Intersectional Cues in Soft vs. Hard Science Labels

While many studies have examined persistent disparities in STEM versus non-STEM representation across gender and racial groups, less attention has been given to more fine-grained, subjective distinctions within STEM fields – particularly the categorization of "hard" versus "soft" sciences. The present research investigates whether individuals integrate complex, intersectional gender–racial cues when labeling scientific fields as hard or soft sciences, as well as the factors that moderate this process. In a Qualtrics survey, participants rated six field descriptions drawn from either social or natural/physical science domains, each paired with an intersectional exemplar image randomly selected from six gender (male vs. female) and racial (White vs. Black vs. Asian) combinations. After evaluating all field descriptions, participants completed four Semantic Differential Scales assessing their associations between the intersectional groups and perceived brilliance, competence, hard work, and masculinity. Results indicated that participants held intersectional stereotypes linking social groups to traits including brilliance and masculinity. However, these associations did not directly translate into scientific field perceptions. Instead, participants appeared to differentially activate gender and racial cues when labeling a field as a hard versus soft science, and this process was moderated by individual differences in endorsement of brilliance- and masculinity-related beliefs about social groups. Overall, the study demonstrates how social category cues shape perceptions of hard versus soft science labels and illustrates the value of a lens-based intersectional approach to understanding social perception in academic domains.