A Case Study in catalonia-RUIZ MALLEN

Science Communication
http://scx.sagepub.com/
Scientists Seen by Children: A Case Study in Catalonia, Spain

Isabel Ruiz-Mallén and Maria Teresa Escalas
Science Communication 2012 34: 520 originally published online 22 March 2012
DOI: 10.1177/1075547011429199
The online version of this article can be found at:

http://scx.sagepub.com/content/34/4/520
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
Additional services and information for Science Communication can be found at:
Email Alerts: http://scx.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts
Subscriptions: http://scx.sagepub.com/subscriptions
Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Citations: http://scx.sagepub.com/content/34/4/520.refs.html
>> Version of Record - Jul 8, 2012
OnlineFirst Version of Record - Mar 22, 2012
What is This?
Downloaded from scx.sagepub.com at UQ Library on November 2, 2014

429199
iz-Mallén and EscalasScience Communication
© 2012 SAGE Publications
Reprints and permission:

SCX34410.1177/1075547011429199Ru
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Science Communication
Scientists Seen 34(4) 520–545

© 2012 SAGE Publications
Reprints and permission:
by Children: A sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1075547011429199
Case Study in http://scx.sagepub.com
Catalonia, Spain
Isabel Ruiz-Mallén1 and Maria Teresa Escalas2
Abstract
Evidence shows that people in Western societies often have a stereotypical
image of science and scientists, but studies have mainly focused on English-
speaking countries. This article assesses children’s and adolescents’ percep-
tions of scientists in Catalonia, Spain. An analysis of the perceived image of
scientists was conducted using 236 drawings. Findings suggest that Catalan
children perceive scientists as stereotypical and that this image is dominant
among boys older than 12 years. To reduce the gap between children’s percep-
tions and scientists’ reality, more efforts must be addressed from science
communication research and science education institutions.
Keywords
DAST, public perception of science, science dissemination, science in society,
Spain
Introduction
Half a century has passed since Mead and Metraux (1957) published their
research on high school students’ images of science and scientists. This study
was the first of an extended and distinguished line of research showing that
1
Institut de Ciència i Tecnologia Ambientals, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain
2
Observatori de la Difusió de la Ciència, Departament de Didàctica de les Matemàtiques i de
les Ciències Experimentals, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain
Corresponding Author:
Isabel Ruiz-Mallén, Institut de Ciència i Tecnologia Ambientals, Edifici C, Campus de la
Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, 08193 Bellaterra, Barcelona, Spain
Email: isabel.ruiz@uab.cat

Ruiz-Mallén and Escalas 521
people—most of them students—think that science and technology are

responsible and necessary for progress, but they usually have a negative,
stereotypical image of scientists. This image increases with their age and is
more associated with being a boy than being a girl (Beardsley & O’Dowd,
1961; Chambers, 1983; Mead & Metraux, 1957). However, much debate and
uncertainty still exists on the nature of factors conditioning stereotypical
images of scientists. For example, it is not clear how age or grade level influ-
ences the formation of those perceptions (Finson, 2002). Furthermore,
although a considerable amount of research on children’s perception of sci-
ence and scientists has recently been conducted in North America (Fralick,
Kearn, Thompson, & Lyons, 2009; Steinke et al., 2007), Australia (Schibeci
& Sorensen, 1983), and several European countries (Archer et al., 2010;
Buldu, 2006; Newton & Newton, 1998), there is pending work to do in other
Western countries. In Spain, for instance, we cannot find any published study
on this topic in internationally peer-reviewed journals. We address this topic
of research to generate new knowledge on the association between students’
gender, age, and place of living and their level of stereotypical perception of
scientists based on a case study in Spain. We use data gathered from draw-
ings of students aged 6 to 17 years from urban and rural settings in Catalonia,
a region located in northeast Spain and nationally recognized by its leader-
ship in the production of science- and technology-oriented development
projects and policies (Keating, 2001).
According to Piaget (1969), there is a positive association between chil-
dren’s cognitive development and their drawing development. Researchers
have argued that the ways in which children depict a topic provide insight
into their feelings and thoughts about that topic (Crook, 1985; Thomas &
Silk, 1990). Therefore, children’s drawings of scientists might reflect their
perceptions and attitudes toward scientists and science. In this sense, drawing
is a potential tool for uncovering some stereotypes that play a relevant role in
children’s attitudes toward science (Rodari, 2007).
According to Hilton and Von Hippel (1996), stereotypes are beliefs about
the characteristics, attributes, and behaviors of members of certain groups
(i.e., scientists). Prior experience and information on those groups play a dra-
matic role in the assimilation and maintenance of stereotypes because prim-
ing determines how information is interpreted and saved for later use. In the
case of the stereotypical images of scientists, children are strongly influenced
by the images they see at home, at school, in comics, and particularly on
television programs and films (Hughes, 2001; Long, Boiarsky, & Thayer,
2001; National Science Board, 2002; Steinke et al., 2007). It seems that mass

522 Science Communication 34(4)
media’s and adults’ understanding of science (i.e., teachers, parents) might

promote the prevalence of children’s negative stereotypical image of
scientists.
In Catalonia, a previous survey on public understanding of science
(Ribas & Caceres, 1997) showed that the population’s knowledge and
interest in science increased between 1989 and 1995. Results suggested
that this increase might be associated with the people’s higher levels of
schooling and also with other sociodemographic features such as gender
and patterns of media use. The Spanish national survey in 2008 (Fundación
Española de Ciencia y Tecnología, 2008) supported those results because
Catalonia was found to be the region of Spain in which people showed the
highest interest in science and technology. However, one third of the inter-
viewees responded that they were not interested in science mainly because
they did not understand it, and 35% of them perceived science as an unat-
tractive career option for young people. At the European level, results
from the Eurobarometer in 2005, a survey of approximately 1,000 people
from 32 European countries, showed that Europeans perceived themselves
as moderately well informed on science issues but slightly less interested
in science than they were a decade ago (Claessens, 2005). Moreover, in
2010 the public had less clear insight into the efficiency of scientists’ work
(see European Commission, 2010). This disenchantment with science, as
Sjøberg (2001) argues, may be associated with the lack of mutual under-
standing between scientists and the public, the perceived image of science
as not related to human needs, and the stereotypical and problematic image
of scientists perceived by the public.
Stereotypic thinking may affect children’s perception, judgment, and
behavior toward science, a perception that might prevail during adolescence
and adulthood. Consequently, it is important to detect negative stereotypes to
prevent students’ lack of interest in science, avoidance of science careers, and
loss of vocation. In this study, we analyzed the drawings of scientists made
by Catalan children to find answers to the following research questions:
Research Question 1: What is the image that Catalan children and ado-
lescents have of a scientist and his or her profession?
Research Question 2: How is the image of the scientist being stereo-
typed?
Research Question 3: How do children’s age, gender, and place of liv-
ing (rural vs. urban context) influence their image of the scientist?

