Int J of Sci and Math Educ

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9869-4

The Relationship Between Adult Self-Efficacy

and Scientific Competencies: the Moderating
Effect of Gender

Chun-Yen Tsai 1 & Tai-Chu Huang 1

Received: 3 July 2017 / Accepted: 12 November 2017

# Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan 2017

Abstract This study investigated the relationship between adult self-efficacy in science
and scientific competencies of Taiwanese citizens. Probability proportional to size sam-
pling was used to select 1830 participants between the ages of 18 and 70. The research
methods employed was survey research; analysis was conducted using hierarchical
regression analysis. The results indicated that gender and self-efficacy have an explanatory
power for scientific competencies. The predictive power of self-efficacy for scientific
competencies was different for male and female groups. This study proposes several
suggestions regarding science education policies in accordance with the research findings.

Keywords Gender . Scientific competencies . Scientific literacy . Self-efficacy

Introduction

An important goal of science education worldwide is to improve scientific literacy

(Benjamin et al., 2017; Jack, Lin & Yore, 2014; Woods-McConney, Oliver, McConney,
Schibeci & Maor, 2014). The contemporary definition of scientific literacy extends to
the understanding of scientific processes, practices, and activities and the ability to
evaluate scientific products and participate in discussions of science-related matters
(Snow & Dibner, 2016). The investigation of scientific literacy is suggested to extend
from school education into adulthood and lifelong learning (Falk, Storksdieck &
Dierking, 2007; Falk & Needham, 2013; Sarkar & Corrigan, 2014). Traditional

Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-

9869-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

* Chun-Yen Tsai
[email protected]

1
Center for General Education, National Sun Yat-sen University, No. 70, Lianhai Rd., Gushan Dist.,
Kaohsiung City 80424, Taiwan
 C.-Y. Tsai, T.-C. Huang

research on scientific literacy focuses on the individual level. However, the existence of
individuals within society emphasizes the importance of this literacy to issues on the
social level (Chin, Yang & Tuan, 2016; Fang, 2013; Snow & Dibner, 2016).
Scientific literacy refers to important abilities needed by an individual in a demo-
cratic society to participate in decision-making regarding socio-scientific issues in
public affairs (Bauer, Allum & Miller, 2007; Chin et al., 2016; Miller, 2004; Tsai, Li
& Cheng, 2017). Such abilities are also regarded as scientific competencies, which is
defined as Bthe capacities to use scientific knowledge, to identify questions and to draw
evidence-based conclusions in order to understand and help make decisions about the
natural world and the changes made to it through human activity^ (Organisation for
Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD], 2013, p.9). Science and
technology are an integral part of modern life and each person should possess basic
scientific literacy. Such literacy includes understanding of science and technology and
their impact on humankind and the ability to use such knowledge and skills to solve
issues encountered throughout life. Pyo (2016) suggested that adult literacy should be
manifested in various life situations.
Greater attention has recently been paid to affective factors in adult education
(Cross, 2009; Jameson & Fusco, 2014). Adult learners prefer self-directed learning,
which can be promoted by affective factors such as an individual’s intrinsic motivation
(Jameson & Fusco, 2014; Stine-Morrow & Parisi, 2011). Many researchers have
pointed out that affective factors are related to science education and scientific literacy
(Bauer et al., 2007; Lin, Hong, & Huang, 2012; Lin, Lawrenz, Lin & Hong, 2013;
Woods-McConney et al., 2014). Tsai et al. (2017) indicated that adult scientific
competencies can be predicted by affective factors, among which the most important
factor is self-efficacy.
Self-efficacy refers to an individual’s confidence in his or her ability to accomplish a
specific task (Bandura, 1986, 1997; Hardin & Longhurst, 2016; Porras-Hernandez &
Salinas-Amescua, 2012; Stine-Morrow & Parisi, 2011) and to predict the potential
success of his or her own actions. Self-efficacy is important for adults’ lifelong
decision-making (Hammond & Feinstein, 2005; Porras-Hernandez & Salinas-
Amescua, 2012; Zeldin & Pajares, 2000). This judgment of self-confidence influences
an individual’s choice of actions, level of effort, and amount of time allocated. Self-
efficacy also affects an adult’s investment into self-directed learning (Hammond &
Feinstein, 2005; Porras-Hernandez & Salinas-Amescua, 2012; Stine-Morrow & Parisi,
2011; Velayutham, Aldridge & Fraser, 2012). This type of learning process can result in
transformational learning, which refers to adults reflecting on their beliefs and knowl-
edge and exploring new knowledge during the learning process (Fenichel &
Schweingruber, 2010; Sandlin, Wright & Clark, 2013). Reflection during transforma-
tional learning develops self-efficacy that strengthens adults’ motivation to learn
(Hammond & Feinstein, 2005). Theories of motivation suggest that this effect is due
to the greater learning motivation of individuals with higher self-efficacy (Bandura,
1997; Hammond & Feinstein, 2005).
Despite worldwide efforts to reduce the gender gap in education, this gap is still
present in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) (Hardin &
Longhurst, 2016; Legewie & DiPrete, 2014; Wang & Degol, 2017; Xu, 2015). The
results of the recently implemented Programme for International Student Assessment
(PISA) revealed that on average, 15-year-old male students outperform female students
The Relationship Between Adult Self-Efficacy and Scientific...

