Support NeoGAF

[Deku]

A study that shows that children fell into stereotype of math = boys, reading = girls by second grade.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01529.x/abstract

Article on MSN that sums up the study:

http://moms.today.com/_news/2011/03...s-children-absorb-stereotypes-by-second-grade



Pretty worrying, although not surprising to me after being exposed to kids media prevalent in the western world. On the other hand, something like this was relatively unheard of growing up in East Europe. We had some girls who really kicked ass in math in my class, and noone batted an eye at that being in some way unusual.

Boys are already at a huge disadvantage in school where the standards and teaching tend to favour girls and punish boys for being boys. They fall behind on reading skills, and by the time they graduate high school, boys are way behind in post secondary enrollment.

This 'study' feels more like an attack on boys and yet another attempt to modify the curriculum to fit how girls learn.

I suspect they could do a similar study on girls and reading skills.

 

[Cyan]

Nope. I'm saying that if you're going to try and legitimise a stereotype of the population you should aim for wider coverage than 247.

So... you're saying you don't understand statistics.

 

[Hari Seldon]

I know stats can't be fallible, but I'm not really buying this with my old, irrational brain.

I seem to remember my math classes up to calculus being filled with females. however, it's possible that they were good at it and just didn't like it.

Well there is an undeniable truth that far less females enter into math heavy majors in college. It has nothing to do with women not being able to do math, since women are obviously just as smart and capable as men. It has to do with what is driving women away from not liking math and not sticking with it at the rates that men do.

 

[FromTheFuture]

Not sure if this I'd mentioned, but is this a new phenomenon? I've never heard about this until this very moment. Otherwise, math and reading have never seemed to be very gender biased to me, other than maybe the fact that many computer related careers are dominated by males. But I assumed that to be a culmination of a multitude of other factors than just math is for boys.

Also, apparently I'm all backwards for stereotypes because I'm an Asian male who sucks at math and destroys at English.

 

[Dr.Palutena]

This offends me so much.

indeed defying a stereotype while reinforcing others seems counterproductive.

 

[Dude Abides]

Dat math.

 

[Azih]

I can't really conceive of what 'signals' are in our society that could cause this at such a young age. Can anyone point to something blatently obvious? I really doubt parents/teachers are (subconciously) doing this as they want the children to succeed in ALL subjects.

I would need to see more studies like this, otherwise I will just dismiss it as confirmation bias.

Well if you look at what the researches are saying it's pretty obvious they have no idea *why* two year olds think boys = math, girls = reading. They've just shown that that's what is happening.

 

[Deku]

Well if you look at what the researches are saying it's pretty obvious they have no idea *why* two year olds think boys = math, girls = reading. They've just shown that that's what is happening.

And yet that is not what the OP implied. He or she rants on about being concerned about societal biases.

But seems unwilling to comment on biological biases. Maybe boys are really just better at Maths.

 

[Hari Seldon]

So... you're saying you don't understand statistics.

To be fair these social science studies have a very liberal interpretation of how the central limit theorem works.

 

[Azih]

And yet that is not what the OP implied. He or she rants on about being concerned about societal biases.

That's the best hypothesis they've got. It's not even a theory.

But seems unwilling to comment on biological biases. Maybe boys are really just better at Maths.

Well the study isn't about whether boys are better at maths or not, it's about what two year olds *think* about who is better at math or english. Two years old is incredibly incredibly young to be coming to these kinds of conclusions. If by two you've already decided that you're not going to be good at reading or not going to be good at math then isn't that going to affect your later schooling significantly?

 

[Zaptruder]

I can't really conceive of what 'signals' are in our society that could cause this at such a young age. Can anyone point to something blatently obvious? I really doubt parents/teachers are (subconciously) doing this as they want the children to succeed in ALL subjects.

I would need to see more studies like this, otherwise I will just dismiss it as confirmation bias.

I think you fail to understand the design of the study.

The study doesn't test the kids on maths or reading. It tests their association with gender and subjects.

Even at such a young age, before you think that there'd be a large deal of influence from genders trending towards one thing or another... they're already showing that they're playing into gender stereotypes.

The problem is, we don't know exactly what the source of these gender stereotypes are; the easy out is of course simply to say that there are large number of complex factors that point towards this been a cultural phenomenon.

The one that's looking for confirmation bias is yourself, using... I don't even know if it's an anecdote; it may just be an idea that makes sense to you and you're running with it...

Boys are just as likely to engross themselves in action figures (dolls) as they are lego. Girls are just as likely to engross themselves in building blocks as they are dolls.

The problem is that societal influences are and can be subtle. The fact that there is a disparity in place that isn't actively combated against means that children pick up on these associations (on a subconcious level) and queues and mimic and imitate them.



One thing to take away from this is the understanding that environmental influence works more subtely than most can understand... that genetic traits like appearance and gender can affect the environment we percieve and how others percieve us, and in turn how the environment interacts with us.

