7 ms·

Sex differences in ability tilt in the right tail of cognitive abilities

36 points by jeffreyrogers 9y ago

IntronExon 9y ago
It is worth pointing out that “ability” here is being measured by standardized tests, such as SAT and ACT. This could reflect underlying differences between sexes, or that by the time people are categorized as being in the top 5% social/cultural bias has already had an effect.
- stcredzero 9y ago
  The measurement of general intelligence is just about the most strongly predictive tool in Psychology. Here's some things from Thomas Sowell's Migrations and Cultures that people don't know about intelligence as measured by groups. Polish and Italian immigrant communities went from the mid-80's average IQ to over 100 over the 1st half of the 20th century. Poles had increased their average IQ to 108. In another study, African American children of US service people growing up in Germany had the same average IQs as their classmates. So could factors outside of genetics, like culture, have powerful effects on IQ? It certainly looks like it. Advocates of Social Justice should be looking for what these factors are. Whatever those factors are, not seeking to deliver them to underprivileged groups is like letting lead get into the water of Flint Michigan: It can mean huge differences in the IQs of growing children. Instead, what I see from the far left, is the willful suppression of such information. If it doesn't fit the political agenda and narrative, then it's a-priori a product of bigotry or bias of some kind. Sorry, but that strikes me as cynical and very odd. It's almost like someone cares more about power than the welfare of the underprivileged. More on the specific topic of the op, the SAT and ACT certainly don't measure everything. Perhaps there is some kind of bias in workplace culture that puts too much emphasis on the skills well measured by such tests, while other kinds of skills are underappreciated? My intuitive sense, considering what tech is like, is that it's probably true.
  - IntronExon 9y ago
    Measurement of general intelligence isn’t part of this study.
    - stcredzero 9y ago
      I thought that ACT and SAT scores were used as a proxy for the measurement of general intelligence.
      - nugi 9y ago
        Proxy is the key word here. There are many more biases in SAT, ACT, than most general intelligence tests.
        stcredzero 9y ago
        [citation needed] A lot of criticism about intelligence tests are ideologically driven, because underprivileged groups score low, and in many regions that have suffered the most from colonialism, underprivileged groups score low. I think that what we will find is that being underprivileged affects intelligence quite strongly. Sephardic Jews were at the center of worldwide Jewish culture. Their cultural contributions and success in society would suggest that as a population they were probably quite intelligent during their heyday. Today, Ashkenazi Jews are known to have a high average group IQ, higher than current day Sephardic Jews. I suspect that ideological knee-jerk fear driven suppression of IQ research on underprivileged groups is keeping our society from realizing interventions which can help groups by driving up their average IQ scores. We have historical evidence from the US that underprivileged groups with below average IQs can be changed.
    - hprotagonist 9y ago
      SAT scores correlate better than you'd think with IQ as a measure of G. https://www.psychologicalscience.org/pdf/ps/Frey.pdf?origin=publication_detail https://www.psychologicalscience.org/pdf/ps/Frey.pdf?origin=...
- nugi 9y ago
  Very true, we only get correlation with this. I wonder how much the ACT and SAT scores differ compared to each other. It is well known the SAT tests more learned (larger social bias) abilities than the ACT. It may provide more perspective to your point.
stcredzero 9y ago
According to the NLRB, citing something like this in a memorandum at someplace like Google is discriminatory "junk science."
- IntronExon 9y ago
  I would imagine that has a lot to do with what you cite it to support. The conclusions here are weak where innate ability is concerned, yet I suspect that’s where you were headed. I can cite studies showing worse outcomes for African Americans for example, but I’d be a deceptive ass if I tried to pawn that of as proof off innate differences.
  - avatarlite 9y ago
    The cause of sex-related ability tilt is irrelevant with regard to the consequences on STEM employment. Whether due to socialization alone, innate ability alone, some combination of the two, or causes we don't understand, the outcome is the same and the consequences are the same.
    - stcredzero 9y ago
      But what one would rationally choose to do about it might well be very different.
    - loorinm 9y ago
      Exactly. It doesn’t matter what the causes are. The fact is it’s harming people as a whole and talented women aren’t being treated fairly. All the biology in the world doesn’t explain or fix this very real problem. Also, we are not slaves to “biology”. We are perfectly capable of murdering each other but we don’t, because we have rules. Rules trump biology.
      - stcredzero 9y ago
        Exactly. It doesn’t matter what the causes are. That's pretty illogical. If you test positive for a virus, you'll want to think twice about taking antibiotics. Also, we are not slaves to “biology”. We are perfectly capable of murdering each other but we don’t, because we have rules. Rules trump biology. Culture trumps conscious mental entities like rules. Such an idea is needed to explain many of the things we see around the world and in history. (Like, why have Jewish people been able to locally dominate in tailoring in so many instances across literally thousands of years? It's certainly not because of some kind of tailoring gene, and it's not about "rules.") A strongly cultural view basically dismantles huge swathes of Alt-Right ideology, replacing it with something else which allows for everyone to participate. However, such a view also dismantles much of the current day Far Left ideology. I think it's high time that something more rational and more fitting with evidence came to replace that, however.
