education research and analysis journal

• Technical Support
• Find My Rep

You are here

Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis

Preview this book.

• Description
• Aims and Scope
• Editorial Board
• Abstracting / Indexing
• Submission Guidelines

Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis ( EEPA ) is the premier journal for rigorous, policy-relevant research on issues central to education. The articles that appear inform a wide range of readers—from scholars and policy analysts to journalists and education associations—working at local, state, and national levels. EEPA is a multidisciplinary journal, and editors consider original research from multiple disciplines, orientations, and methodologies.

Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis (EEPA) publishes manuscripts of theoretical or practical interest to those engaged in educational evaluation or policy analysis, including economic, demographic, financial, and political analyses of education policies, and significant meta-analyses or syntheses that address issues of current concern. The journal seeks high-quality research on how reforms and interventions affect educational outcomes; research on how multiple educational policy and reform initiatives support or conflict with each other; and research that informs pending changes in educational policy at the federal, state, and local levels, demonstrating an effect on early childhood through early adulthood.

• Clarivate Analytics: Current Contents - Physical, Chemical & Earth Sciences
• Contents Pages in Education (T&F)
• EBSCO: Sales & Marketing Source
• EBSCOhost: Current Abstracts
• ERIC (Education Resources Information Center)
• Educational Research Abstracts Online (T&F)
• ProQuest Education Journals
• Social SciSearch
• Social Sciences Citation Index (Web of Science)
• Wilson Education Index/Abstracts

All manuscripts should be submitted electronically at http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/eepa . For questions or inquiries contact [email protected] .

Publication Standards

Researchers submitting manuscripts should consult the Standards for Reporting on Research in AERA Publications and the AERA Code of Ethics .

Manuscript Style, Length, and Format

The style guide for all AERA journals is the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, 7 th edition.

Please follow these guidelines:

• Keep manuscripts to a maximum of 45 pages, including all tables, figures and endnotes. References are not included in the page count.
• Number the pages consecutively, beginning with the page after the title page.
• Double space your manuscript, and use 1-inch margins on all sides.
• Use 12-point Times New Roman only.
• Do not use footnotes . If you find that explanatory or amplifying information must be included in note form, use endnotes typed as normal text after the conclusion of the manuscript text. Notes should be numbered consecutively throughout the paper. Please do not use the endnotes feature of software programs as this makes typesetting difficult. Endnotes are included in the manuscript word count.
• Present data in figures and tables to clarify information for readers. Refer in the text to any figure or table so readers can find the supporting documentation.
• Place all figures and tables at the end of the text, and type figure captions on a separate page rather than with the original figures. This page is not counted in the manuscript length limit.
• Insert subheads at reasonable intervals to break the monotony of lengthy text. Use APA format for headings.

Appendices can only appear in the copyedited and typeset PDF if, with their inclusion, the article is still within the maximum page limit of 45 pages. Appendices themselves should exceed three pages. If the inclusion of appendices would make the article longer than 45 pages or they are longer than 3 pages, they can appear instead as online supplementary files.

Brief Format

EEPA also publishes Briefs. The Brief format can cover the range of paper topics normally considered for EEPA . Briefs will typically have much shorter introductions, literature reviews, and theoretical frameworks, and will focus primarily on the empirics.

Briefs will be held to the same rigorous standards for publication as any other submission. The review process will be the same, except that authors will receive no more than one “revise and resubmit” decision before a “reject” or “conditional acceptance/acceptance” decision is made. Authors may choose to submit a Brief for various reasons. For example, a study is a replication in a previously-studied area, and a lengthy literature review section is not needed; the research design does not necessitate a long set of robustness checks; or the topic is of immediate policy relevance and a shorter format may be more accessible to policymakers without sacrificing rigor.

Briefs should follow the following guidelines:

• Manuscripts should contain no more than 2500 words, excluding references.
• No more than three total figures or tables should be included.
• Pages should be numbered consecutively, beginning with the page after the title page.
• The manuscript should be double-spaced, with 1-inch margins on all sides.
• Only 12-point Times New Roman should be used.
• Footnotes or endnotes should not be used.
• Data should be presented in figures and tables to clarify information for readers. References should be made within the text to any figures or tables so readers can find the supporting material.
• All figures and tables should be placed at the end of the text, and figure captions should appear on a separate page rather than with the original figures. This page is not counted in the manuscript length limit.
• Subheads should be inserted at reasonable intervals to break the monotony of lengthy text. Use APA format for headings.
• Appendices can only appear online. Appendices can be used to provide any additional methodological information needed.

Submission Preparation Checklist

As part of the submission process, please check off your submission’s compliance with the requirements below. If your submission does not meet these requirements, it may be returned to you and delay consideration of your work.

• The submission has not been previously published and is not under consideration for publication elsewhere, or an explanation has been provided in the Cover Letter.
• THE MANUSCRIPT CONTAINS NO IDENTIFYING INFORMATION, EVEN ON THE TITLE PAGE. “Author” and publication year are used in any mention of the author’s work and in the bibliography and notes instead of author names, titles of works, etc. The author’s name has been removed from the document’s Properties, which in Microsoft Word is found in the File menu (select “File,” “Properties,” “Summary,” and remove the author’s name; select “OK” to save).
• The text conforms to APA style and the requirements stated above under “Manuscript Style, Length, and Format.”
• The submission is in Microsoft Word. Any supplemental files are in Microsoft Word, RTF, Excel, or PDF. 
• All URL addresses in the manuscript (e.g., http://www.aera.net ) are activated and ready to click.
• An abstract of up to 120 words is included. Please also include at least 3-5 keywords, the terms that researchers will use to find your article in indexes and databases. A term may contain more than one word.

Checklist Once Your Manuscript is Accepted

• Submit one high-quality electronic version of each figure that is to be typeset.

Upload figures as individual files in the original version from the application the figure was created in. Figures must not be embedded in a Word doc.

Include only references cited in the text in your reference list. The author is responsible for the accuracy and completeness of the reference list.

Do not use underlining. Use sentence structure, not italics, to create emphasis; words to be set in italics should be typed in italics.

Spell out abbreviations and acronyms at first mention unless they are found as entries in their abbreviated form in Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, 11th ed., 2003 (e.g., “IQ” needs no explanation).

Clearly mark mathematical symbols and Greek letters to indicate italics, boldface, superscript, and subscript. Place any formulas or equations in an editable form rather than as text objects or pictures. We advise submitting all equations in Mathtype to ensure they are correctly formatted during typesetting.

Ensure the text includes a reference to any figure or table so readers look for the supporting documentation. Any table, formula, or figure must be in an editable form and should be included at the end of the manuscript text.

How to Get Help With the Quality of English in Your Submission

Authors who would like to refine the use of English in their manuscripts might consider using the services of a professional English-language editing company. We highlight some of these companies at http://www.sagepub.com/journalgateway/engLang.htm .

Please be aware that Sage has no affiliation with these companies and makes no endorsement of them. An author's use of these services in no way guarantees that his or her submission will ultimately be accepted. Any arrangement an author enters into will be exclusively between the author and the particular company, and any costs incurred are the sole responsibility of the author.

Copyright Information

No written or oral permission is necessary to reproduce a table, a figure, or an excerpt of fewer than 500 words from this journal, or to make photocopies for classroom use. Authors are granted permission, without fee, to photocopy their own material or make printouts from the final pdf of their article. Copies must include a full and accurate bibliographic citation and the following credit line: “Copyright [year] by the American Educational Research Association; reproduced with permission from the publisher.” Written permission must be obtained to reproduce or reprint material in circumstances other than those just described. Please direct all requests for permission or for further information on policies and fees to the journal’s Website at http://eepa.aera.net/ .

For authors who use figures or other material for which they do not own copyright:

Authors who wish to use material, such as figures or tables, for which they do not own the copyright must obtain written permission from the copyright holder (usually the publisher) and submit it along with their manuscript. (However, no written or oral permission is necessary to reproduce a table, a figure, or an excerpt of fewer than 500 words from an AERA journal.)

For authors of joint works (articles with more than one author):

This journal uses a transfer of copyright agreement that requires just one author (the corresponding author) to sign on behalf of all authors. Please identify the corresponding author for your work when submitting your manuscript for review. The corresponding author will be responsible for the following:

• Ensuring that all authors are identified on the copyright agreement, and notifying the editorial office of any changes in the authorship.
• Securing written permission (by letter or e-mail) from each co-author to sign the copyright agreement on the co-author’s behalf.
• Warranting and indemnifying the journal owner and publisher on behalf of all co-authors. Although such instances are very rare, you should be aware that in the event that a co-author has included content in his or her portion of the article that infringes the copyright of another or is otherwise in violation of any other warranty listed in the agreement, you will be the sole author indemnifying the publisher and the editor of the journal against such violation.

Please contact AERA if you have questions or if you prefer to use a copyright agreement for all coauthors to sign.

Privacy Statement

The names and e-mail addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.

The Publications Committee welcomes comments and suggestions from authors. Please send these to the Publications Committee in care of the AERA central office.

Right of Reply

The right of reply policy encourages comments on recently published articles in AERA publications. They are, of course, subject to the same editorial review and decision process as articles. If the comment is accepted for publication, the editor shall inform the author of the original article. If the author submits a reply to the comment, the reply is also subject to editorial review and decision. The editor may allot a specific amount of journal space for the comment (ordinarily about 1,500 words) and for the reply (ordinarily about 750 words). The reply may appear in the same issue as the comment or in a later issue (Council, June 1980).

If an article is accepted for publication in an AERA journal that, in the judgment of the editor, has as its main theme or thrust a critique of a specific piece of work or a specific line of work associated with an individual or program of research, then the individual or representative of the research program whose work is critiqued should be notified in advance about the upcoming publication and given the opportunity to reply, ideally in the same issue. The author of the original article should also be notified. Normal guidelines for length and review of the reply and publication of a rejoinder by the original article’s author(s) should be followed. Articles in the format “an open letter to …” may constitute prototypical exemplars of the category defined here, but other formats may well be used, and would be included under the qualifications for response prescribed here (Council, January 2002).

Authors who believe that their manuscripts were not reviewed in a careful or timely manner and in accordance with AERA procedures should call the matter to the attention of the Association’s executive officer or president.

Sage Choice and Open Access

If you or your funder wish your article to be freely available online to nonsubscribers immediately upon publication (gold open access), you can opt for it to be included in Sage Choice, subject to payment of a publication fee. The manuscript submission and peer review procedure is unchanged. On acceptance of your article, you will be asked to let Sage know directly if you are choosing Sage Choice. To check journal eligibility and the publication fee, please visit Sage Choice . For more information on open access options and compliance at Sage, including self author archiving deposits (green open access) visit Sage Publishing Policies on our Journal Author Gateway.  

2016-2018 Coeditors - stop receiving new manuscripts June 30, 2018

2019-2021 Coeditors - begin receiving new manuscripts July 1, 2018

• Read Online
• Sample Issues
• Current Issue
• Email Alert
• Permissions
• Foreign rights
• Reprints and sponsorship
• Advertising

Individual Subscription, Combined (Print & E-access)

Institutional Subscription, E-access

Institutional Subscription & Backfile Lease, E-access Plus Backfile (All Online Content)

Institutional Subscription, Print Only

Institutional Subscription, Combined (Print & E-access)

Institutional Subscription & Backfile Lease, Combined Plus Backfile (Current Volume Print & All Online Content)

Institutional Backfile Purchase, E-access (Content through 1998)

Individual, Single Print Issue

Institutional, Single Print Issue

To order single issues of this journal, please contact SAGE Customer Services at 1-800-818-7243 / 1-805-583-9774 with details of the volume and issue you would like to purchase.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Published: 30 January 2023

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the evidence on learning during the COVID-19 pandemic

• Bastian A. Betthäuser   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-4544-4073 1 , 2 , 3 ,
• Anders M. Bach-Mortensen   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-7804-7958 2 &
• Per Engzell   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-2404-6308 3 , 4 , 5  

Nature Human Behaviour volume  7 ,  pages 375–385 ( 2023 ) Cite this article

72k Accesses

119 Citations

1974 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Social policy

To what extent has the learning progress of school-aged children slowed down during the COVID-19 pandemic? A growing number of studies address this question, but findings vary depending on context. Here we conduct a pre-registered systematic review, quality appraisal and meta-analysis of 42 studies across 15 countries to assess the magnitude of learning deficits during the pandemic. We find a substantial overall learning deficit (Cohen’s d  = −0.14, 95% confidence interval −0.17 to −0.10), which arose early in the pandemic and persists over time. Learning deficits are particularly large among children from low socio-economic backgrounds. They are also larger in maths than in reading and in middle-income countries relative to high-income countries. There is a lack of evidence on learning progress during the pandemic in low-income countries. Future research should address this evidence gap and avoid the common risks of bias that we identify.

Similar content being viewed by others

Elementary school teachers’ perspectives about learning during the COVID-19 pandemic

A methodological perspective on learning in the developing brain

Measuring and forecasting progress in education: what about early childhood?

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to one of the largest disruptions to learning in history. To a large extent, this is due to school closures, which are estimated to have affected 95% of the world’s student population 1 . But even when face-to-face teaching resumed, instruction has often been compromised by hybrid teaching, and by children or teachers having to quarantine and miss classes. The effect of limited face-to-face instruction is compounded by the pandemic’s consequences for children’s out-of-school learning environment, as well as their mental and physical health. Lockdowns have restricted children’s movement and their ability to play, meet other children and engage in extra-curricular activities. Children’s wellbeing and family relationships have also suffered due to economic uncertainties and conflicting demands of work, care and learning. These negative consequences can be expected to be most pronounced for children from low socio-economic family backgrounds, exacerbating pre-existing educational inequalities.

It is critical to understand the extent to which learning progress has changed since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. We use the term ‘learning deficit’ to encompass both a delay in expected learning progress, as well as a loss of skills and knowledge already gained. The COVID-19 learning deficit is likely to affect children’s life chances through their education and labour market prospects. At the societal level, it can have important implications for growth, prosperity and social cohesion. As policy-makers across the world are seeking to limit further learning deficits and to devise policies to recover learning deficits that have already been incurred, assessing the current state of learning is crucial. A careful assessment of the COVID-19 learning deficit is also necessary to weigh the true costs and benefits of school closures.

A number of narrative reviews have sought to summarize the emerging research on COVID-19 and learning, mostly focusing on learning progress relatively early in the pandemic 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 . Moreover, two reviews harmonized and synthesized existing estimates of learning deficits during the pandemic 7 , 8 . In line with the narrative reviews, these two reviews find a substantial reduction in learning progress during the pandemic. However, this finding is based on a relatively small number of studies (18 and 10 studies, respectively). The limited evidence that was available at the time these reviews were conducted also precluded them from meta-analysing variation in the magnitude of learning deficits over time and across subjects, different groups of students or country contexts.

In this Article, we conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the evidence on COVID-19 learning deficits 2.5 years into the pandemic. Our primary pre-registered research question was ‘What is the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on learning progress amongst school-age children?’, and we address this question using evidence from studies examining changes in learning outcomes during the pandemic. Our second pre-registered research aim was ‘To examine whether the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on learning differs across different social background groups, age groups, boys and girls, learning areas or subjects, national contexts’.