in terms of scientific self-efficacy and scientific competencies (OECD, 2016). Attention

should be given to research on whether this issue extends to the adult population. This
gap affects students’ choices of science-related careers, as well as the actual numbers of
young female workers entering the labor market (OECD, 2016; Xu, 2015). Wang
(2012) pointed out that, although female students in some countries demonstrate better
academic performance than male students, the proportion of female workers involved
in continuous scientific research and entering the scientific community is small. Higher
academic levels are also associated with smaller proportions of women in science.
The reasons for such gender differences in science can be partially explained by
biological determinism (Tomasi & Volkow, 2011) and social constructivism (Tsui, Xu,
Venator & Wang, 2016; Zeldin, Britner & Pajares, 2008). In biological determinism,
men and women are thought to differ in their innate abilities, which results in their
differences in scientific learning and choices of careers. However, after conducting
literature analysis, Wang (2012) pointed out that this theory lacks empirical support in
current research. Social constructivism suggests that learning is generated from social
situations, through which an individual builds his or her understanding of the external
world (Vygotsky, 1986). Learners reinforce their relationship with family, teachers,
peers, and instructors in such situational contexts (Zeldin et al., 2008). According to
this social constructivism framework, societal expectations (Brotman & Moore, 2008;
Wang, 2012; Zeldin et al., 2008) and stereotypes (Tsui et al., 2016; Kıran & Sungur,
2012) can be developed in traditional patriarchal societies, which influence the scien-
tific self-efficacy and scientific performance of male and female learners.
Scientific competencies refer to the abilities of citizens to apply knowledge and
skills in order to solve problems in daily life and are necessary in a civil society
(OECD, 2013). Taiwan has been participating in the PISA program since 2006 and has
performed the top 13 among participating countries four times. The industrial devel-
opment of Taiwan is oriented toward the export of scientific products which have
become popular in society. Taiwan is a developed society in terms of scientific
achievements as well as science and technology production. However, Taiwan is
traditionally a patriarchal society characterized by different expectations toward men
and women. Social expectations result in the difference in the science-related achieve-
ments of men and women (Tsai, Yang & Chang, 2015) and their different proportions
in science-related careers (Wang, 2012).
Based on the above discussion, scientific competencies may be related to the
development of self-efficacy. Past studies have shown the importance of self-efficacy
to female students’ learning (Kıran & Sungur, 2012; Lin et al., 2013; Velayutham et al.,
2012) or female adults’ learning (Jameson & Fusco, 2014; Tsai et al., 2017; Zeldin
et al., 2008; Zeldin & Pajares, 2000). In particular, some studies have examined the
relationship between self-efficacy and scientific competencies in students (Lin et al.,
2013) and adults (Tsai et al., 2017). However, limited research has been done regarding
the differences in the relationship between self-efficacy and scientific competencies in
male and female adults. As gender differences in these important competencies have
not been considered in related studies, the interaction effect of gender in the relationship
between factors remains unknown. Moreover, few studies have explored the potential
factors that affect adults’ self-efficacy and scientific competencies. Adult groups with
different self-efficacy and scientific competencies have seldom been investigated
regarding their career selection intention and their intention to participate in science
 C.-Y. Tsai, T.-C. Huang

activities. Thus, this study aimed to examine the role of gender difference in the effect
of self-efficacy on scientific competencies in order to provide the insight on its impact
on different groups.
This study was founded upon the aforementioned studies and was conducted using
adult groups to investigate the roles gender and self-efficacy play in relation to civic
scientific literacy. The research questions (RQ) addressed included the following:

1. Did gender have a predictive power for scientific competencies in adults?

2. Did self-efficacy in science have a predictive power for scientific competencies in
adults?
3. Did gender have a moderation effect on the relationship between self-efficacy in
science and scientific competencies in adults?
4. What were the associated factors in the groups with different levels of self-efficacy
and scientific competency?

Methods

Data Collection

The subject population in this study was comprised of Taiwanese citizens between the
ages of 18 and 70. To begin with, cluster analysis was used to divide the townships in
Taiwan into six levels using population density, education level, the percentage of the
population over the age of 65, the percentage of the population between the ages of 15
and 64, the percentage of the population in the manufacturing industry, and the
percentage of population in the service industry. Furthermore, three phases of proba-
bility proportional to size (PPS) sampling were conducted for each level according to
Btownship/district—village—citizen^ and samples were selected in accordance with
population proportion (Table 1). After selecting 60 villages, in order to prevent the
interviews from failing to reach estimated complete number, this study used expansion
sampling in accordance with previous research to select subjects (Tsai, Shien, Jack, Wu,
Chou, Wu, Liu et al., 2012). Finally, the expanding number of subjects was 5558 and

Table 1 The samples for each stratum and phase

Stratum N o . o f Population Proportion Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Expanding Completed

townships/ S a m p l e d Sampled Sampled citizen samples
districts townships/ villages citizen samples
districts

1 25 3,564,655 0.221 6 12 436 1453 370

2 40 4,387,129 0.272 8 16 544 1722 493
3 73 4,480,267 0.277 8 16 558 1395 538
4 47 1,334,942 0.083 2 4 160 317 158
5 98 1,718,978 0.106 4 8 218 510 195
6 75 667,761 0.041 2 4 84 161 76
Total 358 16,153,732 1 30 60 2000 5558 1830
The Relationship Between Adult Self-Efficacy and Scientific...

the final successful sample consisted of 1830 citizens. Within the successful sample,
49.8% were male and 50.2% were female. The percentages of population aged 18–29,
30–39, 40–49, 50–59, and 60–70 were 22.2, 22.6, 20.9, 20.5, and 13.8%, respectively.