gwern 9y ago
Mirror: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ctuft161j42r46f/2018-wai.pdf?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/ctuft161j42r46f/2018-wai.pdf?dl=0
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
ggm 9y ago
I'm tempted to put this in the same bucket as "the bell curve" that it uncovered a factoid, but one which shifts the centre overlap of two curves by a statistically significant (ie, measureable) amount, but does not strongly suggest that close to normal people on average have a difference which matters a damn. Many of us outside google believe that google employs too many people who think they are Mensa, and so self-identify in the far right side. Sorry guys, but I hate to tell you this: your own curves probably don't support your arguments: you're all well within normal. TL;DR no, this doesn't support the diversity memo
- stcredzero 9y ago
  TL;DR no, this doesn't support the diversity memo [citation needed] What you say seems to generally contradict findings in psychology and common sense. http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/Occupations.aspx http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/Occupations.aspx https://www.quora.com/Whats-the-average-IQ-of-a-Google-engineer/answer/Jake-Nicholson-16?share=19ec7d8e&srid=TPm https://www.quora.com/Whats-the-average-IQ-of-a-Google-engin... Maybe Googlers don't have to all be in Mensa. However, having more general intelligence is a good predictor of success in many tech fields.
  - ggm 9y ago
    Those are weak cites (ok: so I gave none) -one has bars wide enough to drive a low-IQ truck through. The other is "I went to IQ camp and here is my cornflake box toy" response. Having GI is good for engineering, sure. But having maths higher than verbal skills, I think its in the margins. You want both, and people with both, and with determination and good teaching will go far. I believe good teaching and a drive to success outweighs almost everything else. (not an engineer. I looked at my competencies and decided not to make bridges, I didn't want the burdens which come with being wrong about the bridge building)
    - stcredzero 9y ago
      Those are weak cites (ok: so I gave none) The preponderance of the evidence is against you, but I'm not versed in grabbing psych links. I believe good teaching and a drive to success outweighs almost everything else. That is very powerful. I would partly agree, in that those are very powerful. I think Liana K makes a very good case that there is something societal going on. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIRvtA2JIIA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIRvtA2JIIA However, there seems to be a "Scandinavian Paradox" for attitudes regarding Math as well: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0153857 http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal....
owens99 9y ago
Research like this fails to give us any insights about the difference between Nature vs Nurture. It's highly likely men and women are conditioned and encouraged from an early age by their parents to take interest in things which the parent believes fits their gender role.
- insickness 9y ago
  There are several areas of research that show there are biologically deterministic differences between males and females. Female new born babies focus on faces more than males do. Males focus more on mechanical mobiles than females. https://www.theguardian.com/education/2003/apr/17/research.highereducation https://www.theguardian.com/education/2003/apr/17/research.h... Male Monkeys prefer boy toys while female monkeys prefer girl toys. https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13596-male-monkeys-prefer-boys-toys/ https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13596-male-monkeys-pr...
bdod6 9y ago
For anyone interested in additional research and debate on this topic, I'd recommend watching Pinker and Spelke's excellent debate on Youtube. As some might remember, in 2005 Larry Summers was fired from Harvard for making similar comments regarding right tail cognitive abilities. Pinker/Spelke lay out great points on both sides of the issue. Sex Differences in Cognitive Abilities by Diane Halpern is another important work in this subject. It was published back in 1986, so the research on topic has been going on for decades. During that time, virtually every piece of research supports the claim that innate differences in mental abilities exist between the sexes. The extent of those differences is hard to measure, but this new paper is nothing new. It's just adding more support to an already large body of evidence.
dogma1138 9y ago
They've published in the past the 30 year results in 2010 for anyone who's interested to see if there are any major differences. https://www.psychologytoday.com/sites/default/files/attachments/56143/sex-differences-in-the-right-tail-cognitive-abilities.pdf https://www.psychologytoday.com/sites/default/files/attachme...
shrewduser 9y ago
man you really have to catch these stories quick before they're blasted off the front page, i was hoping for some discussion but it looks like these stories get buried either by mass flagging or an admin.
- jeffreyrogers 9y ago
  Yeah it's a shame. I thought the comments on this one were pretty civil and reasonable.
uoaei 9y ago
The thing to remember about data is, it only says exactly what it says. And what it says is this: sex of an individual somehow correlates with the measure of cognitive ability used in the study. The hidden variable here is a dominating one: the sex of the individual and how they have been socialized to practice certain skills over others. This varies by where they spent their developmental years, how their parents brought them or denied them certain opportunities, how the skills they developed align with or diverge from the test they took, and other invisible influences.