We contribute to the existing research in two ways. First, we describe and appraise the up-to-date body of evidence, including its geographic reach and quality. More specifically, we ask the following questions: (1) what is the state of the evidence, in terms of the available peer-reviewed research and grey literature, on learning progress of school-aged children during the COVID-19 pandemic?, (2) which countries are represented in the available evidence? and (3) what is the quality of the existing evidence?

Our second contribution is to harmonize, synthesize and meta-analyse the existing evidence, with special attention to variation across different subpopulations and country contexts. On the basis of the identified studies, we ask (4) to what extent has the learning progress of school-aged children changed since the onset of the pandemic?, (5) how has the magnitude of the learning deficit (if any) evolved since the beginning of the pandemic?, (6) to what extent has the pandemic reinforced inequalities between children from different socio-economic backgrounds?, (7) are there differences in the magnitude of learning deficits between subject domains (maths and reading) and between age groups (primary and secondary students)? and (8) to what extent does the magnitude of learning deficits vary across national contexts?

Below, we report our answers to each of these questions in turn. The questions correspond to the analysis plan set out in our pre-registered protocol ( https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021249944 ), but we have adjusted the order and wording to aid readability. We had planned to examine gender differences in learning progress during the pandemic, but found there to be insufficient evidence to conduct this subgroup analysis, as the large majority of the identified studies do not provide evidence on learning deficits separately by gender. We also planned to examine how the magnitude of learning deficits differs across groups of students with varying exposures to school closures. This was not possible as the available data on school closures lack sufficient depth with respect to variation of school closures within countries, across grade levels and with respect to different modes of instruction, to meaningfully examine this association.

The state of the evidence

Our systematic review identified 42 studies on learning progress during the COVID-19 pandemic that met our inclusion criteria. To be included in our systematic review and meta-analysis, studies had to use a measure of learning that can be standardized (using Cohen’s d ) and base their estimates on empirical data collected since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic (rather than making projections based on pre-COVID-19 data). As shown in Fig. 1 , the initial literature search resulted in 5,153 hits after removal of duplicates. All studies were double screened by the first two authors. The formal database search process identified 15 eligible studies. We also hand searched relevant preprint repositories and policy databases. Further, to ensure that our study selection was as up to date as possible, we conducted two full forward and backward citation searches of all included studies on 15 February 2022, and on 8 August 2022. The citation and preprint hand searches allowed us to identify 27 additional eligible studies, resulting in a total of 42 studies. Most of these studies were published after the initial database search, which illustrates that the body of evidence continues to expand. Most studies provide multiple estimates of COVID-19 learning deficits, separately for maths and reading and for different school grades. The number of estimates ( n  = 291) is therefore larger than the number of included studies ( n  = 42).

Flow diagram of the study identification and selection process, following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.

The geographic reach of evidence is limited

Table 1 presents all included studies and estimates of COVID-19 learning deficits (in brackets), grouped by the 15 countries represented: Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Colombia, Denmark, Germany, Italy, Mexico, the Netherlands, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the UK and the United States. About half of the estimates ( n  = 149) are from the United States, 58 are from the UK, a further 70 are from other European countries and the remaining 14 estimates are from Australia, Brazil, Colombia, Mexico and South Africa. As this list shows, there is a strong over-representation of studies from high-income countries, a dearth of studies from middle-income countries and no studies from low-income countries. This skewed representation should be kept in mind when interpreting our synthesis of the existing evidence on COVID-19 learning deficits.

The quality of evidence is mixed

We assessed the quality of the evidence using an adapted version of the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool 9 . More specifically, we analysed the risk of bias of each estimate from confounding, sample selection, classification of treatments, missing data, the measurement of outcomes and the selection of reported results. A.M.B.-M. and B.A.B. performed the risk-of-bias assessments, which were independently checked by the respective other author. We then assigned each study an overall risk-of-bias rating (low, moderate, serious or critical) based on the estimate and domain with the highest risk of bias.

Figure 2a shows the distribution of all studies of COVID-19 learning deficits according to their risk-of-bias rating separately for each domain (top six rows), as well as the distribution of studies according to their overall risk of bias rating (bottom row). The overall risk of bias was considered ‘low’ for 15% of studies, ‘moderate’ for 30% of studies, ‘serious’ for 25% of studies and ‘critical’ for 30% of studies.

a , Domain-specific and overall distribution of studies of COVID-19 learning deficits by risk of bias rating using ROBINS-I, including studies rated to be at critical risk of bias ( n  = 19 out of a total of n  = 61 studies shown in this figure). In line with ROBINS-I guidance, studies rated to be at critical risk of bias were excluded from all analyses and other figures in this article and in the Supplementary Information (including b ). b , z curve: distribution of the z scores of all estimates included in the meta-analysis ( n  = 291) to test for publication bias. The dotted line indicates z  = 1.96 ( P  = 0.050), the conventional threshold for statistical significance. The overlaid curve shows a normal distribution. The absence of a spike in the distribution of the z scores just above the threshold for statistical significance and the absence of a slump just below it indicate the absence of evidence for publication bias.

In line with ROBINS-I guidance, we excluded studies rated to be at critical risk of bias ( n  = 19) from all of our analyses and figures, except for Fig. 2a , which visualizes the distribution of studies according to their risk of bias 9 . These are thus not part of the 42 studies included in our meta-analysis. Supplementary Table 2 provides an overview of these studies as well as the main potential sources of risk of bias. Moreover, in Supplementary Figs. 3 – 6 , we replicate all our results excluding studies deemed to be at serious risk of bias.

As shown in Fig. 2a , common sources of potential bias were confounding, sample selection and missing data. Studies rated at risk of confounding typically compared only two timepoints, without accounting for longer time trends in learning progress. The main causes of selection bias were the use of convenience samples and insufficient consideration of self-selection by schools or students. Several studies found evidence of selection bias, often with students from a low socio-economic background or schools in deprived areas being under-represented after (as compared with before) the pandemic, but this was not always adjusted for. Some studies also reported a higher amount of missing data post-pandemic, again generally without adjustment, and several studies did not report any information on missing data. For an overview of the risk-of-bias ratings for each domain of each study, see Supplementary Fig. 1 and Supplementary Tables 1 and 2 .

No evidence of publication bias

Publication bias can occur if authors self-censor to conform to theoretical expectations, or if journals favour statistically significant results. To mitigate this concern, we include not only published papers, but also preprints, working papers and policy reports.

Moreover, Fig. 2b tests for publication bias by showing the distribution of z -statistics for the effect size estimates of all identified studies. The dotted line indicates z  = 1.96 ( P  = 0.050), the conventional threshold for statistical significance. The overlaid curve shows a normal distribution. If there was publication bias, we would expect a spike just above the threshold, and a slump just below it. There is no indication of this. Moreover, we do not find a left-skewed distribution of P values (see P curve in Supplementary Fig. 2a ), or an association between estimates of learning deficits and their standard errors (see funnel plot in Supplementary Fig. 2b ) that would suggest publication bias. Publication bias thus does not appear to be a major concern.

Having assessed the quality of the existing evidence, we now present the substantive results of our meta-analysis, focusing on the magnitude of COVID-19 learning deficits and on the variation in learning deficits over time, across different groups of students, and across country contexts.

Learning progress slowed substantially during the pandemic

Figure 3 shows the effect sizes that we extracted from each study (averaged across grades and learning subject) as well as the pooled effect size (red diamond). Effects are expressed in standard deviations, using Cohen’s d . Estimates are pooled using inverse variance weights. The pooled effect size across all studies is d  = −0.14, t (41) = −7.30, two-tailed P  = 0.000, 95% confidence interval (CI) −0.17 to −0.10. Under normal circumstances, students generally improve their performance by around 0.4 standard deviations per school year 10 , 11 , 12 . Thus, the overall effect of d  = −0.14 suggests that students lost out on 0.14/0.4, or about 35%, of a school year’s worth of learning. On average, the learning progress of school-aged children has slowed substantially during the pandemic.

Effect sizes are expressed in standard deviations, using Cohen’s d , with 95% CI, and are sorted by magnitude.

Learning deficits arose early in the pandemic and persist

One may expect that children were able to recover learning that was lost early in the pandemic, after teachers and families had time to adjust to the new learning conditions and after structures for online learning and for recovering early learning deficits were set up. However, existing research on teacher strikes in Belgium 13 and Argentina 14 , shortened school years in Germany 15 and disruptions to education during World War II 16 suggests that learning deficits are difficult to compensate and tend to persist in the long run.

Figure 4 plots the magnitude of estimated learning deficits (on the vertical axis) by the date of measurement (on the horizontal axis). The colour of the circles reflects the relevant country, the size of the circles indicates the sample size for a given estimate and the line displays a linear trend. The figure suggests that learning deficits opened up early in the pandemic and have neither closed nor substantially widened since then. We find no evidence that the slope coefficient is different from zero ( β months  = −0.00, t (41) = −7.30, two-tailed P  = 0.097, 95% CI −0.01 to 0.00). This implies that efforts by children, parents, teachers and policy-makers to adjust to the changed circumstance have been successful in preventing further learning deficits but so far have been unable to reverse them. As shown in Supplementary Fig. 8 , the pattern of persistent learning deficits also emerges within each of the three countries for which we have a relatively large number of estimates at different timepoints: the United States, the UK and the Netherlands. However, it is important to note that estimates of learning deficits are based on distinct samples of students. Future research should continue to follow the learning progress of cohorts of students in different countries to reveal how learning deficits of these cohorts have developed and continue to develop since the onset of the pandemic.

The horizontal axis displays the date on which learning progress was measured. The vertical axis displays estimated learning deficits, expressed in standard deviation (s.d.) using Cohen’s d . The colour of the circles reflects the respective country, the size of the circles indicates the sample size for a given estimate and the line displays a linear trend with a 95% CI. The trend line is estimated as a linear regression using ordinary least squares, with standard errors clustered at the study level ( n  = 42 clusters). β months  = −0.00, t (41) = −7.30, two-tailed P  = 0.097, 95% CI −0.01 to 0.00.

Socio-economic inequality in education increased

Existing research on the development of learning gaps during summer vacations 17 , 18 , disruptions to schooling during the Ebola outbreak in Sierra Leone and Guinea 19 , and the 2005 earthquake in Pakistan 20 shows that the suspension of face-to-face teaching can increase educational inequality between children from different socio-economic backgrounds. Learning deficits during the COVID-19 pandemic are likely to have been particularly pronounced for children from low socio-economic backgrounds. These children have been more affected by school closures than children from more advantaged backgrounds 21 . Moreover, they are likely to be disadvantaged with respect to their access and ability to use digital learning technology, the quality of their home learning environment, the learning support they receive from teachers and parents, and their ability to study autonomously 22 , 23 , 24 .

Most studies we identify examine changes in socio-economic inequality during the pandemic, attesting to the importance of the issue. As studies use different measures of socio-economic background (for example, parental income, parental education, free school meal eligibility or neighbourhood disadvantage), pooling the estimates is not possible. Instead, we code all estimates according to whether they indicate a reduction, no change or an increase in learning inequality during the pandemic. Figure 5 displays this information. Estimates that indicate an increase in inequality are shown on the right, those that indicate a decrease on the left and those that suggest no change in the middle. Squares represent estimates of changes in inequality during the pandemic in reading performance, and circles represent estimates of changes in inequality in maths performance. The shading represents when in the pandemic educational inequality was measured, differentiating between the first, second and third year of the pandemic. Estimates are also arranged horizontally by grade level. A large majority of estimates indicate an increase in educational inequality between children from different socio-economic backgrounds. This holds for both maths and reading, across primary and secondary education, at each stage of the pandemic, and independently of how socio-economic background is measured.

Each circle/square refers to one estimate of over-time change in inequality in maths/reading performance ( n  = 211). Estimates that find a decrease/no change/increase in inequality are grouped on the left/middle/right. Within these categories, estimates are ordered horizontally by school grade. The shading indicates when in the pandemic a given measure was taken.

Learning deficits are larger in maths than in reading

Available research on summer learning deficits 17 , 25 , student absenteeism 26 , 27 and extreme weather events 28 suggests that learning progress in mathematics is more dependent on formal instruction than in reading. This might be due to parents being better equipped to help their children with reading, and children advancing their reading skills (but not their maths skills) when reading for enjoyment outside of school. Figure 6a shows that, similarly to earlier disruptions to learning, the estimated learning deficits during the COVID-19 pandemic are larger for maths than for reading (mean difference δ  = −0.07, t (41) = −4.02, two-tailed P  = 0.000, 95% CI −0.11 to −0.04). This difference is statistically significant and robust to dropping estimates from individual countries (Supplementary Fig. 9 ).

Each plot shows the distribution of COVID-19 learning deficit estimates for the respective subgroup, with the box marking the interquartile range and the white circle denoting the median. Whiskers mark upper and lower adjacent values: the furthest observation within 1.5 interquartile range of either side of the box. a , Learning subject (reading versus maths). Median: reading −0.09, maths −0.18. Interquartile range: reading −0.15 to −0.02, maths −0.23 to −0.09. b , Level of education (primary versus secondary). Median: primary −0.12, secondary −0.12. Interquartile range: primary −0.19 to −0.05, secondary −0.21 to −0.06. c , Country income level (high versus middle). Median: high −0.12, middle −0.37. Interquartile range: high −0.20 to −0.05, middle −0.65 to −0.30.

No evidence of variation across grade levels

One may expect learning deficits to be smaller for older than for younger children, as older children may be more autonomous in their learning and better able to cope with a sudden change in their learning environment. However, older students were subject to longer school closures in some countries, such as Denmark 29 , based partly on the assumption that they would be better able to learn from home. This may have offset any advantage that older children would otherwise have had in learning remotely.

Figure 6b shows the distribution of estimates of learning deficits for students at the primary and secondary level, respectively. Our analysis yields no evidence of variation in learning deficits across grade levels (mean difference δ  = −0.01, t (41) = −0.59, two-tailed P  = 0.556, 95% CI −0.06 to 0.03). Due to the limited number of available estimates of learning deficits, we cannot be certain about whether learning deficits differ between primary and secondary students or not.

Learning deficits are larger in poorer countries

Low- and middle-income countries were already struggling with a learning crisis before the pandemic. Despite large expansions of the proportion of children in school, children in low- and middle-income countries still perform poorly by international standards, and inequality in learning remains high 30 , 31 , 32 . The pandemic is likely to deepen this learning crisis and to undo past progress. Schools in low- and middle-income countries have not only been closed for longer, but have also had fewer resources to facilitate remote learning 33 , 34 . Moreover, the economic resources, availability of digital learning equipment and ability of children, parents, teachers and governments to support learning from home are likely to be lower in low- and middle-income countries 35 .

As discussed above, most evidence on COVID-19 learning deficits comes from high-income countries. We found no studies on low-income countries that met our inclusion criteria, and evidence from middle-income countries is limited to Brazil, Colombia, Mexico and South Africa. Figure 6c groups the estimates of COVID-19 learning deficits in these four middle-income countries together (on the right) and compares them with estimates from high-income countries (on the left). The learning deficit is appreciably larger in middle-income countries than in high-income countries (mean difference δ  = −0.29, t (41) = −2.78, two-tailed P  = 0.008, 95% CI −0.50 to −0.08). In fact, the three largest estimates of learning deficits in our sample are from middle-income countries (Fig. 3 ) 36 , 37 , 38 .