Instruments

The assessment developed by Tsai et al. (2017) was used to test adult scientific
competencies. Assessment was comprised of five sections with a total of 11 items. A
full score was 11 points. The situations within Lin’s (2010) assessment framework
revolved around important scientific topics in Taiwan. Scientific competencies com-
prise a set of specific constructs (Lin, 2010; OECD, 2009, 2010), which are as follows:
(1) Identifying scientific issues: this construct includes the recognition of the key
features of a scientific investigation; (2) Explaining phenomena scientifically: this
construct includes the description or interpretation of phenomena and prediction of
changes; (3) Using scientific evidence: this construct includes the accessing of scientific
information and construction of arguments and conclusions based on scientific evi-
dence. (4) Solving problems technically: this construct includes the application of
techniques to solve problems and the formulation of solutions to address problems.
Five science education experts reviewed the questions to achieve expert validity.
There were five contexts spanning four competency indicators; items were either
multiple choice or true or false. In terms of construct validity, Rasch analysis (Rasch,
1960) revealed that the mean-square (MNSQ), which shows the amount of distortion
present in the assessment, indicated that the goodness of fit was between 0.94 and 1.05,
which is within the ideal cutoff range of 0.6–1.4 (Linacre & Wright, 1994). T values,
which show the calculated difference between the presented items and the ideal model,
were between −1.8 and 1.0, which are within the ideal cutoff range of −1.96–1.96.
Separation reliability, which represents the proportion of observed variance considered
to be true, was 1.00, which was above the ideal cutoff of 0.9 (Waugh & Addison,
1998). All of the above indicate acceptable reliability and validity. Estimated difficulty
was between −2.23 and 1.84; lower estimated values indicate the items were easier to
answer. Two example items of the assessment are provided in the Appendix.
Self-efficacy comprises one single construct and is defined as the respondents’
confidence in performing science-related tasks (OECD, 2009). The eight items on the
self-efficacy questionnaire were taken from PISA questionnaires to measure self-
confidence in future science-related topics. This questionnaire was developed for young
adults and also verified for adult cohort in the previous study (Tsai et al., 2017).
Answers were given on a four-point scale (1 = I couldn’t do this, 2 = I would
struggle to do this on my own, 3 = I could do this with a bit of effort, 4 = I could do
this easily); scores ranged between 8 and 32 points. The Cronbach’s alpha of reliability
was 0.87. One example item is shown as follows: How easy do you think it would be
for you to perform the following tasks on your own? Identify the science question
associated with the disposal of garbage.
There were some demographic and associated variables that were utilized for the
instrument. Gender was a dummy variable, with males denoted as 1 and females as 0.
Science course was linked to the question BHow many science courses did you take in
high school?^ A score of 1 was attributed to Bscience course^ if respondents had taken
at least one of the science courses. Science-related job was linked to the question BIs
 C.-Y. Tsai, T.-C. Huang

your current job related to science and technology?^ A score of 1 was attributed to
Bscience-related job^ if respondents answered Byes.^ Internet for science was linked to
the question BWhat sources did you obtain information about science and technology
from in the past year?^ A score of 1 was attributed to BInternet for science^ if
respondents answered that they obtained information from any BInternet device.^
Science center visit was linked to the question BIn the past year, how many times have
you visited the following science centers?^ A score of 1 was attributed to Bscience
center visit^ if respondents answered that they had been to any of the science centers.

Research Processes

A total of 60 villages were sampled and 44 interviewers were trained at a training

workshop. The members of the research team explained the meaning of each test item
to the trainees. Questionnaire records and access rules were also introduced. Inter-
viewers were required to comply with personal data protection requirements. During
the field research activity, the interviewers were divided into three groups according to
geographical area, and each group was supervised by a supervising interviewer. Each
interviewer was responsible for one to three villages. Interviewers followed the names
and addresses on the sample list and conducted on-site interviews. During the inter-
views, the interviewers read each item on the questionnaire aloud to interviewees and
recorded their answers. The interview materials were the items of the instrument
(BInstruments^), including the scientific competency test, self-efficacy questionnaire,
and demographic and associated data. Cue cards were also used to aid interviewees in
understanding longer or more complex questions and answer options. Interviewers
maintained contact with the supervising interviewers throughout the interview process
to relay and discuss any problems encountered during the survey.

Data Analyses

The research team entered the data obtained from field research into SPSS software to
test logical consistency and adjust illogical values. Although PPS sampling ensures
representativeness, unavoidable failures in the interviews in process can skew the
representativeness of successful samples. To minimize any deviation in the represen-
tativeness of the successful sample, this study used post-stratification to make correc-
tions via weighting cases and improve the accuracy of statistical data estimation (Du &
MacEachern, 2008). The two major variables covered in this study, age and gender,
served as the target parameters for post-stratification weighting according to the
proportion of population.
During the analysis of research questions, after the data for the successful sample
was weighted, it was analyzed using hierarchical regression. As hierarchical regression
is a confirmation technique, variable sequence was founded on research theory and
whether independent variables are influenced by other independent variables (Chiu,
2010). This study was formulated in accordance with past literature; as such, the
independent variables included gender and self-efficacy in order to understand their
predictive power on scientific literacy.
Afterward, the participants were divided into four groups (2 × 2) according to the
median scores for self-efficacy and scientific competency. The percentage of associated
The Relationship Between Adult Self-Efficacy and Scientific...

factors was tested using the chi-square test. These four groups were the low self-
efficacy and low scientific competency (LseLsc) group, the high self-efficacy and low
scientific competency (HseLsc) group, the low self-efficacy and high scientific com-
petency (LseHsc) group, and the high self-efficacy and high scientific competency
(HseHsc) group.