Children’s and Adolescents’ Images of Scientists

Research has shown that young people associate scientists with negative ele-
ments that constrain an effective scientific activity; thus, children perceive
scientists as disorganized, distracted, and even crazy (Rodari, 2007). In the
first formal research conducted on this topic, Mead and Metraux (1957)
asked 35,000 U.S. high school students to write an essay about a scientist and
his or her work. They found that the scientist was usually perceived as being
a middle-aged or elderly male, wearing a white coat and glasses, and work-
ing in a laboratory. Later studies have shown that these classical stereotypi-
cal images presented by children of the people who work in science are
pervasive over generations and prevail across developed countries (Chambers,
1983; Fralick et al., 2009; Koren & Bar, 2009; Newton & Newton, 1992;
Rodari, 2007). These images might negatively affect students’ perception of
science and interest in scientific activities, discourage them from attend-
ing science courses (Mead & Metraux, 1957), or affect their educational
achievement. According to education researchers and psychologists (O’Brien,
Kopala, & Martínez-Pons, 1999), students’ perceptions of scientists are
associated with their attitudes toward science and their educational achieve-
ment in the said subject. Furthermore, students who see themselves in a sci-
ence career are more likely to be engaged in an education program to prepare
for that career than their peers (Finson, 2002). For instance, in a study among
2,442 U.S. high school and junior high school students in southern Arizona,
McCorquodale (1984) asked students about their educational and occupa-
tional aspirations, attitudes toward adult roles and school subjects, and their
self-image. She tested the associations among these variables and students’
gender and ethnicity (e.g., Anglo, Mexican, and Mexican American). Her
results suggested that males and Anglos were more interested in science than
females and Mexican Americans because males and Anglos described them-
selves as more self-confident, which is a characteristic they associated with
the image of a scientist. In another study in the United States, Losh, Wilke,
and Pop (2008) asked 206 elementary school students to draw a teacher.
When finished, 108 of them were asked to draw a scientist, then a veterinar-
ian. The remaining 98 children were asked to draw first a veterinarian and
then a scientist. The researchers found that children more often drew teachers
as smiling, whereas scientists were drawn as monsters slightly more often
than teachers or veterinarians were. They suggested that what the students
depicted in their drawings (i.e., unattractive scientists) might be linked to
their early academic or career choices.

In sum, previous research on children’s image of science has shown that

students’ stereotypical images of scientists and science are still prevailing
and are usually affected by children’s gender (Finson, 2001; Losh et al.,
2008; Sumrall, 1995), cultural traits (Finson, 2001; McCorquodale, 1984),
and media influence (Flicker, 2003; Schibeci & Sorensen, 1983; Steinke
et al., 2007; Weingart, Muhl, & Pansegrau, 2003). However, most of the
existing research has been conducted in a reduced number of English-
speaking countries, such as Canada, the United States, Australia, and the
United Kingdom (see exceptions in Buldu, 2006; Koren & Bar, 2009;
Türkmen, 2008). Moreover, findings of previous research among European
nations (Picker & Berry, 2000; Rodari, 2007) have shown the consistency of
children’s stereotypical thinking but suggested that differences in the way
children see scientists exist in several European countries.
This study contributes to a better understanding of the perceptions of
Catalan children and adolescents of science and scientists and the factors
constraining those images. Our research is relevant because (a) this is the first
formal study on students’ image of scientists conducted in Catalonia—also in
Spain; (b) the study sample includes a wide range of ages, from elementary
school to high school students; (c) the level of stereotyping in images drawn
of scientists was measured by using an index that has internal validity; and
(d) potential associations between the children’s stereotypical thinking and
their gender, age, and place of living were tested by using statistical analysis
(i.e., bivariate and multivariate tests).
Drawing Analysis
Because children tend to complete drawings quickly, easily, and in an enjoy-
able manner (Lewis & Greene, 1983), several education studies over the past
60 years have used children’s drawings to assess their perceptions on a vari-
ety of issues, such as environmental education (Barraza, 1999; Dove, Everett,
& Preece, 1999), pediatric nursing (Pelander, Lehtonen, & Leino-Kilpi,
2007), and public understanding of science and scientists (Chambers, 1983;
Finson, Beaver, & Cramond, 1995).
The first cross-sectional study on children’s visual images of scientists
using drawings as a research method was developed by Chambers (1983).
However, other researchers had already analyzed children’s perceptions of
scientists by using written techniques based on essays (Mead & Metraux,
1957), semantic scales (Beardsley & O’Dowd, 1961), and Likert-type scales
(Krajkovich & Smith, 1982). In his study, Chambers (1983) draws on previ-
ous literature (Mead & Metraux, 1957) to identify seven specific attributes or

elements that consistently appeared in students’ drawings of scientists, which

are indicators of the standard image of a scientist: (a) lab coat (usually white),
(b) eyeglasses, (c) facial hair, (d) symbols of research (scientific instruments
and laboratory equipment), (e) symbols of knowledge (books, filing cabi-
nets), (f) technology, and (g) relevant captions such as formulae and the
“eureka” syndrome. He called this method the Draw-A-Scientist Test (DAST)
and tested it with 4,807 Canadian and U.S. children from kindergarten to
Grade 5.
The DAST test has been used in its original form by some researchers
(Rahm & Charbonneau, 1997), but other experts have reviewed and expanded
it to modify its scoring scheme, included alternative standard images, or used
a combination of DAST and surveys (Finson et al., 1995; Fralick et al., 2009;
Losh et al., 2008; Türkmen, 2008). However, evidence confirming the best
methodology for assessing children’s perceptions of scientists through their
drawings could be described as unclear. Nonetheless, the original DAST
needs to be adapted to contemporary society, that is, to include new elements
of scientific activity that have become relevant in the past three decades, such
as those related to safety (Manzoli, Castelfranchi, Gouthier, & Cannata,
2006), and also indicators that have been identified as stereotypical features
in previous research, such as scientists gender and age (Finson et al., 1995).
Method
Methodological Considerations
The hypothesis of this study is that children’s stereotypical image of scien-

tists depends on three main factors related to drawers’ sociodemographic
traits: (a) gender, (b) age, and (c) place of living, differentiating between
urban and rural. Results from previous research on children’s perceptions of
scientists through drawing analyses have shown that students’ gender and
age influence their drawings (Finson, 2001; Losh et al., 2008; Steinke et al.,
2007; Sumrall, 1995). Furthermore, stereotypical images are firmly estab-
lished for students attending secondary school (Chambers, 1983), so the
perception of scientists might be different between them and students younger
than 12 years attending elementary school. But how does children’s place
of living affect their perceptions toward scientists? There is evidence of
minimization of stereotypical images of scientists when children are in con-
tact with real scientists (Smith & Erb, 1986). If so, then one should expect
that children living in towns, where research centers or universities are

mainly placed, might meet more scientists and draw less stereotypical
images of scientists than children living in rural villages who have less
chance of being in contact with scientists.
The hypotheses were tested using information from the stereotypical ele-
ments represented in drawings to generate the outcome variables for analysis.
This study used a coding sheet adapted from stereotypical characteristics of
scientists identified in previous research (Chambers, 1983; Finson et al.,
1995). The coding sheet included a set of variables indicating the four aspects
of the standard image of each drawn scientist: (a) personal traits, (b) elements
of specific knowledge, (c) human and social values, and (d) risk acceptance.
These indicators were used a basis to create a score for measuring the
level of stereotypical images of scientists in drawings (detailed in the
Outcome Variables section). For the analysis, indicators of scientist stereo-
types including the global stereotypical score were used as outcome vari-
ables. The drawers’ sociodemographic data, including their gender, age
(e.g., younger than vs. older than 12 years), and place of living (e.g., rural
vs. urban context), were used as explanatory variables. First, a bivariate
analysis (test of proportion) was used to test possible significant differences
and observe tendencies between each outcome and explanatory variable.
The classical t-test analysis was not used because some distributional
assumptions may not be true for binary or dummy outcome variables
(Jackson, Boliver, & Lessard-Phillips, 2005), such as those found in this
study. Second, ordinary least squares multivariate regressions with robust
standard errors and clustering by the variable for child’s age were used.
Clustering was utilized because students’ understanding of science is related
to their development stages, and students of the same age display similar
drawing skills (Lowenfeld, 1957).
Sample
The drawings of 314 Catalan children aged 6 to 17 years from 64 schools—
including elementary, secondary, and high schools—located in 63 different
towns and villages in Catalonia were collected. Students voluntarily partici-
pated in the drawing contest called “Draw a Scientist” of the European
Science Party, which was celebrated on September 28, 2007. The aim of the
drawing contest was to promote “Science in Society” using information and
communication technologies (see www.recercaenaccio.cat) to implement a
participatory science research action in Catalonia.

