On 8 November 2010 Stephen Black wrote, first quoting Rick Froman: >>There was an issue of Psychological Science in the Public >>Interest devoted to this issue in 2007, available for free here: http://www.psychologicalscience.org/journals/pspi/pspi_8_1_article.pdf
>Their conclusion from the Abstract: <snip>"There are no >single or simple answers to the complex questions about >sex differences in science and mathematics.” >By happenstance, I just stumbled on a new study, >published in the most recent issue of _Current Directions >in Psychological Science_, but only available for $$$. >They come to a bolder conclusion, namely "preferences >and choices—both freely made and constrained—are the >most significant cause of women’s underrepresentation". That doesn't seem to me to necessarily be *much* bolder, as the fact that the most significant reason for women's under-representation is down to choices of one kind or another does not preclude that at the highest level there may be sex differences in potential achievement in mathematics. >_Science Daily_ has an informative news item on it headed >"Women's Choices, Not Abilities, Keep Them out of Math-Intensive >Fields at http://tinyurl.com/2f3bo59 The Science Daily article relates to this book cited by Stephen: >Ceci, S. and Williams, W. (2010) Sex Differences in Math-Intensive >Fields _Current Directions in Psychological Science_ October >2010 19: 275-279, first published on October 4, 2010 … >abstract at http://cdp.sagepub.com/content/19/5/275.abstract The headline of the Science Daily article is "Women's Choices, Not Abilities, Keep Them out of Math-Intensive Fields" This, as headlines often do, slightly oversimplifies what Ceci and Williams concluded. I obtained their book through my local library earlier this year. I can't say I actually *read* it (it is heavy, heavy, heavy with statistical analysis, and a thorough reading would take up most of one's time for two or three weeks at least – and then I wouldn't be able to pretend to have understood much of the stats), but the sense I had of their overall conclusions is that while women's choice was very much the main factor in men's disproportionate representation in mathematical and physical science fields, they did not exclude sex differentials in achievement at the highest levels. In fact this is indicated in the Science Daily article: "However, twice as many men as women score in the top 1% on tests such as the SAT-M. Clearly, the picture is complex, Ceci and Williams decided." – in other words, a not dissimilar overall conclusion to the one quoted by Rick above! Also from the Science Daily article: "Williams and Ceci also reviewed research on sex discrimination and decided that it is no longer a major factor. In fact, one large-scale national study found that women are actually slightly more likely than men to be invited to interview for and to be offered tenure-track jobs in math-intensive STEM fields." All the above is very much in line with what Susan Pinker finds in her book *The Sexual Paradox: Troubled Boys, Gifted Girls and the Real Differences Between the Sexes* (2008). Allen Esterson Former lecturer, Science Department Southwark College, London allenester...@compuserve.com http://www.esterson.org ------------- From: sbl...@ubishops.ca Subject: Re: Big news on the Larry Summers front Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2010 20:19:00 -0500 On 6 Nov 2010 at 15:30, Rick Froman wrote: There was an issue of Psychological Science in the Public Interest devoted to this issue in 2007, available for free here: http://www.psychologicalscience.org/journals/pspi/pspi_8_1_article.pdf >Their conclusion from the Abstract: <snip>"There are no > single or simple answers to the complex questions about sex > differences in science and mathematics.” By happenstance, I just stumbled on a new study, published in the most recent issue of _Current Directions in Psychological Science_, but only available for $$$. They come to a bolder conclusion, namely "preferences and choices—both freely made and constrained—are the most significant cause of women’s underrepresentation" . _Science Daily_ has an informative news item on it headed "Women's Choices, Not Abilities, Keep Them out of Math-Intensive Fields at http://tinyurl.com/2f3bo59 It has the obligatory nod to the Larry Summers affair. Stephen Ceci, S. and Williams, W. (2010) Sex Differences in Math-Intensive Fields _Current Directions in Psychological Science_ October 2010 19: 275-279, first published on October 4, 2010 doi:10.1177/0963721410383241 abstract at http://cdp.sagepub.com/content/19/5/275.abstract -------------------------------------------- Stephen L. Black, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology, Emeritus Bishop's University Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada e-mail: sblack at ubishops.ca --------------------------------------------- --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=6307 or send a blank email to leave-6307-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