Results

This study held scientific competencies as the dependent variable and gender and self-
efficacy as independent variables to investigate the relationship between the indepen-
dent variables and scientific competencies. Prior to analysis of the relationships be-
tween variables, mean values and standard deviations were determined for each
variable (Table 2). Among male citizens, the mean value and standard deviation of
self-efficacy were 20.36 and 4.65, respectively. Among female citizens, the mean value
and standard deviation of self-efficacy were 18.88 and 5.20, respectively. Among male
citizens, the mean value and standard deviation of scientific competencies were 5.61
and 2.05, respectively. Among female citizens, the mean value and standard deviation
of scientific competencies were 5.28 and 2.29, respectively. In order to test the
predictive power of gender and self-efficacy on scientific competencies and the mod-
eration effect of gender in the relationship between self-efficacy and scientific compe-
tencies, gender, self-efficacy, and the interaction effect of gender and self-efficacy were
input into hierarchical regression analysis (Chiu, 2010). Prior to regression analysis, it
was assumed that there was no multicollinearity issue between independent variables.
Tolerance of each hierarchical regression model was greater than .80, which supported
the basic assumption (Chiu, 2010).

The Effect of Gender Factor

Step 1 in Table 3 shows the test for the predictive power of gender on scientific
competencies. The predictive power of gender on scientific competencies reached
significance (F(1, 1828) = 10.924, p < .01), explaining 0.6% of total variance in
scientific competencies (R2 = 0.006); the predictive power was β = 0.077. The results
indicated the predictive power of gender on scientific competencies. Male citizens
demonstrated better scientific competencies than female citizens. Table 2 also shows
that the mean value of scientific competencies among male citizens was 5.61, which
was higher than 5.28 among female citizens.

Table 2 Descriptive statistics of self-efficacy and scientific competencies

Variables Gender n Mean Standard deviation

Self-efficacy Male 911 20.36 4.65

Female 919 18.88 5.20
Scientific competencies Male 911 5.61 2.05
Female 919 5.28 2.29
 C.-Y. Tsai, T.-C. Huang

Table 3 Hierarchical multiple regression analysis for scientific competencies

Step 1 Step 2 Step 3

Variables β t β t β t

Gender 0.077 3.305** 0.021 0.974 0.022 1.026

Self-efficacy 0.377 17.252*** 0.431 14.721***
Gender × self-efficacy −.080 −2.736**
Multiple R 0.077 0.381 0.386
R2 0.006 0.145 0.149
△R2 0.006 0.139 0.004
F 10.924** 155.166*** 106.306***

**p < .01

***p < .001

The Effect of Self-Efficacy

Step 2 in Table 3 shows the test for the predictive power of self-efficacy on scientific
competencies. The predictive power of self-efficacy on scientific competencies reached
significance (F(2, 1827) = 155.166, p < .001). Parameter estimate results also
indicated the significance of self-efficacy in the t test (t = 17.252, p < .001). Self-
efficacy explained 13.9% of the total variance in scientific competencies
(△R2 = 0.139); the predictive power was β = 0.377. The results indicated predictive
power of self-efficacy on scientific competencies. Citizens with higher self-efficacy
demonstrated better scientific competencies. An increase of self-efficacy by 1 standard
deviation can increase scientific competencies by 0.377 standard deviation.

The Moderating Effect of Gender Factor

Step 3 in Table 3 shows the test for the moderating effect of gender on the relationship
between self-efficacy and scientific competencies. The interaction effect of gender and
self-efficacy reached significance (△R2 = 0.004, F(3, 1826) = 106.306, p < .001).
Parameter estimate results also indicated the significance of this interaction effect in the
t test (t = −2.736, p < .01). The results indicated the moderating effect of gender and
self-efficacy on their predictive power on scientific competencies. In this study, gender
was a moderator, meaning it had a moderating effect on the relationship between self-
efficacy and scientific competencies. The predictive power of self-efficacy on scientific
competencies differed between male and female groups.
A simple effect analysis was conducted in order to examine this difference (Table 4).
The results indicated that, depending on gender, self-efficacy had different explanatory
powers on scientific competencies. With regard to female citizens, self-efficacy ex-
plained 18.2% of total variance in scientific competencies (R2 = 0.182, F(1,
909) = 204.446, p < .001) and its predictive power was β = 0.427 (t = 14.298,
p < .001). With regard to male citizens, self-efficacy explained only 9.5% of total
variance in scientific competencies (R2 = 0.095, F(1, 917) = 95.228, p < .001) and
The Relationship Between Adult Self-Efficacy and Scientific...

Table 4 Simple effect analyses for the prediction of self-efficacy on scientific competencies

Gender B β t F R2

Female 0.188 0.427 14.298*** 204.446*** 0.182

Male 0.136 0.308 9.758*** 95.228*** 0.095

***p < .001

its predictive power was β = 0.308 (t = 9.758, p < .001). The results indicated a
greater predictive power of self-efficacy on scientific competencies for female citizens,
whereas its predictive power for male citizens was smaller (Fig. 1). With regard to
female citizens, an increase of self-efficacy by 1 standard deviation would increase
scientific competencies by 0.427 standard deviation. With regard to male citizens, an
increase of self-efficacy by 1 standard deviation would increase scientific competencies
by 0.308 standard deviation.