Two years since the COVID-19 pandemic, there is a growing number of studies examining the learning progress of school-aged children during the pandemic. This paper first systematically reviews the existing literature on learning progress of school-aged children during the pandemic and appraises its geographic reach and quality. Second, it harmonizes, synthesizes and meta-analyses the existing evidence to examine the extent to which learning progress has changed since the onset of the pandemic, and how it varies across different groups of students and across country contexts.

Our meta-analysis suggests that learning progress has slowed substantially during the COVID-19 pandemic. The pooled effect size of d  = −0.14, implies that students lost out on about 35% of a normal school year’s worth of learning. This confirms initial concerns that substantial learning deficits would arise during the pandemic 10 , 39 , 40 . But our results also suggest that fears of an accumulation of learning deficits as the pandemic continues have not materialized 41 , 42 . On average, learning deficits emerged early in the pandemic and have neither closed nor widened substantially. Future research should continue to follow the learning progress of cohorts of students in different countries to reveal how learning deficits of these cohorts have developed and continue to develop since the onset of the pandemic.

Most studies that we identify find that learning deficits have been largest for children from disadvantaged socio-economic backgrounds. This holds across different timepoints during the pandemic, countries, grade levels and learning subjects, and independently of how socio-economic background is measured. It suggests that the pandemic has exacerbated educational inequalities between children from different socio-economic backgrounds, which were already large before the pandemic 43 , 44 . Policy initiatives to compensate learning deficits need to prioritize support for children from low socio-economic backgrounds in order to allow them to recover the learning they lost during the pandemic.

There is a need for future research to assess how the COVID-19 pandemic has affected gender inequality in education. So far, there is very little evidence on this issue. The large majority of the studies that we identify do not examine learning deficits separately by gender.

Comparing estimates of learning deficits across subjects, we find that learning deficits tend to be larger in maths than in reading. As noted above, this may be due to the fact that parents and children have been in a better position to compensate school-based learning in reading by reading at home. Accordingly, there are grounds for policy initiatives to prioritize the compensation of learning deficits in maths and other science subjects.

A limitation of this study and the existing body of evidence on learning progress during the COVID-19 pandemic is that the existing studies primarily focus on high-income countries, while there is a dearth of evidence from low- and middle-income countries. This is particularly concerning because the small number of existing studies from middle-income countries suggest that learning deficits have been particularly severe in these countries. Learning deficits are likely to be even larger in low-income countries, considering that these countries already faced a learning crisis before the pandemic, generally implemented longer school closures, and were under-resourced and ill-equipped to facilitate remote learning 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 45 . It is critical that this evidence gap on low- and middle-income countries is addressed swiftly, and that the infrastructure to collect and share data on educational performance in middle- and low-income countries is strengthened. Collecting and making available these data is a key prerequisite for fully understanding how learning progress and related outcomes have changed since the onset of the pandemic 46 .

A further limitation is that about half of the studies that we identify are rated as having a serious or critical risk of bias. We seek to limit the risk of bias in our results by excluding all studies rated to be at critical risk of bias from all of our analyses. Moreover, in Supplementary Figs. 3 – 6 , we show that our results are robust to further excluding studies deemed to be at serious risk of bias. Future studies should minimize risk of bias in estimating learning deficits by employing research designs that appropriately account for common sources of bias. These include a lack of accounting for secular time trends, non-representative samples and imbalances between treatment and comparison groups.

The persistence of learning deficits two and a half years into the pandemic highlights the need for well-designed, well-resourced and decisive policy initiatives to recover learning deficits. Policy-makers, schools and families will need to identify and realize opportunities to complement and expand on regular school-based learning. Experimental evidence from low- and middle-income countries suggests that even relatively low-tech and low-cost learning interventions can have substantial, positive effects on students’ learning progress in the context of remote learning. For example, sending SMS messages with numeracy problems accompanied by short phone calls was found to lead to substantial learning gains in numeracy in Botswana 47 . Sending motivational text messages successfully limited learning losses in maths and Portuguese in Brazil 48 .

More evidence is needed to assess the effectiveness of other interventions for limiting or recovering learning deficits. Potential avenues include the use of the often extensive summer holidays to offer summer schools and learning camps, extending school days and school weeks, and organizing and scaling up tutoring programmes. Further potential lies in developing, advertising and providing access to learning apps, online learning platforms or educational TV programmes that are free at the point of use. Many countries have already begun investing substantial resources to capitalize on some of these opportunities. If these interventions prove effective, and if the momentum of existing policy efforts is maintained and expanded, the disruptions to learning during the pandemic may be a window of opportunity to improve the education afforded to children.

Eligibility criteria

We consider all types of primary research, including peer-reviewed publications, preprints, working papers and reports, for inclusion. To be eligible for inclusion, studies have to measure learning progress using test scores that can be standardized across studies using Cohen’s d . Moreover, studies have to be in English, Danish, Dutch, French, German, Norwegian, Spanish or Swedish.

Search strategy and study identification

We identified relevant studies using the following steps. First, we developed a Boolean search string defining the population (school-aged children), exposure (the COVID-19 pandemic) and outcomes of interest (learning progress). The full search string can be found in Section 1.1 of Supplementary Information . Second, we used this string to search the following academic databases: Coronavirus Research Database, the Education Resources Information Centre, International Bibliography of the Social Sciences, Politics Collection (PAIS index, policy file index, political science database and worldwide political science abstracts), Social Science Database, Sociology Collection (applied social science index and abstracts, sociological abstracts and sociology database), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Web of Science. Second, we hand-searched multiple preprint and working paper repositories (Social Science Research Network, Munich Personal RePEc Archive, IZA, National Bureau of Economic Research, OSF Preprints, PsyArXiv, SocArXiv and EdArXiv) and relevant policy websites, including the websites of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, the United Nations, the World Bank and the Education Endowment Foundation. Third, we periodically posted our protocol via Twitter in order to crowdsource additional relevant studies not identified through the search. All titles and abstracts identified in our search were double-screened using the Rayyan online application 49 . Our initial search was conducted on 27 April 2021, and we conducted two forward and backward citation searches of all eligible studies identified in the above steps, on 14 February 2022, and on 8 August 2022, to ensure that our analysis includes recent relevant research.

Data extraction

From the studies that meet our inclusion criteria we extracted all estimates of learning deficits during the pandemic, separately for maths and reading and for different school grades. We also extracted the corresponding sample size, standard error, date(s) of measurement, author name(s) and country. Last, we recorded whether studies differentiate between children’s socio-economic background, which measure is used to this end and whether studies find an increase, decrease or no change in learning inequality. We contacted study authors if any of the above information was missing in the study. Data extraction was performed by B.A.B. and validated independently by A.M.B.-M., with discrepancies resolved through discussion and by conferring with P.E.

Measurement and standardizationr

We standardize all estimates of learning deficits during the pandemic using Cohen’s d , which expresses effect sizes in terms of standard deviations. Cohen’s d is calculated as the difference in the mean learning gain in a given subject (maths or reading) over two comparable periods before and after the onset of the pandemic, divided by the pooled standard deviation of learning progress in this subject:

Effect sizes expressed as β coefficients are converted to Cohen’s d :

We use a binary indicator for whether the study outcome is maths or reading. One study does not differentiate the outcome but includes a composite of maths and reading scores 50 .

Level of education

We distinguish between primary and secondary education. We first consulted the original studies for this information. Where this was not stated in a given study, students’ age was used in conjunction with information about education systems from external sources to determine the level of education 51 .

Country income level

We follow the World Bank’s classification of countries into four income groups: low, lower-middle, upper-middle and high income. Four countries in our sample are in the upper-middle-income group: Brazil, Colombia, Mexico and South Africa. All other countries are in the high-income group.

Data synthesis

We synthesize our data using three synthesis techniques. First, we generate a forest plot, based on all available estimates of learning progress during the pandemic. We pool estimates using a random-effects restricted maximum likelihood model and inverse variance weights to calculate an overall effect size (Fig. 3 ) 52 . Second, we code all estimates of changes in educational inequality between children from different socio-economic backgrounds during the pandemic, according to whether they indicate an increase, a decrease or no change in educational inequality. We visualize the resulting distribution using a harvest plot (Fig. 5 ) 53 . Third, given that the limited amount of available evidence precludes multivariate or causal analyses, we examine the bivariate association between COVID-19 learning deficits and the months in which learning was measured using a scatter plot (Fig. 4 ), and the bivariate association between COVID-19 learning deficits and subject, grade level and countries’ income level, using a series of violin plots (Fig. 6 ). The reported estimates, CIs and statistical significance tests of these bivariate associations are based on common-effects models with standard errors clustered by study, and two-sided tests. With respect to statistical tests reported, the data distribution was assumed to be normal, but this was not formally tested. The distribution of estimates of learning deficits is shown separately for the different moderator categories in Fig. 6 .

Pre-registration

We prospectively registered a protocol of our systematic review and meta-analysis in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42021249944) on 19 April 2021 ( https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021249944 ).

Reporting summary

Further information on research design is available in the Nature Portfolio Reporting Summary linked to this article.

Data availability

The data used in the analyses for this manuscript were compiled by the authors based on the studies identified in the systematic review. The data are available on the Open Science Framework repository ( https://doi.org/10.17605/osf.io/u8gaz ). For our systematic review, we searched the following databases: Coronavirus Research Database ( https://proquest.libguides.com/covid19 ), Education Resources Information Centre database ( https://eric.ed.gov ), International Bibliography of the Social Sciences ( https://about.proquest.com/en/products-services/ibss-set-c/ ), Politics Collection ( https://about.proquest.com/en/products-services/ProQuest-Politics-Collection/ ), Social Science Database ( https://about.proquest.com/en/products-services/pq_social_science/ ), Sociology Collection ( https://about.proquest.com/en/products-services/ProQuest-Sociology-Collection/ ), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature ( https://www.ebsco.com/products/research-databases/cinahl-database ) and Web of Science ( https://clarivate.com/webofsciencegroup/solutions/web-of-science/ ). We also searched the following preprint and working paper repositories: Social Science Research Network ( https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/DisplayJournalBrowse.cfm ), Munich Personal RePEc Archive ( https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de ), IZA ( https://www.iza.org/content/publications ), National Bureau of Economic Research ( https://www.nber.org/papers?page=1&perPage=50&sortBy=public_date ), OSF Preprints ( https://osf.io/preprints/ ), PsyArXiv ( https://psyarxiv.com ), SocArXiv ( https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv ) and EdArXiv ( https://edarxiv.org ).

Code availability

All code needed to replicate our findings is available on the Open Science Framework repository ( https://doi.org/10.17605/osf.io/u8gaz ).

The Impact of COVID-19 on Children. UN Policy Briefs (United Nations, 2020).

Donnelly, R. & Patrinos, H. A. Learning loss during Covid-19: An early systematic review. Prospects (Paris) 51 , 601–609 (2022).

Hammerstein, S., König, C., Dreisörner, T. & Frey, A. Effects of COVID-19-related school closures on student achievement: a systematic review. Front. Psychol. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.746289 (2021).

Panagouli, E. et al. School performance among children and adolescents during COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review. Children 8 , 1134 (2021).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Patrinos, H. A., Vegas, E. & Carter-Rau, R. An Analysis of COVID-19 Student Learning Loss (World Bank, 2022).

Zierer, K. Effects of pandemic-related school closures on pupils’ performance and learning in selected countries: a rapid review. Educ. Sci. 11 , 252 (2021).

Article   Google Scholar  

König, C. & Frey, A. The impact of COVID-19-related school closures on student achievement: a meta-analysis. Educ. Meas. Issues Pract. 41 , 16–22 (2022).

Storey, N. & Zhang, Q. A meta-analysis of COVID learning loss. Preprint at EdArXiv (2021).

Sterne, J. A. et al. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i4919 (2016).

Azevedo, J. P., Hasan, A., Goldemberg, D., Iqbal, S. A. & Geven, K. Simulating the Potential Impacts of COVID-19 School Closures on Schooling and Learning Outcomes: A Set of Global Estimates (World Bank, 2020).

Bloom, H. S., Hill, C. J., Black, A. R. & Lipsey, M. W. Performance trajectories and performance gaps as achievement effect-size benchmarks for educational interventions. J. Res. Educ. Effectiveness 1 , 289–328 (2008).

Hill, C. J., Bloom, H. S., Black, A. R. & Lipsey, M. W. Empirical benchmarks for interpreting effect sizes in research. Child Dev. Perspect. 2 , 172–177 (2008).

Belot, M. & Webbink, D. Do teacher strikes harm educational attainment of students? Labour 24 , 391–406 (2010).

Jaume, D. & Willén, A. The long-run effects of teacher strikes: evidence from Argentina. J. Labor Econ. 37 , 1097–1139 (2019).

Cygan-Rehm, K. Are there no wage returns to compulsory schooling in Germany? A reassessment. J. Appl. Econ. 37 , 218–223 (2022).

Ichino, A. & Winter-Ebmer, R. The long-run educational cost of World War II. J. Labor Econ. 22 , 57–87 (2004).

Cooper, H., Nye, B., Charlton, K., Lindsay, J. & Greathouse, S. The effects of summer vacation on achievement test scores: a narrative and meta-analytic review. Rev. Educ. Res. 66 , 227–268 (1996).

Allington, R. L. et al. Addressing summer reading setback among economically disadvantaged elementary students. Read. Psychol. 31 , 411–427 (2010).

Smith, W. C. Consequences of school closure on access to education: lessons from the 2013–2016 Ebola pandemic. Int. Rev. Educ. 67 , 53–78 (2021).

Andrabi, T., Daniels, B. & Das, J. Human capital accumulation and disasters: evidence from the Pakistan earthquake of 2005. J. Hum. Resour . https://doi.org/10.35489/BSG-RISE-WP_2020/039 (2021).

Parolin, Z. & Lee, E. K. Large socio-economic, geographic and demographic disparities exist in exposure to school closures. Nat. Hum. Behav. 5 , 522–528 (2021).

Goudeau, S., Sanrey, C., Stanczak, A., Manstead, A. & Darnon, C. Why lockdown and distance learning during the COVID-19 pandemic are likely to increase the social class achievement gap. Nat. Hum. Behav. 5 , 1273–1281 (2021).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Bailey, D. H., Duncan, G. J., Murnane, R. J. & Au Yeung, N. Achievement gaps in the wake of COVID-19. Educ. Researcher 50 , 266–275 (2021).

van de Werfhorst, H. G. Inequality in learning is a major concern after school closures. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2105243118 (2021).

Alexander, K. L., Entwisle, D. R. & Olson, L. S. Schools, achievement, and inequality: a seasonal perspective. Educ. Eval. Policy Anal. 23 , 171–191 (2001).

Aucejo, E. M. & Romano, T. F. Assessing the effect of school days and absences on test score performance. Econ. Educ. Rev. 55 , 70–87 (2016).

Gottfried, M. A. The detrimental effects of missing school: evidence from urban siblings. Am. J. Educ. 117 , 147–182 (2011).

Goodman, J. Flaking Out: Student Absences and Snow Days as Disruptions of Instructional Time (National Bureau of Economic Research, 2014).

