gender-responsive educational practice, emphasizing the need for more precise and context-sensitive investigations into the circumstances under which gender meaningfully influences students' motivation and well-being.