The Associated Factors with Self-Efficacy and Scientific Competency

The participants were divided into four groups (2 × 2) according to the median scores
for self-efficacy and scientific competency. As shown in Table 5, the female respon-
dents in the LseLsc group accounted for a higher percentage (18.5%) of their respective
gender when compared to the male respondents in the same group (13.2%). On the
contrary, the percentage of female respondents (12.1%) in the HseHsc group was lower
than that of the male respondents in the same group (15.6%).
In order to investigate the associated factors in the groups with different levels of
self-efficacy and scientific competency, the percentages of each groups participating in
the science-related activities are shown in Table 6. The percentage of females who had
taken high school science courses in the LseLsc group (31.6%) was lower than that in
the HseHsc group (74.9%). The percentage of males who had taken high school science
courses in the LseLsc group (43.8%) was also lower than that in the HseHsc group
(81.1%). The percentage of females who had science-related jobs in the LseLsc group
(16.4%) was lower than that in the HseHsc group (41.3%). The percentage of males
who had science-related jobs in the LseLsc group (23.0%) was also lower than that in
the HseHsc group (43.0%). The percentage of females who had used the Internet for

0.90

0.80
(standardized)
competencies

0.70
Scientific

0.60
Female
0.50 Male
0.40

0.30
1 2
Self-efficacy (standardized)
Fig. 1 The relationship between self-efficacy and scientific competencies in the two groups
 C.-Y. Tsai, T.-C. Huang

Table 5 The sample numbers for the four self-efficacy and scientific competency groups

Gender Count LseLsc HseLsc LseHsc HseHsc Total

Female n 339 208 150 222 919

% 18.5% 11.4% 8.2% 12.1% 50.2%
Male n 242 189 194 286 911
% 13.2% 10.3% 10.6% 15.6% 49.8%
Total n 581 397 344 508 1830
% 31.8% 21.7% 18.8% 27.8% 100.0%

LseLsc low self-efficacy and low scientific competency, HseLsc high self-efficacy and low scientific compe-
tency, LseHsc low self-efficacy and high scientific competency, HseHsc high self-efficacy and high scientific
competency

science information in the past 1 year in the LseLsc group (44.0%) was lower than that
in the HseHsc group (84.7%). The percentage of males who had used the Internet to
access scientific information in the past 1 year in the LseLsc group (46.7%) was also
lower than that in the HseHsc group (83.6%). The percentage of females who had
visited science centers in the past 1 year in the LseLsc group (41.6%) was lower than
that in the HseHsc group (70.7%). The percentage of males who had visited science
centers in the past 1 year in the LseLsc group (40.9%) was also lower than that in the
HseHsc group (61.7%). It is noteworthy that the differences in the percentages of the
above associated factors in the female groups were relatively greater according to the
chi-square values.

Discussions

This study found that among adults between the ages of 18 and 70, males had better
scientific competencies than females. The above is the answer to RQ1. The results above

Table 6 The associated factors for the four self-efficacy and scientific competency groups

Associated factors Gender LseLsc (%) HseLsc (%) LseHsc (%) HseHsc (%) Chi-square

Science course Female 31.6 51.7 57.7 74.9 105.92***

Male 43.8 62.6 70.2 81.1 83.20***
Science-related job Female 16.4 20.8 17.5 41.3 35.52***
Male 23.0 33.3 36.7 43.0 19.02***
Internet for science Female 44.0 68.5 78.9 84.7 123.47***
Male 46.7 63.1 72.9 83.6 85.14***
Science center visit Female 41.6 63.5 65.4 70.7 58.48***
Male 40.9 57.7 58.7 61.7 26.16***

LseLsc low self-efficacy and low scientific competency, HseLsc high self-efficacy and low scientific compe-
tency, LseHsc low self-efficacy and high scientific competency, HseHsc high self-efficacy and high scientific
competency
***p < .001
The Relationship Between Adult Self-Efficacy and Scientific...

corresponded with the findings reported by Tsai et al. (2017). The results suggested that
the gender gap between 15-year-old Taiwanese students in terms of their scientific
competencies extends to the adult population. The phenomenon observed in Taiwanese
and Chinese societies for several decades is that men prefer science education and women
prefer non-science education (Tsui et al., 2016; Wang, 2012). This phenomenon is a
possible reason for the current difference between men and women in terms of their
scientific competencies. If there are societal expectations within the learning environment
for men to study science and women to not study science, students are likely to develop
careers according to the societal expectations of their gender (Brotman & Moore, 2008;
Zeldin et al., 2008). Wang (2012) pointed that due to the rapid development of science and
technology and global promotion of gender mainstreaming, more women have been
entering the scientific community as well as science and technology fields, especially in
education. However, more men than women choose science and technology in their final
career development. If women continue to major in non-scientific subjects, this educa-
tional tendency may hinder their future encounters with scientific information in daily life
and affect their scientific competencies.
The results of this study indicated self-efficacy has predictive power on scientific
competencies. Self-efficacy explained 13.9% of total variance in scientific competen-
cies. The above is the answer to RQ2. The results above corresponded with the findings
of the research by Tsai et al. (2017) on adult population. Furthermore, Lin et al. (2013)
utilized the PISA database to examine the factors influencing scientific competencies
and found that self-efficacy could predict students’ scientific competencies. According
to Jameson and Fusco (2014), self-efficacy can help to promote and maintain cognitive
skills in adults, affecting their learning. The adult learning processes take the form of
transformational learning and promote the development of beliefs (Fenichel &
Schweingruber; 2010; Sandlin et al., 2013). Self-efficacy is among these beliefs.
Self-efficacy enhancement may be taken into account in order to help adult learners
succeed in their learning and maintain consistency in learning. Based on the above,
enhancing learners’ self-efficacy in formal or informal learning contexts may be helpful
for improving their scientific competencies.
The results in this study indicated that, depending on gender, self-efficacy had
different explanatory powers on scientific competencies. Self-efficacy had a stronger
predictive power on scientific competencies for female citizens, but a weaker predictive
power for male citizens. The above is the answer to RQ3. These findings provided
additional insight to literature and indicated that self-efficacy may play a different role
in promoting adult scientific competencies for female and male groups. The relation-
ship between self-efficacy and scientific competencies may be bidirectional, and this
mutual relationship is more obvious in female groups. According to Hammond and
Feinstein (2005), the participation of citizens in adult learning can increase their self-
efficacy. On one hand, women with higher self-efficacy become more able to work with
scientific products and information, and their scientific competencies thus improve. On
the other hand, women’s own recognition of their scientific competencies results in the
development of self-efficacy in science and technology.
Social values play an important role in scientific learning (Brotman & Moore, 2008;
Zeldin et al., 2008). Self-efficacy may develop from vicarious experiences of observing the
performance of others, verbal persuasion, and associated types of social influences
(Bandura, 1986). The traditional patriarchal society in Taiwan is not conducive to the
 C.-Y. Tsai, T.-C. Huang