Birkelund, J. F. & Karlson, K. B. No evidence of a major learning slide 14 months into the COVID-19 pandemic in Denmark. European Societies https://doi.org/10.1080/14616696.2022.2129085 (2022).

Angrist, N., Djankov, S., Goldberg, P. K. & Patrinos, H. A. Measuring human capital using global learning data. Nature 592 , 403–408 (2021).

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Torche, F. in Social Mobility in Developing Countries: Concepts, Methods, and Determinants (eds Iversen, V., Krishna, A. & Sen, K.) 139–171 (Oxford Univ. Press, 2021).

World Development Report 2018: Learning to Realize Education’s Promise (World Bank, 2018).

Policy Brief: Education during COVID-19 and Beyond (United Nations, 2020).

One Year into COVID-19 Education Disruption: Where Do We Stand? (UNESCO, 2021).

Azevedo, J. P., Hasan, A., Goldemberg, D., Geven, K. & Iqbal, S. A. Simulating the potential impacts of COVID-19 school closures on schooling and learning outcomes: a set of global estimates. World Bank Res. Observer 36 , 1–40 (2021).

Google Scholar  

Ardington, C., Wills, G. & Kotze, J. COVID-19 learning losses: early grade reading in South Africa. Int. J. Educ. Dev. 86 , 102480 (2021).

Hevia, F. J., Vergara-Lope, S., Velásquez-Durán, A. & Calderón, D. Estimation of the fundamental learning loss and learning poverty related to COVID-19 pandemic in Mexico. Int. J. Educ. Dev. 88 , 102515 (2022).

Lichand, G., Doria, C. A., Leal-Neto, O. & Fernandes, J. P. C. The impacts of remote learning in secondary education during the pandemic in Brazil. Nat. Hum. Behav. 6 , 1079–1086 (2022).

Major, L. E., Eyles, A., Machin, S. et al. Learning Loss since Lockdown: Variation across the Home Nations (Centre for Economic Performance, London School of Economics and Political Science, 2021).

Di Pietro, G., Biagi, F., Costa, P., Karpinski, Z. & Mazza, J. The Likely Impact of COVID-19 on Education: Reflections Based on the Existing Literature and Recent International Datasets (Publications Office of the European Union, 2020).

Fuchs-Schündeln, N., Krueger, D., Ludwig, A. & Popova, I. The Long-Term Distributional and Welfare Effects of COVID-19 School Closures (National Bureau of Economic Research, 2020).

Kaffenberger, M. Modelling the long-run learning impact of the COVID-19 learning shock: actions to (more than) mitigate loss. Int. J. Educ. Dev. 81 , 102326 (2021).

Attewell, P. & Newman, K. S. Growing Gaps: Educational Inequality around the World (Oxford Univ. Press, 2010).

Betthäuser, B. A., Kaiser, C. & Trinh, N. A. Regional variation in inequality of educational opportunity across europe. Socius https://doi.org/10.1177/23780231211019890 (2021).

Angrist, N. et al. Building back better to avert a learning catastrophe: estimating learning loss from covid-19 school shutdowns in africa and facilitating short-term and long-term learning recovery. Int. J. Educ. Dev. 84 , 102397 (2021).

Conley, D. & Johnson, T. Opinion: Past is future for the era of COVID-19 research in the social sciences. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2104155118 (2021).

Angrist, N., Bergman, P. & Matsheng, M. Experimental evidence on learning using low-tech when school is out. Nat. Hum. Behav. 6 , 941–950 (2022).

Lichand, G., Christen, J. & van Egeraat, E. Do Behavioral Nudges Work under Remote Learning? Evidence from Brazil during the Pandemic (Univ. Zurich, 2022).

Ouzzani, M., Hammady, H., Fedorowicz, Z. & Elmagarmid, A. Rayyan—a web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Syst. Rev. 5 , 1–10 (2016).

Tomasik, M. J., Helbling, L. A. & Moser, U. Educational gains of in-person vs. distance learning in primary and secondary schools: a natural experiment during the COVID-19 pandemic school closures in Switzerland. Int. J. Psychol. 56 , 566–576 (2021).

Eurybase: The Information Database on Education Systems in Europe (Eurydice, 2021).

Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. & Rothstein, H. R. A basic introduction to fixed-effect and random-effects models for meta-analysis. Res. Synth. Methods 1 , 97–111 (2010).

Ogilvie, D. et al. The harvest plot: a method for synthesising evidence about the differential effects of interventions. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 8 , 1–7 (2008).

Gore, J., Fray, L., Miller, A., Harris, J. & Taggart, W. The impact of COVID-19 on student learning in New South Wales primary schools: an empirical study. Aust. Educ. Res. 48 , 605–637 (2021).

Gambi, L. & De Witte, K. The Resiliency of School Outcomes after the COVID-19 Pandemic: Standardised Test Scores and Inequality One Year after Long Term School Closures (FEB Research Report Department of Economics, 2021).

Maldonado, J. E. & De Witte, K. The effect of school closures on standardised student test outcomes. Br. Educ. Res. J. 48 , 49–94 (2021).

Vegas, E. COVID-19’s Impact on Learning Losses and Learning Inequality in Colombia (Center for Universal Education at Brookings, 2022).

Depping, D., Lücken, M., Musekamp, F. & Thonke, F. in Schule während der Corona-Pandemie. Neue Ergebnisse und Überblick über ein dynamisches Forschungsfeld (eds Fickermann, D. & Edelstein, B.) 51–79 (Münster & New York: Waxmann, 2021).

Ludewig, U. et al. Die COVID-19 Pandemie und Lesekompetenz von Viertklässler*innen: Ergebnisse der IFS-Schulpanelstudie 2016–2021 (Institut für Schulentwicklungsforschung, Univ. Dortmund, 2022).

Schult, J., Mahler, N., Fauth, B. & Lindner, M. A. Did students learn less during the COVID-19 pandemic? Reading and mathematics competencies before and after the first pandemic wave. Sch. Eff. Sch. Improv. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2022.2061014 (2022).

Schult, J., Mahler, N., Fauth, B. & Lindner, M. A. Long-term consequences of repeated school closures during the COVID-19 pandemic for reading and mathematics competencies. Front. Educ. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.867316 (2022).

Bazoli, N., Marzadro, S., Schizzerotto, A. & Vergolini, L. Learning Loss and Students’ Social Origins during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Italy (FBK-IRVAPP Working Papers 3, 2022).

Borgonovi, F. & Ferrara, A. The effects of COVID-19 on inequalities in educational achievement in Italy. Preprint at SSRN https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4171968 (2022).

Contini, D., Di Tommaso, M. L., Muratori, C., Piazzalunga, D. & Schiavon, L. Who lost the most? Mathematics achievement during the COVID-19 pandemic. BE J. Econ. Anal. Policy 22 , 399–408 (2022).

Engzell, P., Frey, A. & Verhagen, M. D. Learning loss due to school closures during the COVID-19 pandemic. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2022376118 (2021).

Haelermans, C. Learning Growth and Inequality in Primary Education: Policy Lessons from the COVID-19 Crisis (The European Liberal Forum (ELF)-FORES, 2021).

Haelermans, C. et al. A Full Year COVID-19 Crisis with Interrupted Learning and Two School Closures: The Effects on Learning Growth and Inequality in Primary Education (Maastricht Univ., Research Centre for Education and the Labour Market (ROA), 2021).

Haelermans, C. et al. Sharp increase in inequality in education in times of the COVID-19-pandemic. PLoS ONE 17 , e0261114 (2022).

Schuurman, T. M., Henrichs, L. F., Schuurman, N. K., Polderdijk, S. & Hornstra, L. Learning loss in vulnerable student populations after the first COVID-19 school closure in the Netherlands. Scand. J. Educ. Res. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2021.2006307 (2021).

Arenas, A. & Gortazar, L. Learning Loss One Year after School Closures (Esade Working Paper, 2022).

Hallin, A. E., Danielsson, H., Nordström, T. & Fälth, L. No learning loss in Sweden during the pandemic evidence from primary school reading assessments. Int. J. Educ. Res. 114 , 102011 (2022).

Blainey, K. & Hannay, T. The Impact of School Closures on Autumn 2020 Attainment (RS Assessment from Hodder Education and SchoolDash, 2021).

Blainey, K. & Hannay, T. The Impact of School Closures on Spring 2021 Attainment (RS Assessment from Hodder Education and SchoolDash, 2021).

Blainey, K. & Hannay, T. The Effects of Educational Disruption on Primary School Attainment in Summer 2021 (RS Assessment from Hodder Education and SchoolDash, 2021).

Understanding Progress in the 2020/21 Academic Year: Complete Findings from the Autumn Term (London: Department for Education, 2021).

Understanding Progress in the 2020/21 Academic Year: Initial Findings from the Spring Term (London: Department for Education, 2021).

Impact of COVID-19 on Attainment: Initial Analysis (Brentford: GL Assessment, 2021).

Rose, S. et al. Impact of School Closures and Subsequent Support Strategies on Attainment and Socio-emotional Wellbeing in Key Stage 1: Interim Paper 1 (National Foundation for Educational Research (NFER) and Education Endowment Foundation (EEF) , 2021).

Rose, S. et al. Impact of School Closures and Subsequent Support Strategies on Attainment and Socio-emotional Wellbeing in Key Stage 1: Interim Paper 2 (National Foundation for Educational Research (NFER) and Education Endowment Foundation (EEF), 2021).

Weidmann, B. et al. COVID-19 Disruptions: Attainment Gaps and Primary School Responses (Education Endowment Foundation, 2021).

Bielinski, J., Brown, R. & Wagner, K. No Longer a Prediction: What New Data Tell Us About the Effects of 2020 Learning Disruptions (Illuminate Education, 2021).

Domingue, B. W., Hough, H. J., Lang, D. & Yeatman, J. Changing Patterns of Growth in Oral Reading Fluency During the COVID-19 Pandemic. PACE Working Paper (Policy Analysis for California Education, 2021).

Domingue, B. et al. The effect of COVID on oral reading fluency during the 2020–2021 academic year. AERA Open https://doi.org/10.1177/23328584221120254 (2022).

Kogan, V. & Lavertu, S. The COVID-19 Pandemic and Student Achievement on Ohio’s Third-Grade English Language Arts Assessment (Ohio State Univ., 2021).

Kogan, V. & Lavertu, S. How the COVID-19 Pandemic Affected Student Learning in Ohio: Analysis of Spring 2021 Ohio State Tests (Ohio State Univ., 2021).

Kozakowski, W., Gill, B., Lavallee, P., Burnett, A. & Ladinsky, J. Changes in Academic Achievement in Pittsburgh Public Schools during Remote Instruction in the COVID-19 Pandemic (Institute of Education Sciences (IES), US Department of Education, 2020).

Kuhfeld, M. & Lewis, K. Student Achievement in 2021–2022: Cause for Hope and Continued Urgency (NWEA, 2022).

Lewis, K., Kuhfeld, M., Ruzek, E. & McEachin, A. Learning during COVID-19: Reading and Math Achievement in the 2020–21 School Year (NWEA, 2021).

Locke, V. N., Patarapichayatham, C. & Lewis, S. Learning Loss in Reading and Math in US Schools Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic (Istation, 2021).

Pier, L., Christian, M., Tymeson, H. & Meyer, R. H. COVID-19 Impacts on Student Learning: Evidence from Interim Assessments in California. PACE Working Paper (Policy Analysis for California Education, 2021).

Download references

Acknowledgements

Carlsberg Foundation grant CF19-0102 (A.M.B.-M.); Leverhulme Trust Large Centre Grant (P.E.), the Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare (FORTE) grant 2016-07099 (P.E.); the French National Research Agency (ANR) as part of the ‘Investissements d’Avenir’ programme LIEPP (ANR-11-LABX-0091 and ANR-11-IDEX-0005-02) and the Université Paris Cité IdEx (ANR-18-IDEX-0001) (P.E.). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish or preparation of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Centre for Research on Social Inequalities (CRIS), Sciences Po, Paris, France

Bastian A. Betthäuser

Department of Social Policy and Intervention, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

Bastian A. Betthäuser & Anders M. Bach-Mortensen

Nuffield College, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

Bastian A. Betthäuser & Per Engzell

Social Research Institute, University College London, London, UK

Per Engzell

Swedish Institute for Social Research, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

B.A.B., A.M.B.-M. and P.E. designed the study; B.A.B., A.M.B.-M. and P.E. planned and implemented the search and screened studies; B.A.B., A.M.B.-M. and P.E. extracted relevant data from studies; B.A.B., A.M.B.-M. and P.E. conducted the quality appraisal; B.A.B., A.M.B.-M. and P.E. conducted the data analysis and visualization; B.A.B., A.M.B.-M. and P.E. wrote the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bastian A. Betthäuser .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information.

Nature Human Behaviour thanks Guilherme Lichand, Sébastien Goudeau and Christoph König for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Peer reviewer reports are available.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary information.

Supplementary methods, results, figures, tables, PRISMA Checklist and references.

Reporting Summary

Peer review file, rights and permissions.

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Betthäuser, B.A., Bach-Mortensen, A.M. & Engzell, P. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the evidence on learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Nat Hum Behav 7 , 375–385 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-022-01506-4

Download citation

Received : 24 June 2022

Accepted : 30 November 2022

Published : 30 January 2023

Issue Date : March 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-022-01506-4

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Investigating the effect of covid-19 disruption in education using reds data.

• Alice Bertoletti
• Zbigniew Karpiński

Large-scale Assessments in Education (2024)

School reopening concerns amid a pandemic among higher education students: a developing country perspective for policy development

• Manuel B. Garcia

Educational Research for Policy and Practice (2024)

A democratic curriculum for the challenges of post-truth

• David Nally

Curriculum Perspectives (2024)

Parents’ perceptions of their child’s school adjustment during the COVID-19 pandemic: a person-oriented approach

• Sanni Pöysä
• Noona Kiuru
• Eija Pakarinen

European Journal of Psychology of Education (2024)

SGS: SqueezeNet-guided Gaussian-kernel SVM for COVID-19 Diagnosis

• Fanfeng Shi
• Vishnuvarthanan Govindaraj

Mobile Networks and Applications (2024)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Physical Review Physics Education Research

• Collections
• Editorial Team
• Open Access

Utilizing network analysis to explore student qualitative inferential reasoning chains

J. caleb speirs, mackenzie r. stetzer, and beth a. lindsey, phys. rev. phys. educ. res. 20 , 010147 – published 29 may 2024.

• No Citing Articles

Over the course of the introductory calculus-based physics course, students are often expected to build conceptual understanding and develop and refine skills in problem solving and qualitative inferential reasoning. Many of the research-based materials developed over the past 30 years by the physics education research community use sequences of scaffolded questions to step students through a qualitative inferential reasoning chain. It is often tacitly assumed that, in addition to building conceptual understanding, such materials improve qualitative reasoning skills. However, clear documentation of the impact of such materials on qualitative reasoning skills is critical. New methodologies are needed to better study reasoning processes and to disentangle, to the extent possible, processes related to physics content from processes general to all human reasoning. As a result, we have employed network analysis methodologies to examine student responses to reasoning-related tasks in order to gain deeper insight into the nature of student reasoning in physics. In this paper, we show that network analysis metrics are both interpretable and valuable when applied to student reasoning data generated from reasoning chain construction tasks . We also demonstrate that documentation of improvements in the articulation of specific lines of reasoning can be obtained from a network analysis of responses to reasoning chain construction tasks.

