Table 1.
Sixty occupations ranked in order of status, people-things orientation, and data-ideas orientation scores.
Figure 1.
Mean percent of women working in 60 occupations as a function of year.
Table 2.
Fixed and random effects of Model 1, which predicted the change in percent of women in an occupation from O*NET-based measures of occupations' people-things orientation, data-ideas orientation, and status.
Figure 2.
Simple slope plots of percent of women in low, average, and high-status occupations in MLM Model 1.
Low-status occupations were defined as one SD below the mean, average-status occupations as at the mean, and high-status occupations as one SD above the mean status level of all occupations. Status was defined in terms of occupations' median income levels.
Figure 3.
Simple slope plots of percent of women in low, average, and high-status occupations in MLM Model 2.
Low-status occupations were defined as one SD below the mean, average-status occupations as at the mean, and high-status occupations as one SD above the mean status level of all occupations. Status was defined in terms of mean student ratings of occupations' income and status levels.
Table 3.
Fixed and random effects of Model 2, which predicted the change in percent of women in an occupation from student ratings of occupations' people-things orientation and status.
Figure 4.
Amount of variance in the percent of women working in occupations accounted for by occupations' status and people-things orientation for each year from 1972 to 2010.