development of self-confidence in women (Tsai et al., 2015; Wang, 2012). Due to long-
term social values that are unfavorable to women, Taiwanese women have developed lower
extent of self-efficacy. The values of this type of society may discourage female citizens
from developing scientific competencies and choosing profession fields related to science
and technology. This study found that the positive effect of improved self-efficacy on
scientific competencies is greater in women than in men. Women developing self-
confidence in science improve their scientific competencies to a greater extent than do men.
The results in this study indicated that the citizens in the LseLsc groups accounted
for a lower proportion of the citizens participating in science-related activities than
those in the HseHsc group, especially with respect to the female groups. These
activities included taking high school science courses, choosing the science-related
jobs, using the Internet for science information, and visiting science centers. The above
is the answer to RQ4. This indicated that a certain number of citizens with high self-
efficacy and scientific competencies might have had the experience of attending science
courses in high school. Similar results for math were also uncovered in previous studies
involving adult learners (Jameson & Fusco, 2014). A certain number of citizens with
high self-efficacy and scientific competencies will choose science-related jobs for their
career. With high self-efficacy and scientific competencies, citizens may tend to use the
Internet to access scientific information and visit science centers when they have leisure
time. The above discussion echoes the opinions of STEM advocates and shows that the
fostering of self-efficacy and scientific competencies in school is necessary and may
have a certain impact on citizens’ participation in science-related activities in their adult
lives, especially with respect to female citizens.
There were several implications for future research. Lin et al. (2013) pointed out the
difficulty behind conducting large-scale adult studies with representative samples. The
PPS sampling and weighting procedures within this study were strictly performed in
order to obtain a representative sample. Although this study adopted a similar research
model proposed by Lin et al. (2013) and Tsai et al. (2017), the results in the current
study found the further finding and revealed that self-efficacy played different roles
between female and male adults. Female adults who have high self-efficacy may get
more opportunities to enhance their scientific competencies. Moreover, this study also
revealed that the self-efficacy and scientific competencies of citizens may be linked to
their science course experience and participation in science-related activities in their
adult lives. These results and procedures can be referenced in future government
policies and research on science education.
This study had certain limitations. The evaluation of scientific competencies was
adopted from Tsai et al. (2017); items were constructed using important scientific issues
in Taiwan. Although this method was based on the PISA test framework, it is possible
that some adults with scientific literacy may not perform well in this type of test
situation (Sjøberg, 2015). Future studies can further test the variables used in this study
within different contexts.

Conclusions

This study examined the relationship between adult self-efficacy in science and scientific
competencies in Taiwan. Scientific competencies are important abilities used by adults to
The Relationship Between Adult Self-Efficacy and Scientific...