• Received 1 February 2023
• Revised 7 November 2023
• Accepted 26 April 2024

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.20.010147

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

• Research Areas

Authors & Affiliations

• Department of Physics, University of North Florida, Jacksonville, Florida 32224-7699, USA
• Department of Physics and Astronomy and Maine Center for Research in STEM Education, University of Maine, Orono, Maine 04469, USA
• Department of Physics, Penn State Greater Allegheny, McKeesport, Pennsylvania 15132, USA

Article Text

Vol. 20, Iss. 1 — January - June 2024

Authorization Required

Other options.

• Buy Article »
• Find an Institution with the Article »

Download & Share

An example of a reasoning chain construction task implemented online using Qualtrics’ “Pick/Group/Rank” question format. This task is the same task discussed in Sec.  4b .

(a) An example of two methods for constructing an individual-student network from an individual student’s response. (b) An illustration of summing individual student networks to create a full network.

Work-energy task. Question prompts (drawn from Ref. [ 69 ]) and associated reasoning elements provided to students are shown. The elements are numbered for later reference and color coded based on whether they were intended for the work as a change in energy argument (green), were intended for the work as a dot-product argument (blue), or were conclusion elements (yellow). Students were not presented with the colors associated with each element.

Examples of each type of response to the work-energy task. Each example is an actual student-generated chain.

A representation of the communities found in (a) a direct association network and (b) an indirect association network, both built from correct responses to the work-energy task described in Sec.  4a2 . Elements that are aligned with a work as dot-product argument are colored blue and the elements aligned with the work as a change in energy argument are colored green. The answer element is colored yellow. The modularity is given for reference. Note the especially dense connections between elements 5 and 6, suggesting a tight association between those elements in (a).

Reasoning element frequency plot for three communities present in the direct association network, including (a) the work as a change in energy community, (b) the work as a dot-product community, and (c) the two-element force and displacement community [see Fig.  5 ]. The plot indicates the percentage of the trials in which each element was included in the specified community. A dotted line corresponds to the 60% threshold used for ascertaining community membership in the bootstrapping tests.

A representation of a sparsified ( α = 0.2 ) direct association network built from correct responses to the work task. The elements are color coded according to the line of reasoning they are useful for: green elements are useful in the energy argument, and blue elements are useful in the dot-product argument.

The first of four isomorphic graph tasks adapted from Ref. [ 9 ]. The other three graph tasks are shown in detail in Appendix  pp1 . Note that this is the same task as that shown in Fig.  1 .

Reasoning elements provided to the student on each of the four isomorphic graph tasks. Elements that are productive to a correct line of reasoning are color coded in red, elements that are not productive are color coded in blue, and answer elements are color coded in yellow.

Community structure detected in indirect association networks comprised of correct responses to the graph task as posed in the context of (a) kinematics, (b) potential energy, (c) electric potential, and (d) magnetic flux.

Example network illustrating locally adaptive network sparsification [ 64 ]. (a) The base network. (b) The same network after sparsification at α = 0.1 .

Four isomorphic graph tasks used in the study.

Sign up to receive regular email alerts from Physical Review Physics Education Research

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

• Forgot your username/password?
• Create an account

Article Lookup

Paste a citation or doi, enter a citation.

• Root Society for Indexing and Impact Factor Service
• [email protected]
• Apply for Root Impact Factor

• Journal Master

Education Research and Analysis

• Email id :   [email protected]
• URL :    erajournal.com
• Publisher :   Kalyani Foundation For Media Science and Community Research
• Chief Editor :   Santanu Banerjee
• Country :   India
• Facebook :    N/A
• Twitter :    N/A
• ISSN (Online) :   2348-571X
• ISSN (Print) :   -
• Abbreviation :   ERA
• Language :   English
• Frequency :   Quarterly
• Journal Year :   2014
• Keywords :   Multidisciplinary, Research, International Journal, Education, Analysis
• Categories :   Humanities, Literature & Arts
• License Type :   No License

It is an international peer reviewed journal being published since 2014 uninterruptedly. It is a UGC enlisted multidisciplinary journal. Its editorial board consists of scholars form all over India and abroad.

Related Journals

International Journal of Teaching, Learning and Education...

• ISSN (Online) :    2583-4371
• ISSN (Print) :    -
• Email id :    [email protected]
• License Type :    CC BY-SA

Al-Balqa Journal for Research and Studies ...

• ISSN (Online) :    2616-2814
• ISSN (Print) :    1684-0615
• Email id :    [email protected]
• License Type :    CC BY

Journal of Sport and Recreation Researches...

• ISSN (Online) :    2667-8985
• Email id :    [email protected]

Revista Etos...

• ISSN (Online) :    2526-5466
• Email id :    [email protected]
• License Type :    CC BY-NC-ND

Journal of Humanities and Education Development...

• ISSN (Online) :    2581-8651
• Email id :    [email protected]

Bangladesh Journal of Multidisciplinary Scientific Research...

• ISSN (Online) :    2687-8518
• ISSN (Print) :    2687-850X
• Email id :    [email protected]
• License Type :    CC BY-NC

International Journal of Arts and Humanities...

• ISSN (Online) :    2415-122X
• ISSN (Print) :    2415-1491
• Email id :    [email protected]

Bingöl University Journal of Social Sciences Institute...

• ISSN (Online) :    1309-6672
• ISSN (Print) :    2618-6322
• Email id :    [email protected]

International Journal of Information, Business and Management...

• ISSN (Online) :    2218-046X
• ISSN (Print) :    2076-9202
• Email id :    [email protected]

Journal of V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, Series "Phil...

• ISSN (Online) :    2414-5904
• ISSN (Print) :    2226-0994
• Email id :    [email protected]

Popular Journals

International Journal of ...

International Journal of Environment, ...

Indian Journal of Natural...

Tamil Nadu Scientific Research Organization is working for the prom...

Journal of Advanced Compu...

Journal of Advanced Computing and Comm...

AI Publications is an international op...

Annals of International m...

Annals of International medical and Dental Research (AIMDR) is an o...

World Journal of Pharmace...

The mission of World Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences (An interna...

IJLSSR is worldwide multidisciplinary, bi-monthly published, open a...

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF...

The International Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Research ai...

International Journal of Innovative Re...

Acta Scientiae et Intelle...

Acta Scientiae et Intellectus's mission statement first, to serve s...

Popular Impacts

Impact Factor :

ISSN (Online) : 2456-1878

ISSN (Online) : 2456-1908

ISSN (Online) : 2454-1311

ISSN (Online) : 2455-5304

ISSN (Online) : 2456-2319

testimonial

Jagdeep dhatrwal, manish garg, sahil ameriya, sign up for our newsletter.

To get the latest update of Indexed Journal and Impact Factor

Spanish Students’ Categorical Perceptions of Feminist Movements

• Open access
• Published: 29 May 2024
• Volume 53 , article number  52 , ( 2024 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Antonio Manuel Ávila-Muñoz   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5239-2670 1  

3 Altmetric

Identifying a society’s perceptions and, by extension, opinions of a certain social movement can help to understand to what extent the movement has been successful in effecting change. When working to gain such an understanding, a focus on the student population is essential, as their opinions provide insight into the future conditions of society and, thus, into whether the movement has been successful in effecting lasting social change. The present work focusses on the feminist movements and, in line with the above, analyses the perceptions held by a sample of 600 Spanish students enrolled in compulsory secondary, pre-university, and university education. The method employed begins with the use of association tests to extract lexical networks. Then, following a theoretical transformation, the traditional lexical availability index is applied in combination with fuzzy set theory to the sample of lists obtained so as to map the structure of the collective network, a novel approach that results in different levels of compatibility. The highest levels of compatibility reveal the prototypical conceptualisation as well as the sample’s shared cognitive perception. The results suggest that although the population under study may have absorbed the feminist movements’ messages of equality and respect, distorted perceptions could still remain in certain groups analysed. This work therefore recommends that education centres may wish to consider communicating objective information on the feminist movements specifically to women, as this could ultimately lead to all students fully embracing a feminist awareness distanced from extreme ideologies.

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

State of the Art

The feminist movements of today have been shaped by over a century of fighting for equal rights between men and women. Their historical development can be interpreted as a series of overlapping waves, as different currents have emerged over time that have focussed on new dimensions, such as social class, racist ideologies, and diverse gender identities (Amorós & de Miguel Álvarez, 2007 ; Freedman, 2003 ; Glucksmann, 2008 ; McDonald, 1997 ; Shields, 2016 ). However, in general, since the eighteenth century, when awareness first arose of the oppression of women in enlightened society, feminist movements have been defined by the social, political, and legislative nature of their demands. Today, at least in ‘Western’ societies, men and women do have equal rights, but even in these societies an egalitarian social consciousness has still not yet been established. This came to light particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, for example, which highlighted many inequalities within the home environment that are detrimental to women (Collins et al., 2020 ; Dunatchik et al., 2021 ; Mooi-Reci & Risman, 2021 ; Pedersen & Burnett, 2022 ).

Nevertheless, overall, feminism is still a diverse phenomenon, and it has been studied from many viewpoints including that of linguistics (Gupta & Sinha, 2005 ; Irigaray, 1985 ; Kramer, 2016 ; Valls, 2002 ; Velasco Martínez, 2016 ; Weis et al., 2018 ). The results identified not only strong links to philosophy (Irigaray, 1974 ; Wittig, 1979 ) but also that the different groups within the movement as a whole can be deemed to represent approaches to politics that occasionally have associated themselves with other highly ideological political and social movements (Touraine, 2005 ), thereby causing other groups in society to reject their endeavours (Lazar, 2005 ; Nájera, 2010 ; Willis, 1984 ). In certain cases, the demands made by feminist movements even clashed with cultures and traditions deeply rooted in society (Amorós Puente & Posada Kubissa, 2007 ; Bajri, 2022 ; Botello-Peñaloza & Guerrero-Rincón, 2017 ; Ghuman, 2001 ; Medina, 2007 ; Nasution, 2016 ).

Such difficulties may well be a cause of concern for the major international organisations, who support feminist movements and also take action themselves, encouraging the right of any human being to be considered a natural person and holder of rights, irrespective of their sex or gender identity (UN Women, www.unwomen.org/en ). Their expectation is surely that gender equality will help to bring an end to gender-based violence, one of the most devastating human rights violations existing in the present day. Similarly, national institutions of today’s democratic societies place great emphasis on communicating the importance of social justice and on actively creating equal opportunities and equal rights, yet according to some research their efforts are not always successful (Acker et al., 1983 ; Singh, 2007 ; Walker & Thompson, 1984 ). Both Duncan ( 2010 ) and Fitz et al. ( 2012 ) have drawn attention to the low degree of commitment to feminist movements among university students in today’s democratic societies, despite the fact that these students acknowledge the important role such movements play in the historical development of democracy around the world. However, ultimately, intersectionality theory indicates that not only gender affects how individuals experience society, as the various identity and societal categories like gender, race, social class, and sexual orientation overlap, combining to shape the individual’s experience (Crenshaw, 1991 ). It would seem that an individual cannot be reduced to one single identity and that various forms of oppression and privilege overlap.

Based on the current context, research into the perceptions held by the younger generations regarding the feminist movements is crucial. The conditions in future society depend on the attitudes of these individuals, and the fact that they are still students means research can identify any misconceptions or distorted perceptions they glean from their academic environment. In this way, research can help education promote equality where required to ensure conditions result in more equitable societies in future (Cann, 2019 ; Caro Blanco, 2008 ; de Miguel Álvarez, 2008 ; Esteban Galarza & Távora, 2008 ; Hlavka, 2014 ; Liberia Vayá et al., 2015 ).

Aims and Research Foundations

The main objective of the present work was to discover Andalusian students’ collective perception of the phenomenon of feminist movements. Accordingly, I employed a novel approach to analyse a sample of 600 Andalusian students from three different levels of education: final year of compulsory secondary education ( Educación Secundaria Obligatoria ), final year of high school ( Bachillerato ), and final year of a bachelor’s degree ( Grado Universitario ). Building on this main aim, the premises underlying this work, described below, allow for several more specific objectives:

To observe how sociocultural factors affect the perception held by the study sample regarding the phenomenon of feminist movements.

To study the vocabulary associated with the phenomenon.

To study the cognitive prototypes present in the collective mental representation produced by the study sample for the phenomenon.

To reflect on the perceptions held by the different groups considered regarding the phenomenon.

To identify any perceptions that have been recently acquired by society or may even be discriminatory towards present-day social movements seeking to achieve gender equality.

Hence, this work contributes significantly to analysing social perceptions of the feminist movement by addressing a well-researched problem using a novel approach that embraces the principles of reproducibility, replicability, and reliability. First, reproducibility is ensured by transparency and completeness when describing the methodology employed. Each step of the experimental process—from sample selection to data analysis—has been documented in detail, which will allow other researchers to faithfully reproduce the study and verify the results obtained. The methodology can be transferred to different population samples with the confidence that the results will be scientifically valid. Then, replicability is ensured by applying consolidated statistical techniques and using sufficiently large samples to guarantee the generalizability of the results. In addition, the analyses allow us to evaluate the consistency of the findings in different conditions and contexts, confirming the reliability of the obtained results, complementing those achieved to date by previous works. Finally, in the future the reliability of the study, reflected in the meticulousness of the data collection and analysis, will make guaranteeing the use of validated and reliable instruments to measure the variables of interest possible. The research procedure used serves to minimize possible biases and errors observed in prior studies.

Accessing the collective perception of a major phenomenon in today’s world presents difficulties both in theory and methodology. Nevertheless, the fields of cognitive, psycho-, and sociolinguistics at least offer a strategy for accessing such shared information: association tests, or tests of lexical availability. These can provide a detailed understanding of cognitive processes that, when combined with the novel approach employed in the present work, allow a researcher to construct collective prototypes for a society. As is well known, within the theory of categorisation (Rosch & Mervis, 1975 ; Taylor, 1995 ), the concept of prototype refers to an element that represents a category. They reflect the most typical or average instances of the category and serve as a mental reference point, summarising the most important features shared by the majority of category members. For example, a prototype for the category ‘fruit’ could comprise features like ‘is edible’, ‘has seeds’, and ‘is cultivated’. Some fruits like apples or oranges could be seen as more prototypical representations of the category than others. In the present work, collective prototypes are constructed by employing fuzzy set theory. The cognitive processes underlying the approach can be interpreted as collective models of perception, thereby allowing the measuring of a community’s tolerance, inclusivity, and acceptance of social developments (Ávila-Muñoz, 2022 ; Ávila-Muñoz et al., 2020 , 2022 ). The following premises provide the foundations for this approach:

A community’s collective perception of a contentious social reality becomes apparent in lexical-semantic differences. An individual’s various social conditions (gender identity, age, public or private education, social status, profession, etc.) can affect their perception and ideology, and the effects become apparent in the lexical structure of semantic content.

