What Girls’ Perceptions Reveal About Economics
.
What Girls’ Perceptions Reveal About Economics
by Maria Georgouli Loupi and Danielle Guizzo
.
In a mixed-methods project with Discover Economics and The Health Foundation, Maria Georgouli Loupi, Danielle Guizzo, and Sarah Smith explored how girls perceive economics and what stops them from choosing it as a subject.
The challenge is clear: boys outnumber girls in economics at school and university by two-to-one, even though girls who do study the subject tend to outperform them. Why?
In the first phase of the project, we surveyed Year 10-12 students in UK secondary schools who were not yet studying economics. We asked about their perceptions, beliefs, and likelihood of studying a selection of subjects: economics, psychology, business and maths. The results were striking. Girls ranked psychology first, followed by maths, business, and lastly economics. Boys, on the contrary, preferred maths, then economics, business, and finally psychology. Their understanding of subjects had important gaps: both boys and girls associated inequality and well-being with psychology, not economics, and tended to conflate economics with business, finance, and money. Both groups thought economics was hard, but boys expected it to be easier, more enjoyable, and more social than girls did.
To explore this further, we conducted focus groups with girls aged 14-17 – some of them studying economics for their GCSEs or A-levels, others completely unfamiliar with the subject – to gain a deeper understanding of how they form the perceptions we uncovered in the survey. Our questionnaire explored girls’ likeliness to study a subject and the factors influencing their decisions; what they thought economics was about and what they thought economists should be studying; as well as what they imagined economists were like. Again, we found that girls conflate economics with studying monetary and finance issues, and understand the discipline as being narrower than it is and mostly concerned with mathematics – but, encouragingly, girls who had taken economics were less likely to have these misconceptions.
The topics they thought would be important to study (inequality, economic crises, growth) are the ones they believe are not covered in economics, but in other disciplines such as gender, development, or environmental studies. When asked what economists were like, girls imagined highly intelligent but stubborn men – “obnoxious, know-it-all” types in suits. When reflecting on their future careers, they were concerned with choosing something interesting to them, but more importantly, they wanted a career that would facilitate a way of life away from what they imagined an economist does: a dull 9-5 office job.
These perceptions show a double barrier: misconceptions about what economics covers, and negative stereotypes about who economists are. So how do we fix them?
Our findings from the focus groups lead to four recommendations to address the two core stereotypes found in economics: the misinterpretations of what the subject is and does; and distorted beliefs of the professionals and students of economics.
1) Improving the Communication of What Economics Is, and What Economists Do
A recurring theme that emerged from the study is that students often struggle to define what the subject actually entails. This suggests a need for better communication about what economics is, the range of careers it can lead to, and its broader societal impact. It is crucial for universities and professional associations to work alongside schools to develop clear, engaging resources that present economics in an accessible way. Career talks, internships, accessible written materials, and networking events could further help students see the wide range of opportunities in the field and counter narrow or misleading stereotypes.
2) Addressing Gender Stereotypes in Economics Early at School
Given that many students, especially girls, perceive economists as competitive, “know-it-all” men, it is crucial to challenge these stereotypes early in their schooling journey. Schools and universities should incorporate discussions about economics into their curricula from a more diverse perspective, showcasing a wider range of economists who do not conform to traditional perceptions – based on identity, aesthetics, sector, and task.
Offering guest lectures, exposing students to booklets, and interactive activities featuring female economists and those from diverse backgrounds could help reshape students’ understanding of what an economist looks like. Highlighting the collaborative and socially impactful aspects of economics (such as those dealing with poverty, inequality, charitable activities, care work), rather than just competition and financial success, as well as the economists that work on them, helps attract a broader pool of students.
Universities, academic associations, and professional bodies should actively promote the contributions of female economists through outreach initiatives, networking events, and social media campaigns. Schools could also include more female-authored readings in economics courses and ensure that classroom discussions highlight the diverse perspectives within the discipline.
