3 ms·
That is, quite literally, what this experiment showed. Boys did well when it was a non-competitive 'game'. Girls didn't do so well when it was an inconsequentia
by WalterSear 11y ago
That is, quite literally, what this experiment showed. Boys did well when it was a non-competitive 'game'. Girls didn't do so well when it was an inconsequential 'game'.
- tremon 11y agoNot entirely: boys did better in a non-competitive setting, but girls performed equally in both settings.
- WalterSear 11y ago>In classes given reading evaluations, boys made an average of 33.3 correct answers compared with 43.3 by the girls. But when the tests were framed as animal games, boys’ average scores were significantly higher: 44.7 compared with 38.3 for the girls. Girls performed worse in the non-competitive setting.
- tremon 11y agoAh, I stand corrected. I had understood the differences with the girls were insignificant, but it doesn't appear to be.