Drawing Test
Students’ drawings were analyzed using a modified version of the DAST
method. A brief questionnaire was administered by the teachers, who
explained to the students that they were going to participate in a drawing
contest because of the Science Party celebration and asked the students to
“Draw a picture of a scientist.” The questionnaire included four questions on
the children’s sociodemographic data and a drawing section. Students were
asked to write their name, sex, age, place of residence, and school’s name.
Those who were interested in participating in the contest submitted their
drawing to their respective teachers. Depending on the case, students drew in
the classroom or at their home, but the location where the images were drawn
could not be exactly determined. The drawings were sent to the event orga-
nization committee, who gave them to our research team at the Observatory
of Science Dissemination, Autonomous University of Barcelona. We first
discussed the coding categories and their meaning by taking examples from
the drawings. Then, one of us coded the drawings for the DAST (Figure 1).1
The coder had expertise in drawing content analysis because of her participa-
tion in previous studies on children’s environmental perceptions (Barraza &
Ruiz-Mallén, 2007). Participants did not draw any scientist in 78 of the draw-
ings. Because we were interested in analyzing children’s images of scientists,
our final sample included 236 drawings.
Outcome Variables: Stereotypical Images

of a Scientist as Depicted in Drawings
Personal traits. The following variables referring to the scientist’s personal
traits were generated:
Scientist’s sex: Two variables named SCMAN and SCWOMAN were

created to refer to a scientist represented as a man or woman, respec-
tively. This coding strategy allows us to code data from drawings in
which both men and women scientists were depicted. SCMAN was
coded as 1 if the scientist or scientists represented were men and 0 if
not, and SCWOMAN was coded using the same criterion. Unidenti-
fied gender images also were coded as 0 in both variables.
Scientist’s age: The variable SCAGE was coded as 1 if the scientist
appeared to be a young person (i.e., adolescent or young face, fash-
ionable haircut or clothing, on top form), 2 if she or he appeared to be

Figure 1. An example of coding data from a drawing depicted by a 9-year-old girl
middle-aged (i.e., adult face, grey hair, abdominal fat), and 3 if she or
he seemed to be an old person (i.e., white hair, wrinkles). If one draw-
ing showed different-aged scientists, the most common age-group
depicted was considered. For further analyses, the dummy variable
SELDER also was generated to record the presence of elderly or
middle-aged scientist/s in each drawing (Mead & Metraux, 1957).
Images of unidentified age scientists were coded as missing values.
Scientist’s wear: Three variables were generated referring to the pres-
ence (coded as 1) or not (coded as 0) of the following elements:
WHITECOAT, GLASSES, and DISHEVELLED for the scientist
dressing in a white coat, using lab glasses, and having crazy hair,
respectively.
Elements of scientific knowledge. The following variables were generated to

illustrate the areas and elements of scientific knowledge:

Research area: A variable for each science research activity developed

by the drawn scientist was created. The following seven research
activities were coded using independent variables: biochemistry
or chemistry (BIOCHEM); astronomy or astrophysics (ASTRO-
PHYS); mathematics (MATH); environmental sciences, botany, or
zoology (ENVIRON); medicine (MEDICINE); robotic technology
or informatics engineering (TECHNOL); and arts and humanity
(ARTS&HUM). If one drawing showed more than one scientific
activity, only the variable of the main depicted activity was coded
as 1. The variable MULTIDIS was also generated to capture the mul-
tidisciplinary feature (e.g., two or more depicted science research
activities).
Research tools: Three variables referring to the presence (coded as 1)
or not (coded as 0) of written formulas or numbers (FORMULA),
laboratory tools (LABTOOL), and technologic tools (TECHTOOL)
were created.
Research location: The variable LOCATION was created to refer to
the setting where the scientist was placed in the drawings. It was
coded as 1 if the scientist was indoors (e.g., laboratory, library, and
office) and 0 if she or he was depicted outdoors. Unidentified loca-
tion images were coded as missing values.
Human and social values. We identified the following indicators associated

with the solitary character of the scientist:
Scientist’s personality: Two variables referring to the attitude of

the drawn scientist were created. The variable UNFRIENDLY was
coded as 1 if the scientist was serious or angry and 0 if she or he was
smiling or kind. If one drawing showed scientists having both posi-
tive and negative attitudes, the more depicted attitude was coded as
1. No drawings represented lack of expressions or unidentified atti-
tudes. The variable SOLITARY was coded as 1 if the scientist was
represented alone and 0 if she or he was depicted being with other
scientists or nonscientists in the drawing.
Scientist’s type of work: The variable WORK identified three activi-
ties done by scientists and assessed the level of stereotypical work:
experimenting coded as 1 (i.e., actively testing, discovering), think-
ing coded as 2 (i.e., looking up, light bulb, question mark about the
scientist’s head), and teaching coded as 3 (i.e., writing on a classroom

blackboard, explaining to nonscientist people). It was coded as 0 if

the scientist was doing nothing. In relative terms, a child who drew
a scientist teaching identified more human and social values in
science than a child who drew a scientist or a group of scientists
thinking or experimenting. Education is a social activity and has a
formative effect on the individual, and scientists who are teaching
are able to transmit their knowledge and skills to nonscientists. For
further analyses, a dummy variable named STERWORK also was
created, which was coded as 1 if the scientist was experimenting or
thinking and 0 if she or he was teaching or doing nothing.
Risk acceptance. Factors associated with children’s perception of risk in

doing science also were represented in their drawings:
Scientist’s attitude: The variable CRAZY was coded as 1 if the sci-

entist was depicted as a violent, malefic, or unpleasant person and
coded as 0 if not.
Risk factors: Two variables were created: (1) DANGER, which was
coded as 1 if the drawing showed elements indicating danger (i.e.,
explosions) and coded as 0 if not, and (2) UNSAFETY, which was
coded as 1 if the scientist did not wear safety items (i.e., gloves,
safety glasses, mask) and coded as 0 if she or he did.
Explanatory Variables: Children’s Characteristics

Table 1 shows the distribution of children by gender, age, and place of living.
The following variables that refer to the sociodemographic traits of chil-
dren were created:
CHILDMALE: This variable was coded as 1 if the child was a boy and
0 if she was a girl.
CHILDAGE: This variable was coded as the number corresponding to
the child’s age in full years. We generated a dummy variable called
CHILD12 that recorded children up to 11 years old and those who
were aged 12 or older to test the differences between the perception
of elementary school students and those of secondary school students.
CHILDRURAL: This variable was coded as 1 if the child lived in a rural
village with population less than 100,000 inhabitants and situated far
from a university campus and coded as 0 if the child lived in a town.