Lexical prototypes allow researchers to determine cognitive prototypes. The individuals’ thematic vocabulary is structured around prototypical nuclei that encompass the most frequently used and shared lexical units. Frequently shared lexical units identified during analysis can be quantified and operationalised to reveal frequently shared concepts. The compatibility of vocabulary with the most central point of the lexical prototype can be parameterised by applying fuzzy set theory (Ávila-Muñoz & Sánchez Sáez, 2014 ), and the resulting levels within the fuzzy set reveal the cognitive prototype that reflects a society’s opinions.

Thus, researchers can identify stereotyped or discriminatory prototypes as well as lexical and cognitive gaps within fields of experience relevant to contemporary social life and positively impact vulnerable groups of individuals. In this context, researchers can then offer recommendations, such as for the improvement of educational curricula (regarding inclusion, tolerance, diversity, equality, transversality, etc.).

Collective perceptions and opinions are stored, articulated, and to an extent shaped by the lexicon of a language and its varieties. In representation of these collective perceptions, researchers can use lexical networks to access conceptual networks and thereby social value systems (including beliefs, attitudes, and evaluations of, as well as differences between, social groups, ethnicities, nationalities, genders, etc.) (Brugman & Lakoff, 1988 ; Gilquin, 2008 , 2022 ). By focussing on the virtual lexicon, in which units are organised into thematic networks, researchers can access these social value systems for representative samples of a community without the individual speakers being able to self-monitor their responses (Schuetze & Weimer-Stuckmann, 2010 ). If researchers understand the degree to which a society is (un)knowledgeable about a sensitive issue, they can evaluate how much it is (dis)informed—a factor that could affect the community’s attitude towards future developments regarding the issue under study as well as others. To reach such conclusions, researchers must first access the thematic vocabulary of individuals within sample groups from the speech community or communities considered, then analyse the lexical networks available to these individuals, and finally identify the perceptions and underlying community-held beliefs (MacLaury, 1991 ).

The procedures used herein for the tests of lexical availability were based on those for association tests, and they are widely used in both studies on lexical availability (Ávila-Muñoz, 2016a , 2016b , 2017a , 2017b , 2017c , 2018 ; Ávila-Muñoz & Sánchez Sáez, 2011 ; Ávila-Muñoz & Villena Ponsoda, 2010 ) and lexical variation within a speech community (Crespo Miguel & Frías Delgado, 2008 ; Villena Ponsoda et al., 2018 ). Databases obtained using this methodology in the past have proven useful and relevant. For the present work, the data was then processed using a novel approach to produce the shared categorisation and reveal the collective prototype for the population under study, after which the results were analysed and conclusions drawn.

Obtaining Community Prototypes. Moving from Lexical Availability to Lexical Compatibility

Studies on lexical availability were first conducted in the mid-1950s within the area of lexicostatistics, the aim being to provide an alternative to dictionaries of lexical frequency. Such dictionaries present the vocabulary used most frequently by speakers of a language in their communication. To obtain this vocabulary, basic lexical counting methods are used to determine which words occur most often, regardless of the communicative situation. However, despite the value of this type of dictionary within the area of second language teaching (Davies, 2005 ; Davies & Gardner, 2009 ; Lonsdale & Le Bras, 2009 ), researchers cautioned that these lists contained a high number of non-thematic words (conjunctions, prepositions, articles) and only a low number—or even no occurrences at all—of thematic words (mainly nouns), which, though frequently used, are less likely to occur in general, due to being closely linked to specific topics. For instance, many speakers will be familiar with words such as ‘plumbing’, ‘masonry’, ‘partition’, and ‘quote’, but they will only use these words when discussing the subject of house renovation.

Research on lexical availability was therefore initiated to complement dictionaries of lexical frequency within the area of second language teaching (Gougenheim et al., 1954 ). To access available vocabulary, researchers developed a methodology that focusses on a centre of interest—or specific topic (such as house renovation)—to access the available vocabulary expressly for that topic. The centre of interest serves as a stimulus in an association test, or test of lexical availability, during which each research participant spends a pre-defined amount of time writing down a list of words they feel are related to the stimulus (i.e., related to house renovation). The methodology then entails analysing all the word lists furnished by the sample of individuals to determine the lexical availability index (0–1) of each word provided. This index reflects frequency and position, assigning the highest values (values closer to 1)—and thus the highest relevance—to the words that appear most often (frequency) in the first positions on the lists (position).

In more recent decades, reflection on the deeper meaning of the lexical availability index has given rise to the theoretical framework of lexical compatibility. This framework assumes that when individuals produce lists of available vocabulary, they first provide words that are more prototypical, nuclear, or relevant within the centre of interest (e.g., for the centre of interest ‘fruit’: ‘apple’, ‘orange’, ‘banana’, ‘strawberry’) and then other words located increasingly further away from this prototypical nucleus (e.g., for ‘fruit’: ‘pear’, ‘melon’, ‘watermelon’, ‘tomato’, ‘pepper’, ‘cucumber’, ‘courgette’, ‘aubergine’, ‘pumpkin’, ‘avocado’). Within this framework, the lexical availability index serves as an excellent indicator of the degree of prototypicality of words in their centre of interest.

The availability of a word essentially corresponds to its accessibility within the centre of interest. The initial assumption is that each centre of interest revolves around a prototype that represents the topic (Prototype theory: Wittgenstein, 1953 ; Rosch, 1978 ; Lakoff, 1987 ). When an individual takes part in a test of lexical availability, they first access the nucleus of the lexical network for the prototype referenced in the centre of interest (e.g., for ‘fruit’: ‘apple’). Starting from this access point, they then make their own way around the lexical network, and this journey is reflected in the order of the words on the list they produce.

The word order on an individual’s list can therefore be interpreted as an approximate representation of their access to their personal vocabulary. Of course, obtaining the actual structure of each participant’s personal lexical network would be impossible. Such structures are not only determined by many uncontrollable biographical factors but are also dynamic and influenced by the individual’s interaction with their environment, meaning they are in a state of continuous change. Nevertheless, when applied to a sample of lists instead of an individual list, the lexical availability index produces a quantitative estimate for the structure of lexical compatibility within a centre of interest for a population. Although it is still lexical availability and the lexical availability index that are being employed, the terms lexical compatibility and lexical compatibility index are used when describing results based on a sample of lists.

Accordingly, the theoretical framework for the concept of lexical compatibility can be described as follows:

The centre of interest indicates an access point to a network of lexical elements perceived by the individual as interrelated and related to the concept referenced.

The structure of this network is subjective and inherent to the individual, meaning it cannot be directly extrapolated to other individuals.

For various reasons, including both social and cultural factors, individuals have similar lexical structures. When several lexical structures for a single centre of interest are combined, they produce the shared sociocultural metastructure for that centre of interest. In other words, the structure for a centre of interest does not exist in itself but is rather produced by a group of speakers. A change in the group of speakers would therefore most likely produce a change in the structure for the centre of interest.

When an individual is asked to provide a list of available vocabulary, they first access lexical elements closest to the most nuclear, central point of the prototype that represents the centre of interest (e.g., for ‘fruit’: ‘apple’, ‘orange’, ‘banana’). They then move through their lexical network towards words that are further from this initial access point, first providing more accessible elements (e.g., ‘pear’, ‘melon’, ‘watermelon’) and then less accessible elements (e.g., ‘tomato’, ‘pepper’, ‘cucumber’).

The word order on the lists plays a role in determining the structure of their compatibility within the centre of interest.

The structure of a centre of interest is considered to consist of a nucleus accessible to all speakers, and a periphery available to individuals depending on various factors (including their lexical capacity). The structure of compatibility within the nucleus determines the structure of compatibility throughout the rest of the spectrum.

Simply put, lexical compatibility builds on a model of linguistic representation in which lexicon is perceived to be constructed by speakers. When speakers belong to the same speech community, they share a large part of the vocabulary of their language for the reasons mentioned. It is the lexicon hub for a centre of interest that is available to all the individuals within a speech community (e.g., for ‘fruit’: ‘apple’, ‘orange’, ‘banana’, and ‘strawberry’; but not ‘pear’, ‘melon’, ‘watermelon’, ‘tomato’, ‘pepper’, cucumber’, ‘courgette’, ‘aubergine’, ‘pumpkin’, or ‘avocado’), meaning the basic vocabulary they share comprises the centre of the lexical spectrum of every centre of interest. The words that are repeated most often in the highest positions on the lists—and thus most compatible with the most nuclear point of the shared metastructure—represent the shared community prototype and determine the structure of the centre of interest. If one calculates the index of lexical compatibility (ILC, interval 0–1) for each word provided by participants, one can map the structure of the vocabulary for a centre of interest in terms of lexical compatibility. The precise mathematical foundation for the ILC is available in Ávila-Muñoz and Villena Ponsoda ( 2010 ).

Broadly speaking, the ILC can then be parameterised by incorporating fuzzy set theory (Zadeh, 1965 ; Zimmermann, 2001 ). Fuzzy sets are a generalisation of traditional set theory in which the compatibility of elements with the concept represented by the set is considered, instead of their belonging to the set. By employing a specific mathematical formula or tool offered by fuzzy set theory, different levels of compatibility or prototypicality can be established between elements and their set.

The tool that can be employed is either the FEV (Fuzzy Expected Value) or an updated but in this case more or less equal version of the FEV called the WFEV (Weighted Fuzzy Expected Value). These determine typical degrees of compatibility for fuzzy sets. Using either tool, one can establish an initial limit for the degree of belonging (e.g., for the set produced for ‘fruit’: this would most likely include at least ‘apple’) as well as further parameters for differentiating between elements that are initially still ‘very typical, or compatible’ (e.g., for ‘fruit’: this might describe ‘pear’, ‘melon’, and ‘watermelon’) and then ‘not very typical, or compatible’ (e.g., for ‘fruit’: this might describe ‘tomato’, ‘pepper’, ‘cucumber’, etc.). These two tools essentially provide several objective cut-off marks, resulting in a number of superior and inferior levels within the fuzzy set (cut-off sets or levels); each cut-off mark balances the valuation of the set of elements already selected and analysed by the tool with the degrees of compatibility of additional elements. The procedure for using lexical availability to establish degrees of belonging and construct a fuzzy set is explained in more detail in Ávila-Muñoz and Sánchez Sáez ( 2014 ).

In other words, under this approach, various lines of conceptual categorisation certainty can be established. These initially comprise the words closest to the core of the structure for the centre of interest (e.g., for ‘fruit’: ‘apple’, ‘banana’, ‘pineapple’). As the index of lexical compatibility decreases and the words are thus located increasingly further from the centre, they are also located ever closer to what one could call the line of uncertainty, beyond which a participant may question whether the word they have provided does in fact correspond to the stimulus (e.g., for ‘fruit’: ‘pepper’, ‘pumpkin’, ‘avocado’).

The incorporation of fuzzy set theory therefore allows the researcher to determine the relevant vocabulary for a centre of interest in an objective manner, and the parametrisation process ultimately allows the various compatibility levels to be described on a gradient from ‘very representative’ to ‘hardly representative’—the most compatible level being the most representative.

In sum, by translating classical lexical availability into lexical compatibility, we, as researchers, achieve the following:

We create a model, based on a suitable mathematical tool, that represents the situation under study and provides information that is easy to interpret.

We produce a flexible evaluation framework that can be applied to new data at any time.

We are poised to align the framework of a study with the situation it intends to analyse.

We obtain the cognitive prototype that represents the categorisation shared by a sample of individuals regarding a certain concept and we achieve this using an objective and explicable approach. The cognitive prototype consists of the lexical elements presenting the highest ILCs. To facilitate comparison depending on the results obtained, these may be contained within the most compatible level, constitute the entirety of the most compatible level, or constitute the most compatible level as well as additional, less compatible levels.

Methodology

In order to obtain the available vocabulary required as the starting point for this work, a sample of students (N = 600) from the provinces of Malaga and Cadiz, Spain, were asked to take part in tests of lexical availability. The distribution of the sample is presented in Table  1 . As described in the Introduction, the methodological procedures for the tests were based on those for association tests and are firmly established within the fields of socio- and psycholinguistic research, where they have proven incredibly useful, despite the simplicity with which they allow linguistic information to be obtained.

Although the present study only analyses the data produced for the stimulus movimientos feministas ‘feminist movements’, the participants produced word lists for the following stimuli during the tests:

inmigración ‘immigration’

movimientos feministas ‘feminist movements’

cambio climático ‘climate change’

animalistas ‘animal activists’

violencia de género ‘gender-based violence’

educación sexual ‘sex education’

la Constitución ‘the Spanish Constitution’

movimientos políticos populistas ‘populist political movements’

memoria histórica ‘historical memory’

independentismo ‘separatism’

Participants had two minutes in each case to produce a word list. The lists were then combined for each stimulus and analysed as a whole to establish the community prototypes. In order to calculate the lexical compatibility of the terms provided and establish the different levels of compatibility, the DispoCen program was used. This tool was produced at the University of Malaga (Ávila-Muñoz et al., 2021 ) and consists of a library of functions in R that allow researchers to implement various models and applications, which include the option of instantly calculating the functionalities relating to availability and compatibility. The program can be accessed via the following link: https://github.com/jmss70/dispocen .

Participants also filled in a questionnaire that gathered information regarding their basic sociological characteristics as well as information regarding their immediate family’s social biography, the participant’s own leisure and cultural habits, their contact with the media and social media, their attitudes towards certain social and linguistic phenomena, their contact with technology, etc.

Since gender identity provided the most interesting prototypical conceptualisations in this study, Table  2 presents the distribution of the sample according only to this variable. One participant from Cadiz enrolled in high school did not provide information for gender identity, which is why Table  2 refers to a total of only 599 participants. Also, as can be observed, only four participants selected the option Other . Therefore, the present work focusses only on the differences between men and women regarding this variable.

Analysis and Results

As stated above, the results presented in this section were obtained using the tool DispoCen . Based on the individual lists of available vocabulary provided for the stimulus movimientos feministas ‘feminist movements’, DispoCen weighted the frequency of appearance of all the words provided and their positions on the lists. It then identified a certain set of data as prototypical and compared each additional element to this set to determine its degree of compatibility with the set. This process resulted in a model in which all words had been assigned an ILC between 0–1, with the value of 1 describing maximum compatibility. DispoCen then set the initial level of compatibility to consist of words presenting an ILC of 0.95299 or higher (Level 6, level of maximum compatibility, see Table  4 ) and determined cut-off marks for further levels of compatibility (Levels 5–1) that expanded progressively outwards and away from the nucleus; Level 1 encompassed the words that were least compatible with the community prototype.

General Analysis

Table 3 presents the words that obtained the highest ILCs overall Footnote 1 : right , equality , struggle , machismo , demonstration , and purple . These constitute the general opinion shared by the sample with regard to feminist movements, since their high ILCs make them the most compatible within the lexical metastructure. They show that the students under study associate the phenomenon with the demands made by these movements as well as a spirit of struggle, giving the initial impression of an objective and positive shared perception.

Table 4 presents all the words included in Level 6, the level of maximum compatibility. Certain words can now be observed that cause a need for reflection: feminazi , hembrismo , radical , falseness , lie , and nonsense . These words indicate a certain degree of dissatisfaction and, perhaps, a slightly distorted perception.

Analysis by Gender Identity

Table 5 presents the words that show the biggest differences when comparing the ILCs obtained for women and men.