36 points by jeffreyrogers 9y ago

It is worth pointing out that “ability” here is being measured by standardized tests, such as SAT and ACT. This could reflect underlying differences between sexes, or that by the time people are categorized as being in the top 5% social/cultural bias has already had an effect.

stcredzero 9y ago
The measurement of general intelligence is just about the most strongly predictive tool in Psychology. Here's some things from Thomas Sowell's Migrations and Cultures that people don't know about intelligence as measured by groups. Polish and Italian immigrant communities went from the mid-80's average IQ to over 100 over the 1st half of the 20th century. Poles had increased their average IQ to 108. In another study, African American children of US service people growing up in Germany had the same average IQs as their classmates. So could factors outside of genetics, like culture, have powerful effects on IQ? It certainly looks like it. Advocates of Social Justice should be looking for what these factors are. Whatever those factors are, not seeking to deliver them to underprivileged groups is like letting lead get into the water of Flint Michigan: It can mean huge differences in the IQs of growing children. Instead, what I see from the far left, is the willful suppression of such information. If it doesn't fit the political agenda and narrative, then it's a-priori a product of bigotry or bias of some kind. Sorry, but that strikes me as cynical and very odd. It's almost like someone cares more about power than the welfare of the underprivileged. More on the specific topic of the op, the SAT and ACT certainly don't measure everything. Perhaps there is some kind of bias in workplace culture that puts too much emphasis on the skills well measured by such tests, while other kinds of skills are underappreciated? My intuitive sense, considering what tech is like, is that it's probably true.
- IntronExon 9y ago
  Measurement of general intelligence isn’t part of this study.
  - stcredzero 9y ago
    I thought that ACT and SAT scores were used as a proxy for the measurement of general intelligence.
    - nugi 9y ago
      Proxy is the key word here. There are many more biases in SAT, ACT, than most general intelligence tests.
      - stcredzero 9y ago
        [citation needed] A lot of criticism about intelligence tests are ideologically driven, because underprivileged groups score low, and in many regions that have suffered the most from colonialism, underprivileged groups score low. I think that what we will find is that being underprivileged affects intelligence quite strongly. Sephardic Jews were at the center of worldwide Jewish culture. Their cultural contributions and success in society would suggest that as a population they were probably quite intelligent during their heyday. Today, Ashkenazi Jews are known to have a high average group IQ, higher than current day Sephardic Jews. I suspect that ideological knee-jerk fear driven suppression of IQ research on underprivileged groups is keeping our society from realizing interventions which can help groups by driving up their average IQ scores. We have historical evidence from the US that underprivileged groups with below average IQs can be changed.
  - hprotagonist 9y ago
    SAT scores correlate better than you'd think with IQ as a measure of G. https://www.psychologicalscience.org/pdf/ps/Frey.pdf?origin=publication_detail https://www.psychologicalscience.org/pdf/ps/Frey.pdf?origin=...
nugi 9y ago
Very true, we only get correlation with this. I wonder how much the ACT and SAT scores differ compared to each other. It is well known the SAT tests more learned (larger social bias) abilities than the ACT. It may provide more perspective to your point.

stcredzero 9y ago

According to the NLRB, citing something like this in a memorandum at someplace like Google is discriminatory "junk science."

IntronExon 9y ago
I would imagine that has a lot to do with what you cite it to support. The conclusions here are weak where innate ability is concerned, yet I suspect that’s where you were headed. I can cite studies showing worse outcomes for African Americans for example, but I’d be a deceptive ass if I tried to pawn that of as proof off innate differences.
- avatarlite 9y ago
  The cause of sex-related ability tilt is irrelevant with regard to the consequences on STEM employment. Whether due to socialization alone, innate ability alone, some combination of the two, or causes we don't understand, the outcome is the same and the consequences are the same.
  - stcredzero 9y ago
    But what one would rationally choose to do about it might well be very different.
  - loorinm 9y ago
    Exactly. It doesn’t matter what the causes are. The fact is it’s harming people as a whole and talented women aren’t being treated fairly. All the biology in the world doesn’t explain or fix this very real problem. Also, we are not slaves to “biology”. We are perfectly capable of murdering each other but we don’t, because we have rules. Rules trump biology.
    - stcredzero 9y ago
      Exactly. It doesn’t matter what the causes are. That's pretty illogical. If you test positive for a virus, you'll want to think twice about taking antibiotics. Also, we are not slaves to “biology”. We are perfectly capable of murdering each other but we don’t, because we have rules. Rules trump biology. Culture trumps conscious mental entities like rules. Such an idea is needed to explain many of the things we see around the world and in history. (Like, why have Jewish people been able to locally dominate in tailoring in so many instances across literally thousands of years? It's certainly not because of some kind of tailoring gene, and it's not about "rules.") A strongly cultural view basically dismantles huge swathes of Alt-Right ideology, replacing it with something else which allows for everyone to participate. However, such a view also dismantles much of the current day Far Left ideology. I think it's high time that something more rational and more fitting with evidence came to replace that, however.

