A recent cross-sectional study by Hübner and Pfost (2024) investigates gender-related and SES-related disparities in academic risk-taking (ART) and their implications for learning success in undergraduate education. Drawing on a sample of 381 German university students, the study addresses four research questions: (1) Are there significant differences in ART levels based on students’ social group affiliation (gender, SES)? (2) Does ART predict students’ learning success? (3) Are there significant indirect effects of social group affiliation on learning success via ART (mediation)? (4) Are there significant differences in the strength of the relationship between ART and learning success depending on students’ social group affiliation (moderation)?
The authors employed structural equation modeling to address these questions. Specifically, ART was assessed across two dimensions—seminar group and peer group—while learning success was measured through students’ subjective evaluations of their own learning achievement in the current seminar. Gender was coded as female, male, or diverse, with the latter category excluded due to its small sample size. SES was dichotomized into high and low groups. Higher education entry qualification (HEEQ) was included as a general control variable, based on students’ self-reported prior academic performance (ranging from 1 = very good to 6 = insufficient).
The findings reveal significant gender differences in ART on both the seminar group dimension (Mmale = 3.53, Mfemale = 3.23, F = 11.83, p = 0.001, d = 0.40) and the peer group dimension (Mmale = 3.27, Mfemale = 3.49, F = 5.58, p = 0.018, d = 0.28). In contrast, no significant differences emerged between high-SES students and low-SES students in either the seminar group dimension (Mlow-SES = 3.26, Mhigh-SES = 3.33, F = 0.74, p = 0.390, d = 0.09) or the peer group dimension (Mlow-SES = 3.39, Mhigh-SES = 3.45, F = 0.51, p = 0.476, d = 0.07). Both the seminar group (β = 0.23, p = 0.004) and peer group (β = 0.21, p = 0.009) dimensions of ART significantly predicted learning success. Regarding mediation effects, the indirect path from gender through the seminar group dimension of ART to learning success was significant (β = -0.04, p = 0.015), whereas the peer group dimension did not function as a mediator. Furthermore, gender (β = 0.10, p = 0.004) and SES (β = 0.10, p = 0.018) significantly moderated the relationship between the peer group dimension of ART and learning success, but no moderation effects were observed for the seminar group dimension.
This study is among the first to confirm gender differences in ART within higher education and to demonstrate the beneficial effects of ART on learning success using inferential statistical methods. By addressing the four research questions, it contributes to a more nuanced understanding of ART and its role in the reproduction of educational inequalities.
Source (Open Access): Hübner, V., & Pfost, M. (2024). Leap, learn, earn: exploring academic risk taking and learning success across gender and socioeconomic groups. Higher Education, 1-19.