Table 1. The Distribution of the Children by Gender, Age, and Place of Living
Girls (N = 132) Boys (N = 104)
Age (Years) Urban Rural Urban Rural Totala
6 2 0 3 3 8
7 5 5 5 4 22
8 2 7 2 3 15
9 5 4 9 3 24
10 8 6 7 6 33
11 9 13 7 1 39
12 8 7 6 4 30
13 2 7 5 0 17
14 1 8 3 0 12
15 0 3 0 0 3
16 0 1 0 0 2
17 0 0 3 0 3
Totala 51 62 57 24
a. Total number of observations is different in age, gender, and place of living because of
missing data.
Scientist Stereotypical Image Score

To create an individual score of the Scientist Stereotypical Image (SSI),
16 indicators were selected from the set of variables referring to the stereo-
typed perceptions of a scientist (Chambers, 1983; Finson et al., 1995). The
variables that describe the opposite idea of the classical image (i.e., SCWOMAN)
were discarded. The selected variables were the following: (1) SCMAN,
(2) SELDER, (3) WHITECOAT, (4) GLASSES, (5) DISHEVELLED,
(6) BIOCHEM, (7) FORMULA, (8) LABTOOL, (9) TECHTOOL,
(10) LOCATION, (11) UNFRIENDLY, (12) SOLITARY, (13) STERWORK,
(14) CRAZY, (15) DANGER, and (16) UNSAFETY. We tested for intercor-
relation among the depicted elements referring to the four aspects of the
standard image of scientists. A series of Pearson pairwise and Cronbach’s
alpha correlations (not shown) showed partial negative or very low (α < .3)
intercorrelation coefficients between drawing indicators coded as FORMULA,
UNFRIENDLY, SOLITARY, and UNSAFETY and drawn elements corre-
sponding to the other indicators. The four low correlated indicators were
excluded, and we quoted Cronbach’s alpha again, obtaining α > .7 for each
indicator and α = .8 (coefficient = .755) for the global correlation, suggesting

that an index with such variables had internal validity. In our last step, we
added the depicted elements of the 12 positively correlated indicators. The
SSI scores were based on 159 drawings because several indicators could not
be identified in some drawings. For the analysis, the score of SSI was nor-
malized by transforming it into a 0 to 100 score.
Results
Descriptive Analysis
The definition and summary statistics of the variables used for the drawing
content analysis are included in Table 2.
In total, 44% of the students were boys, and almost half of the sample
(47%) was living in rural villages in Catalonia. The ages of 28 children were
not obtained. The average age of the other 208 children was 10.45 years
(SD = 2.37). Approximately 32% of them were older than 12 years.
The children drew more male than female scientists and depicted at least
one male scientist in 72% of the drawings, whereas female scientists were
drawn in only 26%; scientists with undetermined gender were drawn in the
other 2% of the cases. The majority of the children represented scientists as
young people (66% of the drawings). The depicted scientists wore white
coats and used glasses in 59% and 46% of drawings, respectively, but were
disheveled in only 21% of cases.
Scientists were mainly represented by children as biochemical scientists
(62%) and as astrophysics researchers in a lesser percentage (8%). Scientists
working on technology, mathematics, and medicine were drawn in approxi-
mately 3% of cases, whereas environmental scientists and arts and humani-
ties experts were represented in less than 1%. Only 18% of the drawn
scientists worked in two or more research areas. Accordingly, in 62% of the
drawings, the depicted scientific symbols and instruments were laboratory
tools, such as Erlenmeyer flasks and test tubes, followed by telescopes and
other technological research tools (44%) and numbers and formulas (13%).
Most scientists were depicted indoors (82%), mainly in laboratories.
In general, the scientists were drawn by Catalan children as friendly; only
a third of the children (34%) depicted them as serious or angry people. Almost
all the scientists were represented alone (95%), experimenting or doing noth-
ing (47% and 42%, respectively). Only 5% of the scientists were teaching.
About 16% of the cases also showed crazy scientists, and in 11% of drawings,
danger elements, mainly explosions, were depicted. Nonsafety elements, such
as safety glasses, were depicted in 97% of the drawings (SD = 0.17).

Table 2. Definition and Summary Statistics of the Variables Used in the Analysis
No. of
Variable Definition Observations Mean
Dependent
variables
SCMAN Scientist drawn is male (%) 236 72.45
SCWOMAN Scientist drawn is female (%) 236 25.85
SCAGE Group age of scientists drawn: 1 = 203 1.47
young, 2 = middle, 3 = old (raw)
SELDER Scientist is elder or middle-aged (%) 203 46.6
WHITECOAT Scientist wears white coat (%) 236 58.47
GLASSES Scientist uses lab glasses (%) 236 46.61
DISHEVELLED Scientist has disheveled crazy hair (%) 236 20.76
BIOCHEM Research activity is biochemistry (%) 236 62.28
ASTROPHYS Research activity is astrophysics (%) 236 8.05
MATH Research activity is mathematics (%) 236 3.39
ENVIRON Research activity is environmental 236 0.84
science (%)
MEDICINE Research activity is medicine (%) 236 3.38
TECHNOL Research activity is technology (%) 236 3.81
ARTS&HUMAN Research activity is arts and 236 0.84
humanities (%)
MULTDIS More than one research activity 236 18.64
drawn (%)
FORMULA Numbers and formulas represented 236 13.55
(%)
LABTOOL Lab tools represented (%) 236 62.28
TECHTOOL Technology tools represented (%) 236 44.92
LOCATION Research setting is indoors (%) 182 82.41
UNFRIENDLY Serious or angry scientist drawn (%) 236 34.74
SOLITARY Scientist is alone (%) 236 95.33
WORK Scientist’s work: 0 = nothing, 1 = 236 0.73
experimenting, 2 = thinking, 3 =
teaching (raw)
STERWORK Stereotyped scientist’s work: 236 52.11
experimenting or thinking (%)
CRAZY Scientist is crazy (%) 236 16.10
DANGER Elements of danger are drawn (%) 236 11.44
UNSAFETY Safety tools are not drawn (%) 236 97.03
SSI Scientist Stereotypical Image score (%) 159 51.67
(continued)

Table 2. (continued)
No. of
Variable Definition Observations Mean
Explanatory
variables
CHILDMALE Child gender (boy = 1; %) 236 44.06
CHILDAGE Child age (years) 208 10.45
CHILD12 Child aged up to 11 = 0; aged 12 or 208 0.32
older than 12 = 1
CHILDRURAL Child is living in a rural area (%) 204 47.06
Overall, each child depicted an average of 6 of the 12 stereotypical indica-

tors of scientists included in the SSI score. Sixty-six children drew less than
6 indicators whereas 93 of them depicted more than 6. Although representa-
tions of stereotypical images prevailed, several children drew nonstandard
images of scientists (Figure 2).
Bivariate and Multivariate Analysis

Table 3 shows the results of a series of two-tailed pr test of the 17 binary
outcome variables and each explanatory variable.
Significant differences in depicted stereotyped images of scientists among
boys and girls, as well as among children aged 12 years and younger, were
found. For example, 92% of the boys and 56% of the girls depicted male
scientists (p < .001), but only 7.6% of the boys and 40% of the girls depicted
at least one female scientist (p < .001). The boys also drew more unfriendly,
crazy, and mad scientists with disheveled hair than the girls did (p < .01), but
the girls depicted more biochemistry experts using technological tools than
the boys did (p < .1). Children older than 12 years drew more scientists using
a white coat, glasses, and disheveled hair than younger children (p < .01).
Children aged up to 12 years also depicted more unfriendly, crazy (p < .05),
and solitary (p < .1) scientists working in biochemistry (p < .01) and using
laboratory tools and formulas (p < .1) than younger children. Children living
in towns and villages only differed in drawing several stereotypical elements.
Rural children depicted more crazy and mad scientists (p < .05), wearing
glasses (p < .1), experimenting (p < .01) in biochemistry, and using labora-
tory tools than their urban peers, but urban students drew more scientists
working indoors than rural children (p < .1).