3) Make Economics More Accessible and Inclusive in the Classroom
The findings suggest that students, particularly those from less advantaged backgrounds, see economics as an abstract and difficult subject. To address this, educators should emphasise the real-world relevance of economics in ways that connect more closely with students’ everyday experiences. More interdisciplinary teaching approaches, integrating economics with social issues, history, or politics, could help demystify the subject. Additionally, making economics education more engaging through hands-on activities, problem-based tasks, and applied research projects rather than abstract concepts could help change students’ perception of the field. Both these changes could also improve student retention.
Students are sometimes hesitant to take economics because they worry they will not “fit in” with their peers, or they see economics students having certain characteristics they do not identify with or dislike. Promoting a more inclusive learning environment where students feel comfortable participating regardless of their background or gender is key. This could include mentoring schemes, peer support networks, and initiatives to encourage collaborative rather than competitive learning. Ensuring that classroom dynamics allow for diverse voices to be heard, rather than stimulating competition or rewarding “know-it-all” attitudes can help counter the perception of economics as an exclusive or intimidating field. However, such inclusive environment should not be incentivised at schools only, but stimulated and maintained in university classrooms, which are one of the main sources of “exclusivity” or unfriendly attitudes according to our sampled participants.
4) Reconsider the Role of Mathematics in Economics for Entry and Retention
Many students expressed concern that economics is overly mathematical, which may discourage those who do not see themselves as strong in mathematics from pursuing the subject. Students who demonstrated interest in economics topics, such as inequality, poverty, the environment, and development, often preferred to study these issues through other social sciences that employ less mathematical methodologies. Whilst mathematics is an important tool in economics, we stress that it should not be framed as a barrier to entry. One way to address this perception is by incorporating more intuitive, applied teaching methods that connect mathematical concepts to real-world economic issues, emphasising how mathematics and statistics are linked to empirical data or tangible policy questions.
Nonetheless, this raises the challenge of avoiding a misleading representation of economics as a largely non-mathematical discipline, which could create further misconceptions for those choosing economics as a degree. In addition of mathematics being as a barrier of entry, it can also negatively affect student retention and satisfaction. Further reconsiderations of how to employ mathematical content intuitively and critically engage with the economics content seems key, as well as exposing students to models and theories through historical and social lenses, which would allow for a more plural and critical education.
Our research indicates that students are drawn to economics out of a desire to understand society. However, many feel alienated from the discipline due to the prominence of mathematical methods or their perception that economics adopts a narrow analytical approach, often disconnected from their interests or pressing social issues.
5) Reconsidering What Type of Economics We Want
Efforts to broaden participation in economics, either by gender, class, ethnicity, or background are necessary but insufficient on their own. Increasing diversity within a discipline does not automatically transform the knowledge it produces. Our findings suggest that girls’ scepticism is not only about who economists are, but also about what economics appears to value: abstraction over lived experience, technical ability over contextual understanding, and individual optimisation over social relations and structural change.
Attempts to diversify the field risk becoming superficial if economics continues to present itself as a neutral, technical science detached from ethical or political questions. Aiming for a truly inclusive discipline also requires questioning the epistemic foundations that shape what students learn, what methods are privileged, and what counts as “rigorous” or “scientific”. This means recognising that economic knowledge is historically and socially situated, and that its dominant frameworks have often marginalised alternative perspectives – from feminist, ecological, postcolonial, institutional, and political economy traditions.
Reconsidering what type of economics we want therefore requires more than adjusting entry routes or improving communication; it calls for methodological pluralism, greater humility about the limits of economic knowledge, and a willingness to foreground questions of power, care, inequality, and social reproduction as central to economic analysis rather than peripheral.
Crucially, students themselves, especially those currently alienated from mainstream economics should be central participants in rebuilding and reimagining the discipline. Their concerns and intuitions about what economics should study echo decades of critiques from heterodox economists and other social scientists. Creating spaces where students can critically question, debate, and reshape the curriculum is essential for building a more democratic economics.
***
Maria Georgouli Loupi is a PhD student and Associate Lecturer in Sociology at Goldsmiths College, University of London, UK.
Danielle Guizzo is Associate Professor in the Economics Department at the University of Bristol, UK.
.
.
.
.
.