• Hardy Hulley posted a new activity comment 4 years, 1 month ago

    @Hj Hornbeck wrote: “… I will note that while the general idea that men exhibit more variance than women has been around for a hundred years, the magnitude of the variance seems inversely proportional to the sample size…”

    The idea that variance estimates could be inversely proportional to sample sizes doesn’t make much sense. After all the…[Read more]

  • Hardy Hulley posted a new activity comment 4 years, 1 month ago

    @Hj Hornbeck: You quote extensively from Janet S. Hyde, et. al., “Gender similarities characterize math performance,” Science, 321:94-95, 2008. Unfortunately, you probably haven’t chosen the best article upon which to base your case.

    1. First, the data obtained by Heyde et. al. (2008) appears to be a snapshot of NAEP scores for 10 US states…[Read more]

    • Unfortunately, you probably haven’t chosen the best article upon which to base your case.

      Fair enough, I’ll use yours instead.

      Curiously, you omit the very next sentence: “However, measurable differences existed for complex problem-solving beginning in high school years (d=+0.29 favoring males), which might forecast underrepresentation of…

      [Read more]

  • Hardy Hulley posted a new activity comment 4 years, 1 month ago

    @kagehi said “Until you can show that the data is not, in effect, poisoned at the well, you have no grounds to claim that the differences detected are ‘innate’ characteristics, instead of statistically anomalies,…” Please don’t put words in my mouth – I never claimed the results of the study in question were evidence of “innate characteristics.”…[Read more]

    • Just going to say this, since Hornbeck already explains it way better that I can. If you can’t determine, or factor for, or control, the variables that confound you statistics, then your statistics are useless when determining what underlies the system.

      Your own challenge to me is, absurdly, “Of course not, the statistics are only showing the…[Read more]

  • Hardy Hulley posted a new activity comment 4 years, 1 month ago

    @Jack99: If you agree when Kagehi says “Something like 90% of the ‘best’ linguists […] are male, yet, supposedly, women are better at language. This doesn’t make logical sense at all,” then I’m afraid you’re wrong. It is quite possible for women to perform better than men, on average, and yet for the best performers to be men. This is because t…[Read more]

    • The problem with statistics, even accurate ones, is that they can lie, while telling the truth. For example – how many of those “countries” are female dominated, or neutral on gender, instead of part of the vast majority, which have been, and continue to be, male dominated? This is the critical problem with trying to measure such things. There is…[Read more]

      • @kagehi said “Until you can show that the data is not, in effect, poisoned at the well, you have no grounds to claim that the differences detected are ‘innate’ characteristics, instead of statistically anomalies,…” Please don’t put words in my mouth – I never claimed the results of the study in question were evidence of “innate characteristics.”…[Read more]

        • Just going to say this, since Hornbeck already explains it way better that I can. If you can’t determine, or factor for, or control, the variables that confound you statistics, then your statistics are useless when determining what underlies the system.

          Your own challenge to me is, absurdly, “Of course not, the statistics are only showing the…[Read more]

    • 1. In mathematics, boys perform better than girls, on average

      Yeah-huh.

      Meta-analytic findings from 1990 (6, 7) indicated that gender differences in math performance in the general population were trivial, d= –0.05, where the effect size, d, is the mean for males minus the mean for females, divided by the pooled within-gender standard d…

      [Read more]

      • @Hj Hornbeck: You quote extensively from Janet S. Hyde, et. al., “Gender similarities characterize math performance,” Science, 321:94-95, 2008. Unfortunately, you probably haven’t chosen the best article upon which to base your case.

        1. First, the data obtained by Heyde et. al. (2008) appears to be a snapshot of NAEP scores for 10 US states…[Read more]

        • Unfortunately, you probably haven’t chosen the best article upon which to base your case.

          Fair enough, I’ll use yours instead.