investigate and solve issues in daily life (Tsai et al., 2017). This study found that the
scientific competencies of male citizens are better than those of female citizens. Self-
efficacy was found to be an important predictor of scientific competencies. Participants in
this study were divided into male and female groups. The predictive power of self-
efficacy on scientific competencies was greater in female groups than in male groups.
Male and female citizens differed in terms of their scientific competencies, leading
to differences in their career choices. Therefore, it is recommended that educational
instructors should organize educational activities equally suitable for male and female
students and discuss scientific issues from multiple perspectives. Various life issues can
be used to discuss different solutions, which may bring out different viewpoints from
male and female students (McCarthy & Berger, 2008; OECD, 2016). In science inquiry
learning, it should be ensured that male and female students equally observe practical
results and data and explain phenomena and causes; in this way, citizens with scientific
competencies may be nurtured (Weisgram & Bigler, 2005). It is suggested that the
government implement gender mainstreaming and ensure men and women receive
equal treatment in society and public affairs and equal access to social resources.
Results in this study indicated self-efficacy has the predictive power on scientific
competencies in citizens. Positive learning experiences encourage learners to improve
self-efficacy and learning motivation (Hammond & Feinstein, 2005; Jack et al., 2014;
Porras-Hernandez & Salinas-Amescua, 2012). The materials and experience learned
should include from schools and daily life (Pyo, 2016). This indicates the integrated
impact of teachers, parents, and social expectations on the educational cognition and
views of learners. Especially, the developmental process in adults is self-directed learning
(Jameson & Fusco, 2014; Stine-Morrow & Parisi, 2011), in which the learning environ-
ment is composed of life experiences and informal resources (Fenichel & Schweingruber,
2010; Sandlin et al., 2013). If the educational environment and society promote learners’
self-efficacy and motivation for science learning, learners’ scientific competencies may
also improve. Hammond and Feinstein (2005) maintained that low self-efficacy may
cause social exclusion effects on adults and reduce their learning opportunities. When
promoting popular science education, the government may draw from the life experiences
of citizens and employ related scientific products and information. The use of life
experiences which are familiar to adults, considered to be safe, or conducted together
with colleagues may increase adults’ interest and self-confidence and improve their
scientific competencies. The media for this type of informal learning include television,
magazines, and social networks (Hammond & Feinstein, 2005; Sandlin et al., 2013).
The results in this study indicated the moderating effect of gender on the predictive
power of self-efficacy with regard to scientific competencies. The predictive power of
self-efficacy on scientific competencies was stronger in female citizens than in male
citizens. The fact of females’ lower scientific competencies implies the lower self-
efficacy from possible existence of stereotypes in formal and informal scientific
education in terms of educational material, teacher-student interaction, and learning
evaluation (Brotman & Moore, 2008; Kıran & Sungur, 2012; Tsui et al., 2016; Wang &
Degol, 2017). This type of science education environment is not conducive to women’s
self-confidence and affects the development of their scientific competencies. Thus,
solutions to these issues have to be actively researched to allow the proper development
of both male and female learners. Fang (2013) suggested that successful scientists can
be used as examples in learning materials in order to improve scientific literacy.
 C.-Y. Tsai, T.-C. Huang

Weisgram and Bigler (2005) proposed that female scientists should be used as example
in order to increase self-efficacy in female learners. Furthermore, existing use meaning
related to science and technology products does not come from the products’ material
and structure but rather is a result of interpretations provided by designers, sellers, and
users (Wang, 2012). Designers of materials to promote popular science education may
give consideration to female characteristics. Both genders should be considered in the
promotion of educational functions. Such methods may provide women with better
user experiences and improve their self-efficacy and scientific competencies.

Acknowledgments The work reported here was supported by the Ministry of Science and Technology,
Taiwan, under grants NSC 101-2511-S-110-007-MY3. The authors also greatly appreciate the valuable
suggestions of Prof. Huann-shyang Lin and the journal reviewers and editors.

References

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. New York, NY: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: W. H. Freeman.
Bauer, M. W., Allum, N., & Miller, S. (2007). What can we learn from 25 years of PUS survey research?
Liberating and expanding the agenda. Public Understanding of Science, 16(1), 79–95.
Benjamin, T. E., Marks, B., Demetrikopoulos, M. K., Rose, J., Pollard, E., Thomas, A., & Muldrow, L. L. (2017).
Development and validation of scientific literacy scale for college preparedness in STEM with freshmen from
diverse institutions. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(4), 607–623.
Brotman, J. S., & Moore, F. M. (2008). Girls and science: A review of four themes in the science education
literature. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(9), 971–1002.
Chin, C. C., Yang, W. C., & Tuan, H. L. (2016). Argumentation in a socioscientific context and its influence
on fundamental and derived science literacies. International Journal of Science and Mathematics
Education, 14(4), 603–617.
Chiu, H. C. (2010). Quantitative research and statistical analysis in social & behavioral sciences. Taipei,
Taiwan: Wunan Publications.
Cross, S. (2009). Adult teaching and learning: Developing your practice. Maidenhead: McGraw Hill.
Du, J., & MacEachern, S. N. (2008). Judgement post-stratification for designed experiments. Biometrics,
64(2), 345–354.
Falk, J. H., & Needham, M. D. (2013). Factors contributing to adult knowledge of science and technology.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(4), 431–452.
Falk, J. H., Storksdieck, M., & Dierking, L. D. (2007). Investigating public science interest and understanding:
Evidence for the importance of free-choice learning. Public Understanding of Science, 16(4), 455–469.
Fang, Z. (2013). Disciplinary literacy in science: Developing science literacy through trade books. Journal of
Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 57(4), 274–278.
Fenichel, M., & Schweingruber, H. A. (2010). Surrounded by science: Learning science in informal
environments. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Hammond, C., & Feinstein, L. (2005). The effects of adult learning on self-efficacy. London Review of
Education, 3(3), 265–287.
Hardin, E. E., & Longhurst, M. O. (2016). Understanding the gender gap: Social cognitive changes during an
introductory STEM course. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 63(2), 233–239.
Jack, B. M., Lin, H. S., & Yore, L. D. (2014). The synergistic effect of affective factors on student learning
outcomes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51, 1084–1101. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21153.
Jameson, M. M., & Fusco, B. R. (2014). Math anxiety, math self-concept, and math self-efficacy in adult
learners compared to traditional undergraduate students. Adult Education Quarterly, 64, 306–322.
Kıran, D., & Sungur, S. (2012). Middle school students’ science self-efficacy and its sources: Examination of
gender difference. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21(5), 619–630.
Legewie, J., & DiPrete, T. A. (2014). The high school environment and the gender gap in science and
engineering. Sociology of Education, 87(4), 259–280 https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040714547770.
Lin, H. S. (2010). A survey on civic scientific literacy (NSC 98-2511-S-110-005). Kaohsiung City, Taiwan:
Center for General Education, National Sun Yat-sen University.
The Relationship Between Adult Self-Efficacy and Scientific...