Figure 2. Nonstandard images of scientists drawn by a 7-year-old girl (left) and a

12-year-old boy (right)
Table 4 shows results from ordinary least squares regressions using the
proxy for the children’s stereotypical image of scientist (SSI) as the outcome
variable. Similar results were found after performing the regression clus-
tering by CHILDAGE in column (a), then without clustering in column
(b). Results showed that male students had 1.5 points higher SSI score than
their female peers (p < .01). Children older than 12 years had almost 1 point
higher SSI score than those younger than 12 years (p = .09 and p = .04 with
and without clustering, respectively). The average SSI score was 59% for
older students, whereas it was 50% for younger students. Rural children were
found to have 1 point higher SSI score than their urban peers, but contrary to
our expectations, the association was not statistically significant.
Discussion
Results from the drawing analysis show that, in general, Catalan children
still perceive the classic stereotype of a scientist. Most of them drew a mid-
dle-aged or an old man wearing glasses and white coat and working as a
chemist in a laboratory. The results also confirm some, but not all, of the
study’s hypotheses. First, there is a strong and positive association between
being a boy and having a stereotypical perception of a scientist. Second, a
student older than 12 years has a more stereotypical image of a scientist than
a child younger than 12 years. Third, the association between the place of

Table 3. Two Tailed Test of Proportion Results of the Drawing Analysis Variables
(%) Against Explanatory Variables
Test of Proportion
Explanatory Mean 1 Mean 0 Mean 1 Mean 0
Variable (SD) (SD) p (SD) (SD) p
Outcome Variables: Drawing Analysis

SCMAN SCWOMAN
CHILDMALE 92.3 (2.6) 56.8 (4.3) .00*** 7.7 (2.6) 40.1 (4.2) .00***
CHILD12 79.1 (4.9) 73.0 (3.7) .17 19.4 (4.8) 25.5 (3.6) .16
CHILDRURAL 75.0 (4.4) 68.5 (4.5) .15 23.9 (4.3) 30.5 (4.4) .14
WHITECOAT GLASSES
CHILDMALE 59.6 (4.8) 57.6 (4.3) .37 46.1 (4.8) 46.9 (4.3) .45
CHILD12 70.1 (5.6) 54.6 (4.2) .01*** 70.1 (5.6) 39.0 (4.1) .00***
CHILDRURAL 59.3 (5.0) 59.2 (4.7) .50 53.1 (5.1) 42.6 (4.7) .06*
SCELDER DISHEVELLED
CHILDMALE 42.3 (5.3) 27.1 (4.1) .01*** 27.8 (4.4) 15.1 (3.1) .01***
CHILD12 40.9 (6.2) 32.5 (4.2) .12 31.3 (5.6) 17.7 (3.2) .01***
CHILDRURAL 40.0 (5.2) 31.8 (4.8) .13 23.9 (4.3) 18.5 (3.7) .17
BIOCHEM FORMULA
CHILDMALE 57.7 (4.8) 65.9 (4.1) .09* 16.3 (3.6) 11.4 (2.7) .13
CHILD12 80.6 (4.8) 58.8 (4.1) .00*** 20.8 (4.9) 12.7 (2.8) .06*
CHILDRURAL 70.8 (4.6) 57.4 (4.7) .02** 15.6 (3.7) 14.8 (3.4) .43
TECHTOOL LOCATION
CHILDMALE 37.5 (4.7) 50.7 (4.3) .02** 84.2 (4.2) 81.1 (3.8) .29
CHILD12 49.2 (6.1) 48.2 (4.2) .44 83.3 (5.3) 84.1 (3.4) .45
CHILDRURAL 50.0 (5.1) 43.5 (4.7) .18 78.9 (4.7) 87.2 (3.8) .08*
LABTOOL UNFRIENDLY
CHILDMALE 61.5 (4.7) 62.8 (4.2) .41 50.9 (4.9) 21.9 (3.6) .00***
CHILD12 73.1 (5.4) 61.7 (4.1) .05** 38.8 (5.9) 26.9 (3.7) .04**
CHILDRURAL 70.8 (4.6) 56.4 (4.7) .02** 33.3 (4.8) 37.0 (4.6) .29
SOLITARY STERWORK
CHILDMALE 93.2 (2.4) 96.9 (1.5) .09* 54.8 (4.8) 50.0 (4.3) .23
CHILD12 98.5 (1.5) 93.6 (2.0) .06* 50.7 (6.1) 56.0 (4.1) .23
CHILDRURAL 95.8 (2.0) 93.5 (2.3) .23 61.4 (4.9) 44.4 (4.7) .00***
CRAZY DANGER
CHILDMALE 25.0 (4.2) 9.1 (2.5) .00*** 19.2 (3.8) 5.3 (1.9) .00***
CHILD12 22.4 (5.1) 12.7 (2.8) .04** 13.4 (4.1) 11.3 (2.6) .33
CHILDRURAL 21.8 (4.2) 12.9 (3.2) .05** 15.6 (3.7) 8.3 (2.6) .05**
UNSAFETY
CHILDMALE 98.1 (1.3) 96.2 (1.6) .20
CHILD12 97.0 (2.1) 96.4 (1.5) .42
CHILDRURAL 96.8 (1.7) 96.3 (1.8) .41
Note: For definition of variables see Table 2.

*p < .10. **p < .05. ***p < .01.

Table 4. Ordinary Least Squares Regressions of Scientist Stereotypical Image Score

Against Explanatory Variables (n = 128)
Outcome Variable: Scientist

Stereotypical Image
Explanatory Variable (a) (b)
CHILDMALE 1.45 (.39)*** 1.45 (.44)***
CHILD12 0.96 (.51)* 0.95 (.46)**
CHILDTOWN 0.13 (.53) 0.12 (.44)
Note: For definition of variables see Table 2. Column (a) is core model clustering by CHILD-
AGE and (b) is core model without clustering.
*p < .10. **p < .05. ***p < .01.
living of a child and his or her classical image of a scientist is not significant.
Our findings are not surprising, as they fit in with previous evidence on
European children stereotypical thinking but provide additional validation
regarding the consistency of the students’ classical perception of science and
scientists across national boundaries.
A Persistent Stereotypical Image of Scientists