          Curiously, you omit the very next sentence: “However, measurable differences existed for complex problem-solving beginning in high school years (d=+0.29 favoring males), which might forecast underrepresentation of…

          [Read more]

      • @Hj Hornbeck wrote: “… I will note that while the general idea that men exhibit more variance than women has been around for a hundred years, the magnitude of the variance seems inversely proportional to the sample size…”

        The idea that variance estimates could be inversely proportional to sample sizes doesn’t make much sense. After all the…[Read more]

  • Hardy Hulley posted a new activity comment 4 years, 1 month ago

    You should probably reread my last message. I don’t claim that there are not “structural barriers” that create and/or exaggerate gender imbalances; I specifically allow that such an explanation for the existence of gender imbalances may be correct. My point is simply that kagehi’s inference is incorrect. In particular, I show that it is possible…[Read more]

  • Hardy Hulley posted a new activity comment 4 years, 1 month ago

    kagehi wrote “Something like 90% of the ‘best’ linguists […] are male, yet, supposedly, women are better at language. This doesn’t make logical sense at all.”

    No, unfortunately you’re labouring under a misapprehension. If the distribution of languistic abilities for males has a higher variance than the distribution for females, then it is…[Read more]

    • No, you’re “labouring under a misapprehension,” which is that just because 90% of people working in linguistics are men that they are somehow “the most gifted linguists.” The point kagehi is making that you seem loathe to acknowledge is that there are structural barriers in place that set up these differences, and in many cases exaggerate these…[Read more]

      • You should probably reread my last message. I don’t claim that there are not “structural barriers” that create and/or exaggerate gender imbalances; I specifically allow that such an explanation for the existence of gender imbalances may be correct. My point is simply that kagehi’s inference is incorrect. In particular, I show that it is possible…[Read more]

      • Seems to be a semantic argument here, is this better Hardy – there is no automatic reason to assume that such a bias is real, other than its prevalence in academia, but there is vast amounts of evidence implying a likely alternative explanation, which is sufficiently pervasive across all disciplines and skills, to suggest that its **unlikely** to…[Read more]

  • Hardy Hulley posted a new activity comment 4 years, 1 month ago

    It strikes me that this article is intended as a polemic. However, on the off-chance that you did want to say something serious about statistics and probability theory, allow me to point out a few misconceptions:

    1. You say “Many researchers have searched for cognitive and psychological differences between the genders and taken as a whole,…[Read more]

    • Actually… The studies show that “math ability” and the like are heavily influenced by the conditions of the testing. Literally, reminding women that they tend to do worse than guys causes them to do worse, and reminding men that they “do better”, causes their scores to rise slightly. Do both, and you end up with a huge gap. Language is an even…[Read more]

      • Literally, reminding women that they tend to do worse than guys causes them to do worse, and reminding men that they “do better”, causes their scores to rise slightly.</blockquote

        Not only this, but merely reminding women that they are women (e.g., by first asking questions that encourage them to reflect on their gender) can cause women to do…

        [Read more]

        • HTMfaiL. Sorry.

        • Girls: you are great at math. Or you can be, if you choose it!

          That’s what I keep telling my daughter but I don’t think she’s buying it.

          • A female friend of mine in college, who was extremely smart, studying chemical engineering, and in an elite honors program, once told me that she consciously chose to act less intelligent than the men around her, particularly ones she was romantically interested in, so she wouldn’t intimidate them and they’d like her better. As a naive male…[Read more]

      • kagehi wrote “Something like 90% of the ‘best’ linguists […] are male, yet, supposedly, women are better at language. This doesn’t make logical sense at all.”

        No, unfortunately you’re labouring under a misapprehension. If the distribution of languistic abilities for males has a higher variance than the distribution for females, then it is…[Read more]

        • No, you’re “labouring under a misapprehension,” which is that just because 90% of people working in linguistics are men that they are somehow “the most gifted linguists.” The point kagehi is making that you seem loathe to acknowledge is that there are structural barriers in place that set up these differences, and in many cases exaggerate these…[Read more]

          • You should probably reread my last message. I don’t claim that there are not “structural barriers” that create and/or exaggerate gender imbalances; I specifically allow that such an explanation for the existence of gender imbalances may be correct. My point is simply that kagehi’s inference is incorrect. In particular, I show that it is possible…[Read more]

          • Seems to be a semantic argument here, is this better Hardy – there is no automatic reason to assume that such a bias is real, other than its prevalence in academia, but there is vast amounts of evidence implying a likely alternative explanation, which is sufficiently pervasive across all disciplines and skills, to suggest that its **unlikely** to…[Read more]