gwern 9y ago

Mirror: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ctuft161j42r46f/2018-wai.pdf?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/ctuft161j42r46f/2018-wai.pdf?dl=0

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

ggm 9y ago

I'm tempted to put this in the same bucket as "the bell curve" that it uncovered a factoid, but one which shifts the centre overlap of two curves by a statistically significant (ie, measureable) amount, but does not strongly suggest that close to normal people on average have a difference which matters a damn. Many of us outside google believe that google employs too many people who think they are Mensa, and so self-identify in the far right side. Sorry guys, but I hate to tell you this: your own curves probably don't support your arguments: you're all well within normal. TL;DR no, this doesn't support the diversity memo

stcredzero 9y ago
TL;DR no, this doesn't support the diversity memo [citation needed] What you say seems to generally contradict findings in psychology and common sense. http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/Occupations.aspx http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/Occupations.aspx https://www.quora.com/Whats-the-average-IQ-of-a-Google-engineer/answer/Jake-Nicholson-16?share=19ec7d8e&srid=TPm https://www.quora.com/Whats-the-average-IQ-of-a-Google-engin... Maybe Googlers don't have to all be in Mensa. However, having more general intelligence is a good predictor of success in many tech fields.
- ggm 9y ago
  Those are weak cites (ok: so I gave none) -one has bars wide enough to drive a low-IQ truck through. The other is "I went to IQ camp and here is my cornflake box toy" response. Having GI is good for engineering, sure. But having maths higher than verbal skills, I think its in the margins. You want both, and people with both, and with determination and good teaching will go far. I believe good teaching and a drive to success outweighs almost everything else. (not an engineer. I looked at my competencies and decided not to make bridges, I didn't want the burdens which come with being wrong about the bridge building)
  - stcredzero 9y ago
    Those are weak cites (ok: so I gave none) The preponderance of the evidence is against you, but I'm not versed in grabbing psych links. I believe good teaching and a drive to success outweighs almost everything else. That is very powerful. I would partly agree, in that those are very powerful. I think Liana K makes a very good case that there is something societal going on. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIRvtA2JIIA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIRvtA2JIIA However, there seems to be a "Scandinavian Paradox" for attitudes regarding Math as well: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0153857 http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal....

owens99 9y ago

Research like this fails to give us any insights about the difference between Nature vs Nurture. It's highly likely men and women are conditioned and encouraged from an early age by their parents to take interest in things which the parent believes fits their gender role.

insickness 9y ago
There are several areas of research that show there are biologically deterministic differences between males and females. Female new born babies focus on faces more than males do. Males focus more on mechanical mobiles than females. https://www.theguardian.com/education/2003/apr/17/research.highereducation https://www.theguardian.com/education/2003/apr/17/research.h... Male Monkeys prefer boy toys while female monkeys prefer girl toys. https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13596-male-monkeys-prefer-boys-toys/ https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13596-male-monkeys-pr...

bdod6 9y ago

For anyone interested in additional research and debate on this topic, I'd recommend watching Pinker and Spelke's excellent debate on Youtube. As some might remember, in 2005 Larry Summers was fired from Harvard for making similar comments regarding right tail cognitive abilities. Pinker/Spelke lay out great points on both sides of the issue. Sex Differences in Cognitive Abilities by Diane Halpern is another important work in this subject. It was published back in 1986, so the research on topic has been going on for decades. During that time, virtually every piece of research supports the claim that innate differences in mental abilities exist between the sexes. The extent of those differences is hard to measure, but this new paper is nothing new. It's just adding more support to an already large body of evidence.

dogma1138 9y ago

They've published in the past the 30 year results in 2010 for anyone who's interested to see if there are any major differences. https://www.psychologytoday.com/sites/default/files/attachments/56143/sex-differences-in-the-right-tail-cognitive-abilities.pdf https://www.psychologytoday.com/sites/default/files/attachme...

shrewduser 9y ago

man you really have to catch these stories quick before they're blasted off the front page, i was hoping for some discussion but it looks like these stories get buried either by mass flagging or an admin.

jeffreyrogers 9y ago
Yeah it's a shame. I thought the comments on this one were pretty civil and reasonable.

uoaei 9y ago

The thing to remember about data is, it only says exactly what it says. And what it says is this: sex of an individual somehow correlates with the measure of cognitive ability used in the study. The hidden variable here is a dominating one: the sex of the individual and how they have been socialized to practice certain skills over others. This varies by where they spent their developmental years, how their parents brought them or denied them certain opportunities, how the skills they developed align with or diverge from the test they took, and other invisible influences.