Note the words that are significantly more compatible in the case of women: sorority , force , union , harassment , opportunity , necessity , and fear . These all present ILCs of over 0.9 for women, while for men one of these does not even reach an ILC of 0.1 ( sorority ). Some of the words that present higher ILCs for men are also worth noting: superiority , falseness , disgust , lie , trend , and disinformation . The word trend in particular is much more compatible for men than women (0.84444444 versus 0.11111111), possibly suggesting that men consider feminism to be more of a passing trend than a historical endeavour

Analysis by Educational Level

This section presents the results obtained according to the three educational levels considered in this work. Any differences observed here may be relevant, as they could indicate successes or failures regarding the subject of equality in current educational curricula.

Compulsory Secondary Education

For students enrolled in the fourth and final year of compulsory secondary education ( Educación Secundaria Obligatoria ), Table  6 presents the words obtaining the highest ILCs, while Table  7 presents the words included in all six levels of compatibility.

Tables 6 and 7 corroborate the initial impressions gained in the general analysis: although the shared perception is positive ( equality , woman , purple , struggle ), other words appear that could suggest a slight distortion ( feminazi in Level 6 with an ILC of 0.999999, as well as disgust , crazy , and hembrismo in Levels 4 and 3, which are still very compatible).

Figure  1 compares the results obtained for men and women at this educational level. Recall that the words with ILCs closest to 1 are the most compatible in the case of each group. Table 8 contains the translations of the words appearing in Fig.  1 .

ILC. Comparison between men and women enrolled in compulsory secondary education

Overall, at this educational level, the prominent position of the word disgust among men is significant, as is the apparent association among women of the feminist movements with a spirit of protest ( union , revolution , 8th March , banner ).

High School

For students enrolled in the second and final year of high school ( Bachillerato ), Table  9 presents the words obtaining the highest ILCs. In contrast to the previous educational level, this group’s shared perception now no longer includes pejoratives, with feminazi having been replaced by right .

Figure  2 shows that the word feminazi has now disappeared entirely, even specifically for men, although high ILCs for men are instead obtained by the words lie and falseness . For women, these two words present lower ILCs, and words associated with the act of protesting again predominate ( to fight , force , union , empowerment , fight ). As above, Table  10 contains the translations of the words appearing in Fig.  2 .

ILC Men and women enrolled in high school

The results obtained for students enrolled in the final year of a bachelor’s degree ( Grado Universitario ) confirm the tendencies identified above. As can be observed in Table  11 , the words presenting the highest ILCs for this group relate only to equal rights, the main demand of feminist movements.

Even if the entire level of maximum compatibility for students at this educational level is observed instead (Table  12 ), then apart from feminazi , all words still refer either to legitimate causes supported by these movements ( equality , right , freedom ) or to inequities that warrant their existence ( machismo , inequality , patriarchy , violence ).

Feminazi —A Cause for Concern?

The appearance of words that could indicate distorted perceptions of the feminist movements is a cause for concern. Words such as feminazi , hembrismo , crazy , and lie suggest a need for further analysis. As the word feminazi appeared in the level of maximum compatibility in the general analysis and also for several of the groups analysed thereafter, the more detailed analysis conducted in response to the results obtained above and presented in this section focusses on this word as a paradigm for the others. An additional dataset was produced that describes the positions obtained by the word feminazi on the individual lists, and two figures were created that combine this data with sociological information on the participants that had the potential to be of relevance.

The word feminazi was provided by 106 participants out of the total sample (N = 600). Figure  3 presents the positions in which the word appeared on the lists of these individuals.

Histogram of position and frequency of appearance of the word feminazi

Note that even though only just over a sixth of all participants provided the word, most of these individuals provided it in first position. This explains the high ILC identified in the general analysis. Figures  4 and 5 present the associations observed between the appearance of feminazi and the sociological characteristics of the individuals who provided the word.

Appearance of the word feminazi according to age, gender identity, and type of centre (I)

Appearance of the word feminazi according to age, gender identity, and type of centre (II)

Overall, the word feminazi appears in higher positions on the lists provided by men, and it appears more frequently among students enrolled at private and semi-private (state-subsidised) centres. Although linear regression analysis did not show a statistically significant correlation, the tendencies identified in this section nevertheless warrant contemplation and should be noted.

The general aim of this work was to study the collective perception held by a sample of Spanish students regarding feminist movements. Additional, more detailed aims included observing how sociocultural factors affect this perception, conducting lexical analysis, and analysing the cognitive prototypes present in the collective mental representation produced by the study sample for the phenomenon. The ultimate aim of this work was to identify areas of perception that may have been recently acquired by society or may even be discriminatory towards present-day social movements that seek to achieve gender equality. In order to achieve these aims, a sample of 600 students from the provinces of Malaga and Cadiz, Spain, took part in tests of lexical availability. The procedures used for these association tests have been widely used in the fields of sociolinguistic and psycholinguistic research. Despite their simplicity, they have proven to be an incredibly useful method for obtaining large databases, hence it is this form of data that was used for the analysis. The data was then analysed using a novel approach that incorporates fuzzy set theory into the traditional framework of lexical availability, allowing for the objective construction of collective prototypes. The possible distortions identified in the shared perceptions seem to reflect the results of other studies, discussed below.

The situation in Spain regarding gender equality reflects that in today’s democratic societies described in the Introduction. At the institutional level, various laws aim to counteract, eliminate, and prevent any form of discrimination based on gender identity (e.g., Spanish Organic Law 3/2007 of 22 March for Effective Equality Between Women and Men, and Spanish Organic Law 4/2007 of 12 April on Universities). However, the population does not seem entirely aligned with this goal, as shown below. If one looks beyond the financial costs of implementing policies that ultimately appear to be unsuccessful and considers the words of Amelia Valcárcel ( 2008 , p. 75), “una democracia, cuando funciona, es feminista” (‘a democracy, when it works, is feminist’), the situation both in Spain and in other democratic societies could in fact indicate that these democracies are not functioning as they should.

According to data published by the Spanish Centre of Sociological Research (CIS, 2014 ), less than 6% of young people in Spain label themselves as feminist. Regarding university students specifically, Velasco Martínez ( 2016 ) demonstrated an alarming lack of information on feminism among this section of society and observed that individuals cannot be expected to act in a manner suited to a situation they do not fully understand. The author concluded that young people must be made aware of gender-based discrimination through education, stating that if students can recognise gender-based discrimination, this may facilitate feminist identification. Weis et al. ( 2018 ) came to a similar conclusion in their study of 428 U.S. women, in which they suggested that informing women of the pervasiveness of sexism could promote feminist identification.

Velasco Martínez ( 2016 ) also noted the system errors and highlighted that patriarchal patterns as well as the traditionalism imposed by religion and politics were preventing feminist movements from being accepted by the Spanish university population, the subject of the author’s research. Moreover, even among those students that did identify with feminist values, feminist labelling was hampered by student’s perceiving a close link between feminism and political and radical social activism (even though it may be the case that this link is in fact promoted precisely by the neoliberal and patriarchal ideology).

In terms of the research presented in this work, the concerning distortions identified in the analysis could be mirroring a similar degree of disinformation with regard to feminist movements among the student population under study. The systematic and almost universal appearance of the word feminazi attracted attention, as it could indicate the presence within this population of a concerning perception of feminism that can also be widely observed at the global level within some sections of society, including among certain women (Swirsky & Angelone, 2014 ). One reason given by Swirsky and Angelone ( 2014 ) for resentment among women was “a negative connotation associated with the term ‘feminist’”. In their study of just under 500 women residing in the United States, practically half who rejected a feminist identity did so due to the frequent association of feminism with radical factions and the overall stigma surrounding feminism. These authors noted that, as is the case for all social movements, extreme factions of feminism do exist. They stated that certain media outlets may focus on these more radical groups, presenting them in a way intended to make such attitudes seem widespread in certain sections of society and possibly causing a general distaste for the entire movement. In future research, it would be interesting to determine what impression of the feminist movements is being endorsed at public and private/semi-private education centres, so as to identify whether the possible distortions observed in the present work may have been acquired by students within the classroom.

Conclusions

This work analysed lists of lexical association produced for the stimulus movimientos feministas ‘feminist movements’ by a sample of 600 Spanish students from Malaga and Cadiz, enrolled in the final year of compulsory secondary education ( Educación Secundaria Obligatoria ), the final year of high school ( Bachillerato ), and the final years of various bachelor’s degrees ( Grados Universitarios ) across all fields of knowledge. For the non-university levels, data was gathered from both public and private/semi-private (state-subsidised) centres. The analysis was based on an approach and calculation that produces each word’s index of lexical compatibility, a value that compares each word with those that are initially identified as being most compatible within the centre of interest. The two cornerstones of the approach were categorisation theory and fuzzy set theory, and although these have a strong presence respectively in the areas of psycholinguistics and mathematics, the model described in this work involves a methodology that combines the two theories for the first time. This original methodology made it possible for the present research to access the perceptions and associated opinions held by the study population in connection with the phenomenon of feminism.

Most of the previous studies based on lexical association tests—especially those from the field of lexical availability—do not usually include initial stimuli of social relevance or impact. With our work, we show that including such stimuli may be of interest for psycho-sociolinguistic research. It has become clear that the concrete results of working with the methodology proposed here have an obvious application in certain socially sensitive areas. Thanks to this methodological innovation, we can better understand and propose improvement plans for problems affecting socially vulnerable groups.

This study contributes to advancing knowledge of Spanish students’ perceptions of the phenomenon of feminism and adds originality by offering a different approach to previous studies based on reproducibility, replicability, and reliability. By providing a solid and reliable basis for future research, it positions itself as a key reference in the scientific field and provides a solid starting point to continue exploring this important social issue.

Overall, the results obtained are promising. As can be observed in Fig.  6 , the sample under study produced a mostly positive shared categorisation that reflects the values of equality so characteristic of the feminist movements throughout history.

Visual representation of the shared categorisation for feminist movements

The words repeated most often and that best reflect the shared perception of feminist movements are: derecho ‘right’, igualdad ‘equality’, lucha ‘struggle’, machismo ‘machismo’ , manifestación ‘demonstration’, morado ‘purple’, and mujer ‘woman’. Other very compatible and representative words refer to the spirit of protest for which these movements are known today: huelga ‘strike’, desigualdad ‘inequality’, 8M ‘8M’, libertad ‘freedom’, protesta ‘protest’, pancarta ‘banner’, reivindicación ‘demand’, unión ‘union’, revolución ‘revolution’, marcha ‘march’, sororidad ‘sorority’, cartel ‘poster’, and calle ‘street’. Nevertheless, among the words that were most compatible with the shared categorisation, certain words attracted attention: feminazi ‘feminazi’, hembrismo ‘hembrismo’, radical ‘radical’, falsedad ‘falseness’, mentira ‘lie’, and tontería ‘nonsense’. Due to the high ILCs of some of these words and their repeated appearance on the lists under study, additional analysis was conducted focussed on feminazi , the word that may best represent the values that could be implied by them all. The results of this more detailed analysis showed a noteworthy tendency of this word to be provided more often by men than women, and more often by individuals enrolled at private/semi-private centres than individuals enrolled at public centres.

Although the analysis did record an association with politics in higher levels of compatibility, with individuals having provided words such as politics , Podemos , and (Irene) Montero , the most frequent direct associations with the feminist movements were the words necessary , support , empowerment , union , change , society , necessity , fairness , progress , opportunity , and girl . These suggest a promising future for society in which men and women could at last have equal rights.

As can be observed, however, the cognitive gaps as well as the more recently acquired perceptions identified in the students under study here could possibly be in line with the results of previous studies regarding the social spread of feminism and the creation of more equitable societies. For this reason, I—the author of this work—similarly suggest that society could perhaps achieve an increase in students’ awareness of the societal risks posed by discriminating against women if classrooms at the various levels of education both in public and private/semi-private centres shared a larger amount of objective and substantiated information on the feminist movements and the causes they represent. The following list provides specific suggestions that could be implemented at education centres and that could potentially help prevent discrimination against women:

Implementation of awareness programmes at early stages of education Targeted, awareness-raising programmes directed at children could be designed for early levels of education. These would need to address misconceptions and facilitate a more complete and realistic understanding of feminist movements.

Inclusion of feminist movements in the school curriculum Including education on the feminist movements in the school curriculum would allow issues relating to gender equality and the movements themselves to be incorporated into the classroom at early ages. This could help to counteract stereotyping and prejudice regarding feminist movements.

Use of inclusive activities Inclusive classroom activities could be organised to encourage the active participation of all students, regardless of gender. This could involve talks, projects, and discussions on gender equality.

I also recommend that education may wish to focus on students who identify as women and on demonstrating their personal vulnerability to such discrimination. This focus could encourage this group of individuals to label themselves actively and unequivocally as feminists, so that they may then help their fellow students of other genders to accept feminist movements as a necessary component for creating fairer societies and to adopt a feminist awareness distanced from extreme ideologies. This approach might once and for all make it possible for society to overcome the historic social issue of gender inequality.

Although this study provides valuable information regarding Spanish student’s perceptions of the feminist movements, it does exhibit certain limitations. First, the sample size of 600 students may not reflect all the opinions held by the entire student populations in the cities under study. A larger sample size would be required to provide a better reflection. Second, using association tests to construct the shared metastructure on which analysis is then based may simplify the complexity of the individuals’ beliefs. Complementary tests in the form of focus groups on the subject of feminism are currently being prepared to obtain more detail. Third, the recommendation that education centres may wish to share a larger amount of objective information with students assumes a shared understanding of what constitutes “objective” information on the feminist movements. Collaboration with specialists would be required to ensure this shared understanding.

Regarding directions for future research, since society consists of many more environments than those observed here and gender inequality is present across the board, further analyses along the same lines as described herein but focussing on other sections within society is required. In addition, the focus groups currently being prepared to corroborate the results obtained above could also be used to allow students to freely express their views regarding other issues apart from gender equality, such as gender-based violence, sex education, and other issues that would help to determine the directions to take in future work.

Data Availability

The dataset generated for this study includes data originating from underage individuals and is not publicly available as it contains proprietary information that the author acquired through a licence. Due to privacy concerns and the need to protect the identities of minors, access to the dataset and instructions for reproducing the analysis can be obtained by contacting the author directly.

Items within the text will be presented in translation only. Items within tables and figures will be presented in their original form together with their translation.

Acker, J., Barry, K., & Esseveld, J. (1983). Objectivity and truth: Problems in doing feminist research. Women’s Studies International Forum, 6 , 423–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/0277-5395(83)90035-3

Article   Google Scholar  

Amorós, C., & de Miguel Álvarez, A. (Eds.). (2007). Teoría feminista: de la ilustración a la globalización (3 vol.) [Feminist theory: From enlightenment to globalisation]. Minerva Ediciones

Ávila-Muñoz, A. M., & Villena Ponsoda, J. A. (Eds.). (2010). Variación social del léxico disponible en la ciudad de Málaga [Social variation in the available lexicon in the city of Malaga] . Sarriá

Ávila-Muñoz, A. M., & Sánchez Sáez, J. M. (2011). La posición de los vocablos en el cálculo del índice de disponibilidad léxica: procesos de reentrada en las listas del léxico disponible de la ciudad de Málaga [The position of vocabulary in the calculation of the lexical availability index: Re-entry processes on the lists of available lexicon from the city of Malaga]. ELUA. Estudios de Lingüística, 25 , 45–74. https://doi.org/10.14198/ELUA2011.25.02

Ávila-Muñoz, A. M. (2016a). El léxico disponible y la enseñanza del español. Propuesta de selección léxica basada en la teoría de los conjuntos difusos. Journal of Spanish Language Teaching, 3 (1), 31–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/23247797.2016.1163038

Ávila-Muñoz, A. M. (2017). The available lexicon: A tool for selecting appropriate vocabulary to teach a foreign language. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 5 (1), 71–91. https://doi.org/10.30466/IJLTR.2017.20343

Ávila-Muñoz, A. M. (2017b). La utilidad del vocabulario dialectal en el aula de lenguas extranjeras. Propuesta de selección léxica basada en coronas concéntricas [The benefits of dialectal vocabulary in the teaching of foreign languages. Proposal for lexical selection based on concentric crowns or circles]. Marco ELE. Revista de Didáctica Español Lengua Extranjera, 25.