Lin, H. S., Hong, Z. R., & Huang, T. C. (2012). The role of emotional factors in building public scientific
literacy and engagement with science. International Journal of Science Education, 34(1), 25–42.
Lin, H. S., Lawrenz, F., Lin, S. F., & Hong, Z. R. (2013). Relationships among affective factors and preferred
engagement in science-related activities. Understanding of Science, 22(8), 941–954.
Linacre, J. M., & Wright, B. D. (1994). Reasonable mean-square fit values. Rasch Measurement Transactions,
8(3), 370.
McCarthy, R. R., & Berger, J. (2008). Moving beyond cultural barriers: Successful strategies of female
technology education teachers. Journal of Technology Education, 19(2), 65–79.
Miller, J. D. (2004). Public understanding of, and attitudes toward, scientific research: What we know and
what we need to know. Public Understanding of Science, 13(3), 273–294.
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (2009). PISA 2006 technical report. Paris, France:
Author.
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (2010). PISA 2009 assessment framework: Key
competencies in reading, mathematics and science. Paris, France: Author.
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (2013). PISA 2015 draft science framework.
Paris: Author.
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (2016). PISA 2015 Results (Volume I). Paris,
France: Author.
Porras-Hernandez, L. H., & Salinas-Amescua, B. (2012). Nonparticipation in adult education from self-
perceptions to alternative explanations. Adult Education Quarterly, 62(4), 311–331.
Pyo, J. (2016). Bridging in-school and out-of-school literacies. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 59(4), 421–430.
Rasch, G. (1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Chicago, IL: The University
of Chicago Press.
Sarkar, M., & Corrigan, D. (2014). Bangladeshi science teachers’ perspectives of scientific literacy and
teaching practices. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12(5), 1117–1141.
Sandlin, J. A., Wright, R. R., & Clark, C. (2013). Reexamining theories of adult learning and adult
development through the lenses of public pedagogy. Adult Education Quarterly, 63(1), 3–23.
Snow, C. E., & Dibner, K. A. (2016). Science literacy: Concepts, contexts, and consequences. Washington,
DC: The National Academies Press.
Sjøberg, S. (2015). PISA and global educational governance: A critique of the project, its uses and
implications. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 11, 111–127.
Stine-Morrow, E. A. L., & Parisi, J. M. (2011). The adult development and cognition and learning. In K.
Rubenson (Ed.), Adult learning and education (pp. 41–46). Saint Louis, MO: Academic Press.
Tsai, C. Y., Li, Y. Y., & Cheng, Y. Y. (2017). The relationships among adult affective factors, engagement in
science, and scientific competencies. Adult Education Quarterly, 67(1), 30–47.
Tsai, C. Y., Shien, P. P., Jack, B. M., Wu, K. C., Chou, C. Y., Wu, Y. Y., Liu, C. J., Chiu, H. L., Hung, J. F.,
Chao, D., & Huang, T. C. (2012). Effects of exposure to pseudoscientific television programs upon
Taiwanese citizens’ pseudoscientific beliefs. International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 2(2),
175–194.
Tsai, L. T., Yang, C. C., & Chang, Y. J. (2015). Gender differences in factors affecting science performance of
eighth grade Taiwan students. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 24(2), 445–456.
Tomasi, D., & Volkow, N. D. (2011). Laterality patterns of brain functional connectivity: Gender effects.
Cerebral Cortex, 22(6), 1455–1462.
Tsui, M., Xu, X., Venator, E., & Wang, Y. (2016). Stereotype threat and gender: Math performance in Chinese
college students. Chinese Sociological Review, 48(4), 297–316.
Velayutham, A. J. M., & Fraser, B. (2012). Gender differences in student motivation and self-regulation in
science learning: A multi-group structural equation modeling analysis. International Journal of Science
and Mathematics Education, 10(6), 1347–1368.
Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and language (translation newly revised and edited by Alex Kozulin).
Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Wang, Y. H. (2012). The dominant sex dominates technology? An interpretation of the gendered-technology
phenomenon. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 20(3), 241–265.
Wang, M.-T., & Degol, J. L. (2017). Gender gap in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics
(STEM): Current knowledge, implications for practice, policy, and future directions. Educational
Psychology Review, 29(1), 119–140.
Waugh, R. F., & Addison, P. A. (1998). A Rasch measurement model analysis of the revised approaches to
studying inventory. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 68, 95–112.
Weisgram, E. S., & Bigler, R. S. (2005). Girls and science careers: The role of altruistic values and attitudes
about scientific tasks. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 27, 326–348.
 C.-Y. Tsai, T.-C. Huang

Woods-McConney, A., Oliver, M. C., McConney, A., Schibeci, R., & Maor, D. (2014). Science engagement
and literacy: A retrospective analysis for students in Canada and Australia. International Journal of
Science Education, 36(10), 1588–1608.
Xu, Y. (2015). Focusing on women in STEM: A longitudinal examination of gender-based earning gap of
college graduates. The Journal of Higher Education, 86(4), 489–523.
Zeldin, A. L., Britner, S. L., & Pajares, F. (2008). A comparative study of the self-efficacy beliefs of successful
men and women in mathematics, science, and technology careers. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 45(9), 1036–1058.
Zeldin, A., & Pajares, F. (2000). Against the odds: Self-efficacy beliefs of women in mathematical, scientific,
and technological careers. American Educational Research Journal, 37(1), 215–246.