The Catalan children were found to share the stereotypical images of a sci-
entist. These results share similarities with those found in previous research
with children from other countries (e.g., see review in Finson, 2002). Why
are stereotypes remaining across time and cultural contexts? Researchers
have argued that the stereotypical representation of science and scientists in
drawings has been related to fictional characters presented in films, cartoons,
comics, and TV series (Schibeci & Sorensen, 1983; Steinke et al., 2007).
Most Catalan drawings showed elements referring to the scientist image
represented in fiction, previously identified by Weingart et al. (2003), such
as the solitary male experimenting indoors, whereas other classic elements,
such as unfriendly, crazy, and dangerous attitudes, were less depicted.
Similar results were found by Chambers (1983) in his pioneering research
and by Rodari (2007) in a more contemporary study. Results from the study
by Chambers (1983) suggested that only 4% of the drawings included signals
of danger or risk in science-oriented activities. Accordingly, Rodari (2007)
found limited but existing representations of the danger of science using
1,102 drawings gathered from six European countries (Czech Republic,
France, Italy, Poland, Portugal, and Romania). Therefore, some degrees of

negative stereotypes related to scientists’ attitudes and values are still found
in the drawings of European children even though governments and parents
have made efforts to prevent children from watching TV and films with
violence content, including those with scientific content. It is possible, then,
that teaching methods on science education are not sufficient to neutralize
the effects of media on the stereotypical perceptions of students, but this
assumption has not been tested in this study. Further research is necessary to
measure and understand the impact of formal and nonformal science educa-
tion on children’s understanding of science by assessing the effects that
schooling, parents, and the media have on the acquisition of children’s knowl-
edge and values about science and scientists.
Stereotypical Images Among Secondary and

High School Boys
Our results suggest that Catalan boys aged 12 to 17 years from both urban
and rural settings tend to draw more stereotyped scientists than their young,
female peers. This finding suggests children’s stereotypical thinking
increases in secondary school and fits in with previous research on children
in early grades (Chambers, 1983). It seems to show that stereotypical images
of scientists appear in elementary school students’ minds and are fully
assimilated by secondary and high school students. Mass media influence
might explain this result. As argued earlier, science stereotypes in the mass
media (i.e., solitary, crazy, and old scientist experimenting in a laboratory)
perpetuate classical images of science that may influence children’s percep-
tions of scientists. Older children have been exposed for more years to mass
media than younger children. Moreover, as Sjøberg argued (2001), the new
role models of young people (i.e., secondary and high school students) cre-
ated by the media include not scientists but football players and pop artists.
Media people’s lives seem more interesting and attractive for young people
than scientists’ lives. Media people also earn more money than a scientist,
and young people know that they will not need scientific knowledge to be
like their idols. Consequently, this social context has an adverse effect on
students’ perceptions of scientists and their concentration in science learning
that might increase with their age.
We found that boys depicted more men (92%) than girls did (56%),
whereas girls were inclined to depict more women (40%) than boys were
(7%). Three possible reasons might explain the gender results of this study.
First, the representation of real scientists in media might have a strong impact
on children’s stereotypical images of scientists and influence on how they

perceive the role of women in science (Flicker, 2003; Steinke et al., 2007).
For instance, Kitzinger, Chimba, Williams, Haran, and Boyce (2008) exam-
ined science contents in U.K. national newspapers and found that female
scientists were less quoted as experts than male scientists. Second, children
used to draw same-sex human figures more than other-sex figures, which
may support a projective interpretation (Losh et al., 2008). However, this is
not completely true when girls are asked to draw a scientist. Third, it has been
reported that female students are less self-confident in science than their male
peers (McCorquodale, 1984). This argument might explain the low percent-
age of female scientists depicted by female students.
Our gender results do not match with those found by Chambers (1983)
almost three decades ago, in which only girls drew women scientists, but are
closer to the findings of the recent research in Europe (Picker & Berry, 2000;
Rodari, 2007). For instance, Picker and Berry (2000) analyzed children’s
images of mathematicians among secondary school students from the United
States, United Kingdom, Finland, Sweden, and Romania and found common
stereotypical images but with gender differences across countries. Their results
showed that 94% and 57% of the girls and boys from the United Kingdom
drew mathematicians as women, whereas in Romania, none of the boys and
only 17% of the girls depicted female figures. In comparison, the Catalan
boys in this study have a masculine image of scientists, whereas the girls
perceive a more egalitarian situation in science. The increased proportion of
represented women in science might suggest that Catalan girls are more self-
confident with respect to science than their peers from other European coun-
tries (i.e., Romania). They are also less influenced by media and more
concerned about their reality than males. In Catalonia, 45% of the postdoc-
toral grants offered by the government in 2005 were obtained by women
researchers (Department of Universities, Research and the Information
Society, 2006). In Spain, 37% of the professors at universities in 2007 were
women (González, 2007), whereas women only represented 25% of the
European scientists in the same year (Rodari, 2007). Although the role of
women in science is less than desirable, this represents a little advantage in
achieving gender equity in our society. However, our results suggest that this
situation is not represented in the boys’ drawings and poorly represented by
the girls.
Both Rural and Urban Children Drew Stereotyped Scientists

To reduce the gap between children’s perceptions and scientists’ reality,
researchers have conducted experiments consisting of visits from women

scientists to classrooms and found that children’s perceptions toward women

in science improved among both boys and girls (e.g., see review in Finson,
2002). With those findings as a basis, we had hypothesized that rural chil-
dren’s images of scientists would be more stereotypical than those of urban
children because urban areas are closer to places where scientists work, such
as universities and research centers. Although the results showed a positive
association between living in a rural context and stereotypical images, the
association was not significant. There are three possible explanations for this
finding. First, the variable used might be biased because the number of years
a child has been living in his or her current place of living was not controlled.
Second the media exposure in both Catalan rural and urban children is simi-
lar. As we have discussed earlier, the strong influence of the media in the
children’s stereotypical thinking might block the positive impact of other
sources of influence (i.e., living in places where children have more chances
of being in contact with scientists). Third, it is possible that living closer to
research centers is not sufficient to change the children’s attitude toward sci-
ence. Researchers interested in this topic are encouraged to conduct further
research to deeply analyze the influence of children’s place of living on their
perceptions and attitudes toward science and test other indicators to assess
the effects of meeting a scientist on children’s perception of science—for
instance, the number of times per month a child interacts with a scientist.
Conclusions
Catalan children still have a stereotypical image of scientists, and this is
dominant among boys older than 12 years. Because negative stereotypes may
affect students’ interest, judgment, and behavior toward science, more efforts
must be addressed to get society and science closer by two main actions.
First, it is needed to conduct a panel study on children’s perceptions to
better explain the factors conditioning scientists’ stereotypical image, such as
those related to formal and nonformal education, living context, and media
influence. European adults’ image of scientists is known by means of the
Eurobarometer. However, there is no systematical tool for assessing European
young people’s perceptions of and attitudes on science and scientists. In this
study, the SSI score is presented as a valid method to assess the level of ste-
reotypical images of scientists in children’s drawings, and other researchers
are encouraged to use it.
Second, more efforts should be addressed to consolidate the links between
school curricula and science research by designing, implementing, and eval-
uating participatory actions in which scientists, teachers, and students are

involved. According to Barman (1996), teachers need to gain insight into the
way their students perceive science in order to be able to make them under-
stand and use science. In Spain, current science dissemination actions based
on this approach are being implemented. For instance, the Observatory of
Science Dissemination is implementing a pilot science dissemination activ-
ity at secondary schools in Barcelona; this activity consists of a workshop
conducted by a young scientist who explains the nature of his or her life and
work and invites students to participate in an activity or experiment based on
his or her research topic. The teachers can examine their pupils’ reactions,
talk to the scientist, and learn about the research topic (see details at www
.odc.cat). By promoting interaction between children and young scientists,
children are expected to increase their trust in science and scientists and
their optimism about science research and develop their interest in science
careers.
Limitations of the Study