Ávila-Muñoz, A. M. (2017a). Entre limonetis y malaguitas: Estudio del léxico divergente de proximidad. Nuevos datos del Proyecto CONVERLEX-Málaga. Hispania, 100 (4), 538–553. https://doi.org/10.1353/hpn.2017.0097

Ávila-Muñoz, A. M. (2018). Why teach dialectalisms in the foreign language classroom? Konin Language Studies, 6 (2), 139–156. https://doi.org/10.30438/ksj.2018.6.2.2

Ávila-Muñoz, A. M., Sánchez Sáez, J. M., & Odishelidze, N. (2021). DispoCen. Mucho más que un programa para el cálculo de la disponibilidad léxica [DispoCen. Much more than just a program for calculating lexical availability]. ELUA . Estudios de Lingüística de la Universidad de Alicante, 35 , 9–36. https://doi.org/10.14198/ELUA2021.35.1

Ávila Muñoz, A. M., Santos Díaz, I. C., & TrigoI báñez, E. (2022). Perceived impacts of COVID-19 by Spanish university students: Changes in the physical and social environments. In Stanley D. Brunn & Donna Gilbreath (Eds.), COVID-19 and a world of ad hoc geographies (pp. 2059–2076). Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-94350-9_111

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Ávila-Muñoz, A. M. (2022). Algunas percepciones categoriales compartidas por preuniversitarios andaluces sobre la crisis del coronavirus y sus consecuencias. ¿Deberíamos preocuparnos? Un acercamiento desde la disponibilidad y la centralidad léxica. Tejuelo. Didáctica De La Lengua Y La Literatura.Educación, 35 (3), 17–42. https://doi.org/10.17398/1988-8430.35.3.17

Ávila-Muñoz, A. M. (2016b). Can speakers’ virtual lexical richness be calculated?: Individual and social determining factors. Spanish in Context, 13 (2), 285–307. https://doi.org/10.1075/sic.13.2.06avi

Ávila-Muñoz, A. M., & Sánchez Sáez, J. M. (2014). Fuzzy sets and prototype theory: Representational model of cognitive community structures based on lexical availability trials. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 12 (1), 133–159. https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.12.1.05avi

Ávila-Muñoz, A. M., Santos Díaz, I. C., & Trigo Ibáñez, E. (2020). Análisis léxico-cognitivo de la influencia de los medios de comunicación en las percepciones de universitarios españoles ante la COVID-19 [A lexical-cognitive analysis of the influence of the media on the perceptions of Spanish university students regarding COVID-19]. Círculo De Lingüística Aplicada a La Comunicación, 84 , 85–95. https://doi.org/10.5209/clac.70701

Amorós Puente, C., & Posada Kubissa, L. (Eds.). (2007). Feminismo y multiculturalismo [Feminism and multiculturalism]. Instituto de la Mujer

Bajri, I. A. (2022). Discourse analysis in selected articles of Saudi women’s empowerment. British Journal of English Linguistics, 10 (2), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.37745/bjel.2013/vol10n2pp3950

Botello-Peñaloza, H. A., & Guerrero-Rincón, I. (2017). Condiciones para el empoderamiento de la mujer rural en Colombia [Conditions for the empowerment of rural women in Colombia]. Entramado, 13 (1), 62–70. https://doi.org/10.18041/entramado.2017v13n1.25135

Brugman, C., & Lakoff, G. (1988). Cognitive topology and lexical networks. Lexical ambiguity resolution (pp. 477–508). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-051013-2.50022-7

Cann, V. (2019). Girls like this, boys like that. The reproduction of gender in contemporary youth cultures. Bloomsbury Publishing

Caro Blanco, C. (2008). Un amor a tu medida. Estereotipos y violencia en las relaciones amorosas [A relationship that suits you. Stereotypes and violence in romantic relationships]. Revista De Estudios De Juventud, 83 , 213–228.

Google Scholar  

CIS (Centro de Investigaciones Sociológicas). (2014). https://www.cis.es/-/avance-de-resultados-del-estudio-3029-barometro-de-junio-de-2014

Collins, C., Landivar, L. C., Ruppanner, L., & Scarborough, W. J. (2020). COVID-19 and the gender gap in work hours. Gender, Work, & Organization, 28 (S1), 101–112. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12506

Crenshaw, K. W. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43 (6), 1241–1299. https://doi.org/10.2307/1229039

Crespo Miguel, M., & Frías Delgado, A. (2008). Aproximación a la categorización textual en español basada en la semántica de marcos [An approach to textual categorisation in Spanish based on frame semantics]. Procesamiento Del Lenguaje Natural, 41 , 65–71.

Davies, M. A. (2005). Frequency dictionary of Spanish core vocabulary for learners . Routledge.

Davies, M. A., & Gardner, D. (2009). Frequency dictionary of contemporary American English: Word sketches, collocates and thematic lists . Routledge.

de Miguel Álvarez, A. (2008). Feminismo y juventud en las sociedades formalmente igualitarias [Feminism and youth in formally egalitarian societies]. Revista De Estudios De Juventud, 83 , 29–45.

Dunatchik, A., Gerson, K., Glass, J., Jacobs, J. A., & Stritzel, H. (2021). Gender, parenting, and the rise of remote work during the pandemic: Implications for domestic inequality in the United States. Gender & Society, 35 (2), 194–205. https://doi.org/10.1177/08912432211001301

Duncan, L. E. (2010). Women’s relationship to feminism: Effects of generation and feminist self-labeling. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 34 (4), 498–507. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.2010.01599.x

Esteban Galarza, M. L., & Távora, A. (2008). El amor romántico y la subordinación social de las mujeres: Revisiones y propuestas [Romantic love and the social subordination of women: Revisions and proposals]. Anuario De Psicología, 39 (1), 59–73.

Fitz, C. C., Zucker, A. N., & Bay-Cheng, L. Y. (2012). Not all nonlabelers are created equal: Distinguishing between quasi-feminists and neoliberals. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 36 (3), 274–285. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684312451098

Freedman, E. B. (2003). No turning back: The history of feminism and the future of women. Ballantine Books

Ghuman, S. J. (2001). Employment, autonomy and violence against women in India and Pakistan . University of Pennsylvania.

Gilquin, G. (2008). Taking a new look at lexical networks. Lexis . https://doi.org/10.4000/lexis.757

Gilquin, G. (2022). Cognitive corpus linguistics and pedagogy. Pedagogical Linguistics . https://doi.org/10.1075/pl.22014.gil

Glucksmann, M. (2008). V. Airbrushing the history of feminism: ‘Race’ and ethnicity. Feminism & Psychology, 18 (3), 405–409. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959353508092096

Gougenheim, G., Michéa, R., Rivenc, P., & Sauvageot, A. (1954). L’élaboration du français élémentaire. Étude sur l’établissement d’un vocabulaire et d’une grammaire de base [The development of basic French: A study of the development of a basic vocabulary and grammar]. Didier

Gupta, A., & Sinha, S. (2005). Empowerment of women: Language and other facets. Mangal Deep Publications

Hlavka, H. R. (2014). Normalizing sexual violence: Young women account for harassment and abuse. Gender & Society, 28 (3), 337–358. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243214526468

Irigaray, L. (1974). Speculum de l’autre femme [Speculum of the other woman]. Éditions de Minuit

Irigaray, L. (1985). Parler n’est jamais neutre [To speak is never neutral]. Éditions de Minuit

Kramer, E. (2016). Feminist linguistics and linguistic feminisms. In E. Lewin & L. M. Silverstein (Eds.), Mapping feminist anthropology in the twenty-first century (pp. 65–83). New Jersey: Rutgers University Press.

Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind . IL: The University of Chicago Press.

Book   Google Scholar  

Lazar, M. (2005). Politicizing gender in discourse: Feminist critical discourse analysis as political perspective and praxis. In M. Lazar (Ed.), Feminist critical discourse analysis: Gender, power and ideology in discourse (pp. 1–28). Palgrave Macmillan.

Liberia Vayá, I., Zurbano, B., & Barredo Ibáñez, D. (2015). Percepciones de los jóvenes acerca de las actuaciones y discursos públicos sobre la violencia de género en España (2013) [The perceptions of young people regarding public events and speeches on gender-based violence in Spain (2013)]. Feminismo/s, 25 , 159–182. https://doi.org/10.14198/fem.2015.25.09

Lonsdale, D., & Le Bras, Y. (2009). A frequency dictionary of French: Core vocabulary for learners . London: Routledge.

MacLaury, R. E. (1991). Prototypes revisited. Annual Review of Anthropology, 20, 55–74. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2155793

McDonald, K. B. (1997). Black activist mothering: A historical intersection of race, gender, and class. Gender & Society, 11 (6), 773–795. https://doi.org/10.1177/089124397011006004

Medina, V. (2007). El empoderamiento de la mujer y la acción colectiva [The empowerment of women and collective action]. Revista Venezolana De Estudios De La Mujer, 12 (29), 49–62.

Mooi-Reci, I., & Risman, B. J. (2021). The gendered impacts of COVID-19: Lessons and reflections. Gender & Society, 35 (2), 161–167. https://doi.org/10.1177/08912432211001305

Nájera, E. (2010). ¿Feminismo de la igualdad y feminismo de la diferencia? [The feminism of equality and the feminism of difference?]. Feminismo/s, 15 , 9–14. https://doi.org/10.14198/fem.2010.15.01

Nasution, S. N. (2016). Feminism study on marginalized women in the effort of empowerment. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Culture, 2 (3), 144–150. https://doi.org/10.21744/ijllc.v2i3.258

Pedersen, S., & Burnett, S. (2022). Saying the unsayable: The online expression of mothers’ anger during a pandemic. Feminism & Psychology, 32 (2), 246–264. https://doi.org/10.1177/09593535221074131

Rosch, E. (1978). Principles of categorization. In E. Rosch & B. Lloyd (Eds.), Cognition and categorization (pp. 27–48). Lawrence Erlbaum.

Rosch, E., & Mervis, C. B. (1975). Family resemblances: Studies in the internal structure of categories. Cognitive Psychology, 7 (4), 573–605. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(75)90024-9

Schuetze, U., & Weimer-Stuckmann, G. (2010). Virtual vocabulary: Research and learning in lexical processing. CALICO Journal, 27(3), 517–528. http://www.jstor.org/stable/calicojournal.27.3.517

Shields, S. A. (2016). Functionalism, Darwinism, and advances in the psychology of women and gender: From the 19th century to the 21st. Feminism & Psychology, 26 (4), 397–404. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959353516663567

Singh, S. (2007). Deconstructing ‘gender and development’ for ‘identities of women.’ International Journal of Social Welfare, 16 , 100–109. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2397.2006.00454.x

Swirsky, J. M., & Angelone, D. J. (2014). Femi-nazis and bra burning crazies: A qualitative evaluation of contemporary beliefs about feminism. Current Psychology: A Journal for Diverse Perspectives on Diverse Psychological Issues, 33 (3), 229–245. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-014-9208-7

Taylor, J. R. (1995). Linguistic categorization: Prototypes in linguistic theory . London: Clarendon.

Touraine, A. (2005). A new paradigm or the end of social discourse on social reality. Fayard

Valcárcel, A. (2008). Feminismo en el mundo global [Feminism in the global world]. Cátedra

Valls, A. T. (2002). Lenguaje, interacción y diferencia sexual [Language, interaction and sexual difference]. In C. Lomas, & A. González (Coords.), Mujer y educación: educar para la igualdad, educar desde la diferencia (pp. 61–76). Graó

Velasco Martínez, A. (2016). “No soy feminista, pero...”: Mitos y creencias de la juventud universitaria sobre el feminismo [“I’m not a feminist, but…”: Myths and beliefs among university youth about feminism] [Doctoral dissertation, Universitat de Barcelona]. TDX. https://www.tdx.cat/handle/10803/400100#page=1

Villena Ponsoda, J. A., Ávila-Muñoz, A. M., & von Essen, C. (2018). Efecto de la estratificación, la red social y las variables de pequeña escala en la variación léxica. Proyecto de investigación sobre la convergencia del léxico dialectal en la ciudad de Málaga (Converlex) [The effect of stratification, the social network and small-scale variables on lexical variation. Research project on the convergence of dialectal vocabulary in the city of Malaga (Converlex)]. In L. Luque Toro, & R. Luque (Eds.), Léxico español actual V (pp. 209–232). Università Ca’ Foscari Venezia.

Walker, A. J., & Thompson, L. (1984). Feminism and family studies. Journal of Family Issues, 5 , 545–570. https://doi.org/10.1177/019251384005004010

Weis, A. S., Redford, L., Zucker, A. N., & Ratliff, K. A. (2018). Feminist identity, attitudes toward feminist prototypes, and willingness to intervene in everyday sexist events. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 42 (3), 279–290. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684318764694

Willis, E. (1984). Radical feminism and feminist radicalism. Social Text, 9 (10), 91–118.

Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical investigations. McMillan.

Wittig, M. (1979, 21 April). The Straight Mind [Speech audio recording]. Barnard Center for Research on Women. https://digitalcollections.barnard.edu/object/2138/scholar-and-feminist-vi-future-difference-morning-session

Zadeh, L. A. (1965). Fuzzy sets. Information and Control, 8 , 338–353. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0019-9958(65)90241-X

Zimmermann, H. J. (2001). Fuzzy set theory and its applications . Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Download references

Funding for open access publishing: Universidad Málaga/CBUA. As the author, I confirm my commitment to disclosing any financial or non-financial interests that are directly or indirectly related to my work submitted for publication. I believe that this practice contributes to the transparency and trustworthiness of scientific research and upholds the principles of integrity and accountability in academia.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

General Linguistics, Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, Universidad de Málaga, Campus de Teatinos, 29071, Málaga, Spain

Antonio Manuel Ávila-Muñoz

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Antonio Manuel Ávila-Muñoz .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

Author Antonio M. Ávila-Muñoz declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were conducted in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and the Helsinki Declaration of 1964 and its subsequent amendments or comparable ethical standards. This article does not contain any studies with animals conducted by the author.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Ávila-Muñoz, A.M. Spanish Students’ Categorical Perceptions of Feminist Movements. J Psycholinguist Res 53 , 52 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-024-10091-8

Download citation

Accepted : 14 May 2024

Published : 29 May 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-024-10091-8

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Feminist movements
• Shared perceptions
• Lexical associations
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research