To put it another way, irrespective of the amount of genetic differentiation and talent a person may have, imagine if he were brought up as a slave, or in North Korea. how able would that person be, to express those talents and differences? He'd have to have a significant degree of luck in finding a compassionate master, or fall in the right set of circumstances... otherwise the realities of their world would turn them into just another slave or brain washed citizen.

 

[Deku]

Well the study isn't about whether boys are better at maths or not, it's about what two year olds *think* about who is better at math or english. Two years old is incredibly incredibly young to be coming to these kinds of conclusions. If by two you've already decided that you're not going to be good at reading or not going to be good at math then isn't that going to affect your later schooling significantly?

Is the question who is going to be 'better' or are you never going to be 'good at'? That makes a world of difference

Further more, kids that age are highly suggestible and could be lead to answers as well. But that's another issue entirely/

 

[XiaNaphryz]

Dat math.

 

[Escape Goat]

We gender type our kids as soon as they exit the womb. Boys get blue, girls get pink. Boys play with cars, trains and planes why girls get dolls and "house" toys. You don't need a lot of math to put Suzie Wetsherpants diaper back on.

 

[Azih]

Is the question who is going to be 'better' or are you never going to be 'good at'? That makes a world of difference

Actually I made a mistake, the study seems not be to be associated to ability at all (not better or good at). it's asking the two year old to identify names to subjects in one and to determine who is having more fun with math in the other.

The idea is that two year olds are internalising the idea that 'math is for boys' and 'english is for girls' (not ability), and that is not a good thing at all. It's like they've got a ready made excuse and reason to stop trying when they hit a rough part of the learning curve in the subjects.

 

[ToxicAdam]

Well if you look at what the researches are saying it's pretty obvious they have no idea *why* two year olds think boys = math, girls = reading. They've just shown that that's what is happening.

Well, then I was confused because the OP made it seem like they knew the reasons why and it was because we have a sexist society that is making our children pick up on these biases at a very early age.

 

[Slavik81]

Nope. I'm saying that if you're going to try and legitimise a stereotype of the population you should aim for wider coverage than 247.

It's vastly more important to properly choose a sample group than to choose a tremendously large one.

I'm sure the study provides the error margins for their sample size. You can go see what the error margin is for yourself.

 

[The Technomancer]

Yeah, I think we've had similar studies before show the same thing.

Actually what Hary Seldon was saying above also makes sense to me. Boys are usually taught to be 'tough' and to 'win' (especially by their fathers most likely?) and the math is a clear win/lose kind of subject with not much room for interpretation. I can see this being true from the earliest age even, like if the baby girl fails to put the shaped objects through the cut holes correctly, I can see parents being more likely to get the girl who keeps failing at that, away from the toy (aww, she's so cute when she's angry our fluffy princess, here's the doll!). Stuff like this probably compounds later on bit by bit, there's probably not one clear flashing signal.

We have a member named Hari Seldon? Thats awesome.

Sent from my Ubuntu partition "Second Foundation"

 

[Zaptruder]

Actually I made a mistake, the study seems not be to be associated to ability at all (not better or good at). it's asking the two year old to identify names to subjects in one and to determine who is having more fun with math in the other.

The idea is that two year olds are internalising the idea that 'math is for boys' and 'english is for girls' (not ability), and that is not a good thing at all. It's like they've got a ready made excuse and reason to stop trying when they hit a rough part of the learning curve in the subjects.

The article talks about children in grade two btw, not two year olds.

Still young, but a very significant difference.

 

[Azih]

Well, then I was confused because the OP made it seem like they knew the reasons why and it was because we have a sexist society that is making our children pick up on these biases at a very early age.

That's just their hypothesis. Let's not just dismiss the findings but come up with some different reasoning as to why two year olds would think this?


Edit: Ohh grade Two. Not two year olds, my bad. Ok not quite as shocking then.

 

[ToxicAdam]

I think you fail to understand the design of the study.

The study doesn't test the kids on maths or reading. It tests their association with gender and subjects.

That's just their hypothesis. Let's not just dismiss the findings but come up with some different reasoning as to why two year olds would think this?

Okay, I understand better now. It's not saying we are actively disinhibiting our children from succeeding in a particular subject, but rather, some of the other (seemingly benign) sexist choices we encourage them with at a young age could be playing an influence on what they excel at later in life.

I can buy that.

 

[Rikyfree]

God bless Danica McKellar and her math loving hotness.

 

[Fjord]

Seems like they should have had a control of the genders studying a different subject. Perhaps the 'stereotype' is that girls are more social and wouldn't want to be cooped up alone.

I've been trying to track down a transcript of Larry Summer's controversial 2005 gender speech when he was president of Harvard. I think many of you would find it quite interesting. It seems to have been taken down in a suspicious number of places though.

 

[dyls]

just a theory here, throwing it out there...