Potential biases in our estimations relate to (a) the voluntary nature of stu-
dents’ participation in the drawing content, (b) the instructions to draw the
picture that teachers gave to their students, and (c) the role of omitted vari-
ables. First, only the children invited by their teachers and who wanted to
participate in the drawing content sent a drawing. It is possible that children
who did not send a drawing were those who did not have a stereotyped idea
of a scientist. Second, children were asked to draw a scientist, but we do not
have information about how the teachers asked the question. Both Catalan
and Spanish nouns are either masculine or feminine. It was expected that
teachers asked children to draw a masculine and/or feminine scientist and/or
scientists, but we do not have information to confirm it. Last, our estimations
might be biased by the role of omitted variables. For example, the parents’
job might affect children’s perceptions of science and scientists. Children
whose parents work as scientists might have a clear idea of what a scientist
is. Despite those methodological limitations, our main findings of this work
suggest that the use of the SSI score from children’s drawings to assess ste-
reotyped images of scientists is valid. Our results are comparable with previ-
ous findings of research in Western societies. However, further and more
systematic studies are needed to validate our methodology in other countries.
Acknowledgments
We thank the children who participated in this study for their drawings. We are
grateful to Victoria Reyes-García for her useful comments on this article and David

Segarra for his support in planning the study and looking for references. We also
thank Juanita Zorrilla, Pau Senra, Rosina Malagrida, Mequè Edo, and Jordi Pericot
for their support in this research.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interests with respect to the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the
Fundación Española de Ciencia y Tecnología (CCT005-07-00245) and the Agència de
Gestió d’Ajuts Universitaris i de Recerca, Generalitat de Catalunya (ACDC-2008-15).
Note
1. Since there was only one coder, a limitation of the study, no intercoder reliability
coefficient was calculated.
References
Archer, L., Dewitt, J., Osborne, J., Dillon, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2010). “Doing”
science versus “being a scientist”: Examining 10/11-year-old schoolchildren’s
constructions of science through lens of identity. Science Education, 94, 617-639.
Barman, C. R. (1996). How do students really view science and scientists? Science &
Children, 34, 30-33.
Barraza, L. (1999). Children’s drawings about the environment. Journal of Environ-
mental Education Research, 5, 49-66.
Barraza, L., & Ruiz-Mallén, I. (2007). Biodiversity and Conservation in Nuevo San
Juan: a look through children’s drawings. Morelia, Mexico: Forestry National
Commission, Science and Technology National Commission, National Autono-
mous University of Mexico, Michoacan Government.
Beardsley, D. C., & O’Dowd, D. D. (1961). The college-student image of the scien-
tist. Science, 122, 997-1001.
Buldu, M. (2006). Young children’s perceptions of scientists: A preliminary study.
Educational Research, 48, 121-132.
Chambers, D. W. (1983). Stereotypic images of the scientist: The Draw-a-Scientist
Test. Science Education, 67, 255-265.
Claessens, M. (Ed.). (2005). Double Eurobarometer survey: Citizens, science, and
technology (RTD info, Special Eurobarometer issue, November). Retrieved from
http://ec.europa.eu/research/rtdinfo/pdf/rtdspecial_euro_en.pdf

Crook, C. (1985). Knowledge and appearance. In N. H.Freeman & M. V. Cox (Eds.),

Visual order: The nature and development of pictorial representation (pp. 248-265).
Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Department of Universities, Research and the Information Society. (2006). Annual
report of the Department of Universities, Research and the Information Society
2005. Catalonia, Spain: Author. Retrieved from http://www10.gencat.net/agaur
_web/AppJava/english/recursos/jornades/a_info.jsp?contingut=memoriesanuals
Dove, J. E., Everett, L. A., & Preece, P. F. W. (1999). Exploring a hydrological con-
cept through children’s drawings. International Journal of Science Education,
21, 485-497.
European Commission. (2010). Science and technology (Eurobarometer 73.1, Special
Eurobarometer 340). Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/health/eurobarometers/
index_en.htm
Finson, K. D. (2001). Applicability of the DAST-C to the images of scientists drawn
by students of different racial groups. Journal of Elementary Science Education,
15, 15-26.
Finson, K. D. (2002). Drawing a scientist: What we do and do not after fifty years of
drawings. School Science & Mathematics, 102, 335-346.
Finson, K. D., Beaver, J. B., & Cramond, B. L. (1995). Development and field test
of a checklist for the Draw-a-Scientist-Test. School Science & Mathematics, 95,
195-205.
Flicker, E. (2003). Between brains and breasts-women scientists in fiction film: On
the marginalization and sexualization of scientific competence. Public Under-
standing of Science, 12, 307-318.
Fralick, B., Kearn, J., Thompson, S., & Lyons, J. (2009). How middle schoolers draw
engineers and scientists. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18, 60-73.
Fundacion Espñola de Ciencia y Tecnologia. (2008). IV Survey of Social Perception of
Science. Ministry of Science and Innovation. Retrieved from http://www.fecyt.es/
González, R. (2007). Dona i Ciència [Women and science]. Inaugural lecture of the
academic course 2006-2007 at the University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Hilton, J. L., & Von Hippel, W. (1996). Stereotypes. Annual Review of Psychology,
47, 237-71.
Hughes, G. (2001). Exploring the availability of student scientist identities within
curriculum discourse: An anti-essentialist approach to gender-inclusive science.
Gender and Education, 13, 275-290.
Jackson, M., Boliver, V., & Lessard-Phillips, L. (2005). Applied statistics for social
scientists (Course Worksheets, Week 3). Oxford, England: Department of Poli-
tics and International Relations, University of Oxford. Retrieved from http://www
.politics.ox.ac.uk/teaching/

Keating, M. (2001). Rethinking the region: Culture, institutions and economic develop-
ment in Catalonia and Galicia. European Urban and Regional Studies, 8, 217-234.
Kitzinger, J., Chimba, M., Williams, A., Haran, J., & Boyce, T. (2008). Gender, ste-
reotypes and expertise in the press: How newspapers represent female and male
scientists. Bradford, England: UK Resource Centre for Women in Science, Engi-
neering and Technology/Cardiff University.
Koren, P, & Bar, V. (2009). Pupils’ image of “the scientist” among two communities in
Israel: A comparative study. International Journal of Science Education, 31, 2485-2509.
Krajkovich, J. G., & Smith, J. K. (1982). The development of the Image of Science
and Scientists Scale. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 19, 39-44.
Lewis, D., & Greene, J. (1983). Your child’s drawings . . . Their hidden meaning.
London, England: Hutchinson.
Long, M., Boiarsky, G., & Thayer, G. (2001). Gender and racial counter-stereotypes
in science education television: A content analysis. Public Understanding of Sci-
ence, 10, 255-269.
Losh, S. C., Wilke, R., & Pop, M. (2008). Some methodological issues with “Draw
a Scientist Test” among young children. International Journal of Science Educa-
tion, 30, 773-792.
Lowenfeld, V. (1957). Creative and mental growth. New York, NY: Macmillan.
Manzoli, F., Castelfranchi, Y., Gouthier, D., & Cannata, I. (2006, May). Children’s
perceptions of science and scientists. Paper presented at the 9th International
Conference on Public Communication of Science and Technology (PCST), Seoul,
Republic of Korea.
McCorquodale, P. (1984, August). Self-image, science and math: Does the image of
the “scientist” keep girls and minorities from pursuing science and math? Paper
presented at the 79th Annual Meeting of the American Sociological Association,
San Antonio, TX.
Mead, M., & Metraux, R. (1957). Image of the scientist among high school students:
A pilot study. Science, 126, 384-390.
National Science Board. (2002). Science and engineering indicators 2002 (NSB-02-1).
Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
Newton, D. P., & Newton, L. D. (1992). Young children’s perceptions of science and
the scientist. International Journal of Science Education, 14, 331-348.
Newton, D. P., & Newton, L. D. (1998). Primary children’s conceptions of science
and the scientist: Is the impact of a national curriculum breaking down the stereo-
type? International Journal of Science Education, 20, 1137-1149.
O’Brien, V., Kopala, M., & Martínez-Pons, M. (1999). Mathematics self-efficacy,
ethnic identity, gender, and career interests related to mathematics and science.
Journal of Educational Research, 92, 231-235.

