Doctor Spurt of Effortless Incitement says of a (said-to-be repeatable) study on the influence of context on gender differences. We’ve seen studies like these in the past but this one’s a pretty compelling. (Emphasis mine.)
This study looked at women’s performance at mathematics. The subjects completed a test including two mathematics sections separated by a reading comprehension section. The middle section was an experimental manipulation, with one of the following four essays:
(G) This essay argued that there were mathematics-related sex differences, and that the explanation was genetic.
(E) This essay argued that there were mathematics-related sex differences, and that the explanation was experiential.
(NS) This essay argued that there were no mathematics-related sex differences.
(S) This essay primed the question of sex without making reference to differences in mathematical ability.
The hypothesis was that in the second test participants in condition (G) and (S) would underperform those in condition (E) and (NS). This is just what they found, a result that was replicated in a schematically similar study where the manipulation was heard, rather than read. See the figure below.
This isn’t surprising at all – it’s consistent with a pile of established social psychology on the effectiveness of stereotypes. But it’s definitely important.
In other words women tended to perform poorly when gender differences were suggested, and well when gender differences were denied or excused as experimental error.
And while the study was conducted on women this isn’t (duh) an effect limited to women. Studies that similarly manipulate reminders of how men “should” behave have similar effects on men’s behavior.
Which, incidentally, reinforces this point by Lisa of Sociological Images who, pointing to a recent candy bar ad, reminds us…
This stereotype of guys as dumb, immature assholes isn’t doing anyone any favors
(Via Research Blogging)
(Oh, and think there are any self-confidence, body-image, or “does this make me look ‘gay’” implications in that study?)
Anyway, none of this suggests there are or aren’t innate, even genetic differences between men and women when it comes to mathematics. In fact it precisely doesn’t suggest it. Instead what it suggests is that cultural background noise is sufficiently loud to make it profoundly difficult to take seriously those who make such allegations lightly.
Submitted by 2600 (not verified) on Sun, 2009-01-04 00:45.
Interesting stuff.
A slight correction: "...or excused as experimental error." The (E) category is experiential not experimental. For this group, the essay argues that there are math-related sex differences because the different sexes have different experiences (e.g. boys are encouraged to study math more).
This may improve the performance of women because, as the original study argues, "[p]eople may reason that their own experiences are different or that they can resist the effects of their experiences."
[Thanks, Lamil, my mistake. --fl]
Submitted by 2600 (not verified) on Sun, 2009-01-04 01:12.
I don't even know any words for the intensity with which I've always hated that Twix ad.
It's hard to tell whether they're trying harder to make men look dishonest, immature and selfish or to make women look hysterical, dumb and unreasonable.
I mean, standing around at a party going on about how "politicians are out of touch," as if this is an idea never before put forth? And "someone who shares my struggle?" Your struggle with what, being trite and obnoxious? Who could think that barfing up hackneyed nonsense like that constitutes conversation? The same kind of person who would think that going home with a lying stranger under the pretense of "blogging" is somehow less unsafe than going home with him to have sex, I guess.
Not to mention the fact that she must have some kind of interpersonal impairment that keeps her from being able to tell when someone is not interested in what she's talking about, or is just telling her what she wants to hear so she'll shut up.
And I didn't think it was possible to cram that much appallingly terrible writing into such a short amount of time. "I love blogging!" I can't figure out exactly what's wrong with that line but I just HATE it. "What kind of girl do you think I am?" Who the hell says that, other than as a joke? She would have failed in her assigned role as gatekeeper if she'd just said "No. Thanks." or "Not tonight" I suppose.
I think a funnier end to the commercial would be the two of them in bed and the girl still talking and talking and talking about her "struggle."
There's another Twix ad in which two guys are in a bookstore looking at a book which is titled something to the effect of "How to Get Laid By A Lot of Hot Chicks." Guy 1's girlfriend comes up all of a sudden and starts freaking out him reading such an awful thing. He stands there looking dumb for a second, Twix-induced reversal of time occurs, then Guy 1 starts righteously scolding Guy 2 for reading the chick-getting book. The girlfriend, because she's stupid and believes absolutely anything, gets this idiotic, smitten look on her face and she and Guy 1 walk away together.
My TV is going to end up getting thrown through a window one day.
[What bothers me about it isn't that ads create stupidity but that they get so much leverage from it. They take pre-existing stereotypes and just nudge people (sometimes really hard) into thinking it'll be easier to stay in them as long as they buy the right soap. And what's tough is... there's no mileage in *making* people relax into it, it's just a good way to sell soap. Or in this case, candy. $%!$!~#$. Thanks, TLT. --fl]
Submitted by 2600 (not verified) on Sun, 2009-01-04 13:05.
The longer version of that ad is a basic primer in "real world" pick-up, which really illustrates how dominance games played among men sort out WHO GETS to pair up with women, or at least the subset of young women with a certain investment in a certain type of masculinity in their men and a certain type of femininity in themselves. The non-verbal sub-communications are the point--a perfect illustration of how WHO says what and how it is said are what matter, and it's plainly clear that the young lady is never fooled, rather she's playing along with the joke at the end. It's really crass, of course, but it speaks to the experience of a vast subculture of men. I invite any man of average attractiveness to reflect on the "being honest" approach which leads to the protagonist being slapped, sharing a platonic discussion of politics, or seeing her disappear with his French competition in the non-linear, multimedia web version of the "try your own adventure" Twix ad. And, y'know, if you've had repeated success just straight-out asking for sex after a few minutes' discussion of blogging and politics...you are NOT of average attractiveness.
reCaptcha "Hayes SURPRISED". Shades of "...and Arthur is President now."