3 ms·

CS participation was the same or higher than math and physics, and now it's significantly lower. Yes - and this contradicts belorn's theory. My theory is very

CS participation was the same or higher than math and physics, and now it's significantly lower. Yes - and this contradicts belorn's theory. My theory is very simple: more math less women, with other factors being secondary. Here is Scott Alexander doing some pretty good regressions (r=-0.82, p=0.0003): http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/01/24/perceptions-of-required-ability-act-as-a-proxy-for-actual-required-ability-in-explaining-the-gender-gap/ http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/01/24/perceptions-of-required... There is lots of evidence of innate ability playing a significant role in this. Here are some papers: http://www.ams.org/notices/201201/rtx120100010p.pdf http://www.ams.org/notices/201201/rtx120100010p.pdf http://itp.wceruw.org/Hyde%20Science%2008.pdf http://itp.wceruw.org/Hyde%20Science%2008.pdf http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3057475/pdf/nihms-232605.pdf http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3057475/pdf/nihm... (Note that putting agreement with me into an abstract is career suicide, so you'll actually need to skip ahead to the data tables.) My theory predicts % of women in academia in bio vs physics, % women in IT office work vs softer office work, % women in quant trading vs back office, and many more. Do you have any evidence at all which contradicts this?

pron 11y ago
> Yes - and this contradicts belorn's theory. Scientific consensus also disagrees with that theory. We believe that the reason is related to power disparity not simply being a minority group. > Here is Scott Alexander doing some pretty good regressions (r=-0.82, p=0.0003). Except that it explains little, as women participation in all fields is rising. So while it may always be the case that you'll find that correlation with mathematical ability, it matters little, as it explains smaller and smaller differences. In fact, a low analytical writing score may correlate better than a high math score. Where things get weird is in CS, and worse: the software industry. > There is lots of evidence of innate ability playing a significant role in this. Here are some papers... That's not what the papers show at all. The greatest difference I spotted was twice as many boys as girls over the 99th percentile. We are talking 5x-10x participation gap in software.

pron 11y ago

> Yes - and this contradicts belorn's theory. Scientific consensus also disagrees with that theory. We believe that the reason is related to power disparity not simply being a minority group. > Here is Scott Alexander doing some pretty good regressions (r=-0.82, p=0.0003). Except that it explains little, as women participation in all fields is rising. So while it may always be the case that you'll find that correlation with mathematical ability, it matters little, as it explains smaller and smaller differences. In fact, a low analytical writing score may correlate better than a high math score. Where things get weird is in CS, and worse: the software industry. > There is lots of evidence of innate ability playing a significant role in this. Here are some papers... That's not what the papers show at all. The greatest difference I spotted was twice as many boys as girls over the 99th percentile. We are talking 5x-10x participation gap in software.