Pelander, T., Lehtonen, K., & Leino-Kilpi, H. (2007). Children in the hospital:
Elements of quality in drawings. International Pediatric Nursing, 22, 333-341.
Piaget, J. (1969). The child’s conception of the world. London, England: Kegan Paul.
Picker, S. H., & Berry, J. S. (2000). Investigating pupils’ images of mathematicians.
Educational Studies in Mathematics, 43, 65-94.
Rahm, J., & Charbonneau, P. (1997). Probing stereotypes through students’ drawings
of science. American Journal of Physics, 65, 774-778.
Ribas, C., & Caceres, J. (1997). Perceptions of science in Catalan society. Public
Understanding of Science, 6, 143-166.
Rodari, P. (2007). Science and scientists in the drawings of European children. Jour-
nal of Science Communication, 6(3), 1-12.
Schibeci, R. A., & Sorensen, I. (1983). Elementary school children’s perceptions of
scientists. School Science and Mathematics, 83, 14-19.
Sjøberg, S. (2001. March). Science and technology in education: Current challenges
and possible solutions. Invited contribution to Meeting of European Ministers of
Education and Research, Uppsala, Sweden.
Smith, W., & Erb, T. (1986). Effect of women science career role models on early
adolescents. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23, 667-676.
Steinke, J., Lapinski, M., Crocker, N., Zietsman-Thomas, A., Williams, Y., Higdon, S.,
& Kuchibhotla, S. (2007). Assessing media influences on middle school-aged chil-
dren’s perceptions of women in science and engineering using the Draw-A-Scientist-
Test (DAST). Science Communication, 29, 35-64.
Sumrall, W. J. (1995). Reasons for the perceived images of scientists by race and
gender of students in Grades 1-7. School Science and Mathematics, 95, 83-90.
Thomas, G., & Silk, A. (1990). An introduction to the psychology of children’s draw-
ings. London, England: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Türkmen, H. (2008). Turkish primary students’ perceptions about scientist and what
factors affecting the image of scientists. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science
& Technology Education, 4, 55-61.
Weingart, P., Muhl, C., & Pansegrau, P. (2003). Of power maniacs and unethical geniuses:
Science and scientists in fiction film. Public Understanding of Science, 12, 279-287.
Bios
Isabel Ruiz-Mallén is a postdoctoral researcher at the Institute of Environmental
Science and Technology in the Autonomous University of Barcelona. Her research
interests lies public understanding and communication of science, environmental edu-
cation, and ethnoecology, in Spain and Latin America..
Maria Teresa Escalas is an emeritus professor at the Science Department of Didactic

Science and Mathematics in the Autonomous University of Barcelona. She is respon-
sible for the Observatory of Science Dissemination. Her experience is in science com-
munication and education, at both formal and informal levels.

A Case Study in catalonia-RUIZ MALLEN

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Case Study in catalonia-RUIZ MALLEN

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Science Communication

Scientists Seen by Children: A Case Study in Catalonia, Spain

The online version of this article can be found at:

Email Alerts: http://scx.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

>> Version of Record - Jul 8, 2012

OnlineFirst Version of Record - Mar 22, 2012

Downloaded from scx.sagepub.com at UQ Library on November 2, 2014

Reprints and permission:

Scientists Seen 34(4) 520­–545

Isabel Ruiz-Mallén1 and Maria Teresa Escalas2

Downloaded from scx.sagepub.com at UQ Library on November 2, 2014

people—most of them students—think that science and technology are

Downloaded from scx.sagepub.com at UQ Library on November 2, 2014

media’s and adults’ understanding of science (i.e., teachers, parents) might

Downloaded from scx.sagepub.com at UQ Library on November 2, 2014

Children’s and Adolescents’ Images of Scientists

Downloaded from scx.sagepub.com at UQ Library on November 2, 2014

In sum, previous research on children’s image of science has shown that

Downloaded from scx.sagepub.com at UQ Library on November 2, 2014

elements that consistently appeared in students’ drawings of scientists, which

The hypothesis of this study is that children’s stereotypical image of scien-

Downloaded from scx.sagepub.com at UQ Library on November 2, 2014

Downloaded from scx.sagepub.com at UQ Library on November 2, 2014

Outcome Variables: Stereotypical Images

Scientist’s sex: Two variables named SCMAN and SCWOMAN were

Downloaded from scx.sagepub.com at UQ Library on November 2, 2014

Figure 1. An example of coding data from a drawing depicted by a 9-year-old girl

Elements of scientific knowledge. The following variables were generated to

Downloaded from scx.sagepub.com at UQ Library on November 2, 2014

Research area: A variable for each science research activity developed

Human and social values. We identified the following indicators associated

Scientist’s personality: Two variables referring to the attitude of

Downloaded from scx.sagepub.com at UQ Library on November 2, 2014

blackboard, explaining to nonscientist people). It was coded as 0 if

Risk acceptance. Factors associated with children’s perception of risk in

Scientist’s attitude: The variable CRAZY was coded as 1 if the sci-

Explanatory Variables: Children’s Characteristics

Downloaded from scx.sagepub.com at UQ Library on November 2, 2014

Scientist Stereotypical Image Score

Downloaded from scx.sagepub.com at UQ Library on November 2, 2014

Downloaded from scx.sagepub.com at UQ Library on November 2, 2014

Downloaded from scx.sagepub.com at UQ Library on November 2, 2014

Overall, each child depicted an average of 6 of the 12 stereotypical indica-

Bivariate and Multivariate Analysis

Downloaded from scx.sagepub.com at UQ Library on November 2, 2014

Figure 2. Nonstandard images of scientists drawn by a 7-year-old girl (left) and a

Downloaded from scx.sagepub.com at UQ Library on November 2, 2014

Outcome Variables: Drawing Analysis

Note: For definition of variables see Table 2.

Downloaded from scx.sagepub.com at UQ Library on November 2, 2014

Table 4. Ordinary Least Squares Regressions of Scientist Stereotypical Image Score

Outcome Variable: Scientist

A Persistent Stereotypical Image of Scientists

Downloaded from scx.sagepub.com at UQ Library on November 2, 2014

Stereotypical Images Among Secondary and

Downloaded from scx.sagepub.com at UQ Library on November 2, 2014

Both Rural and Urban Children Drew Stereotyped Scientists

Downloaded from scx.sagepub.com at UQ Library on November 2, 2014

scientists to classrooms and found that children’s perceptions toward women

Downloaded from scx.sagepub.com at UQ Library on November 2, 2014

Limitations of the Study

Downloaded from scx.sagepub.com at UQ Library on November 2, 2014

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Scientists Seen 34(4) 520–545