Maybe boys and girls are.....different? Why are we trying to force equality on them as a society, perhaps we should instead try to understand and accept that there may be differences between the sexes and not try and ignore it?

Good luck getting GAF to accept that this could even be any sort of possibility. Obviously it's sexism. I mean, why do you think men have more upper body strength? Sexism, of course.

 

[demon]

I'm not one to deny the effects of socialization on gender roles to a degree, but I'm also not going to ignore the fact that males and females have different brains, different hormonal balances etc, that will lend to different behaviors and proclivities. But we now live in a society where it's beyond politically incorrect to even suggest such a thing, despite all the science and common sense that points that way. In a case like this, is it nature or nurture? Who knows. The tone of the article (and this thread) definitely leans towards nurture but without any actual evidence. They even admit they're clueless as to why.

We gender type our kids as soon as they exit the womb. Boys get blue, girls get pink. Boys play with cars, trains and planes why girls get dolls and "house" toys. You don't need a lot of math to put Suzie Wetsherpants diaper back on.

I've read of studies where boys and girls at a very young age are shown to be naturally drawn to certain types of toys. These are 'gender roles' that span virtually all cultures and it's nothing new. Let's not delude ourselves deny reality for the sake of furthering the cause of gender equality. It's not necessary and it's only harmful to gender relations in the long run.

 

[btkadams]

i'm not one to stereotype but my calc class in university was 95% male. i also am pretty certain there is less than 20 girls in the entire engineering faculty lol. it always just seems like a building full of men when i walk through there.

 

[Telosfortelos]

We gender type our kids as soon as they exit the womb. Boys get blue, girls get pink. Boys play with cars, trains and planes why girls get dolls and "house" toys. You don't need a lot of math to put Suzie Wetsherpants diaper back on.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcHdF1eHhgc&feature=player_detailpage#t=232s

 

[bobbychalkers]

I didn't get the message, I hate math.

 

[XiaNaphryz]

God bless Danica McKellar and her math loving hotness.

NPR: McKellar discusses the mathematical theorem she and two others published

 

[Escape Goat]

I've read of studies where boys and girls at a very young age are shown to be naturally drawn to certain types of toys. These are 'gender roles' that span virtually all cultures and it's nothing new. Let's not delude ourselves deny reality for the sake of furthering the cause of gender equality. It's not necessary and it's only harmful to gender relations in the long run.

I'm not furthering any cause. I just stated a fact. I'm not going to pretend to know the sociological or psychological forces that shape early childhood. I've taken enough psychology courses short of it being a 2nd major but thats a drop in the bucket as far as useful understanding.

If you have that study I'd be interested to read it.

I didn't get the message, I hate math.

Maybe you're a woman trapped in a mans body?

 

[Imperial Hot]

I am a manly man, and I fucking hate math.

 

[StealthGoblin]

In the UK, Girls outperform Boys at Maths at GCSE level (except last year). They are certainly good at it and able even if they think it isn't for them.

 

[JGS]

Well there is an undeniable truth that far less females enter into math heavy majors in college. It has nothing to do with women not being able to do math, since women are obviously just as smart and capable as men. It has to do with what is driving women away from not liking math and not sticking with it at the rates that men do.

That's true & I always linked it up to desire. Neither gender overall particularly likes math and many take it as a means of finishing required coursework.

Overall, I think it takes a special kind of brain to go hog wild about mathematics and once the need to take it is gone, the desire is almost non-existent. I remember (vaguely) taking some kind of psychology course where they compared the brain of an engineer with an "ordinary" brain and those guys apparently think differently than others.

What if that were a trait that was favored in the male species- almost like agressiveness? IDK, I'm thinking on the fly. I think it is clear that women by and large don't pursue those types of careers, I'm just not sure if it's a result of it being ingrained in them at childhood that they can't do it. In my childhood, it seemed like the expectations were the same for both of us and the girls excelled at it to boot.

 

[Shalashaska]

Male and I enjoy math, I like reading too so ehhhh.

 

[Flo_Evans]

To me math = work, reading = entertainment.

I would often read assigned books way before we where supposed to, but you would never catch me doing extra math homework.

 

[ahoyhoy]

90% of the Math teachers I've ever had were Female.

And I fucking hate Math. Too many god-damned rules to learn.

 

[SnakeswithLasers]

Nope. I'm saying that if you're going to try and legitimise a stereotype of the population you should aim for wider coverage than 247.

Someone is bad at statistics. Hint:

Spoiler

It isn't who you think it is.

 

[MiniBossBattle]

Thats it. Teaching my 2 year old girl ordinary differential equations and calculus now.

 

[JGS]

Thats it. Teaching my 2 year old girl ordinary differential equations and calculus now.

Too late.

 

[AmICoolYet]

NPR: McKellar discusses the mathematical theorem she and two others published

I'd let her integrate my natural log.

 

[Sealda]

And yet that is not what the OP implied. He or she rants on about being concerned about societal biases.

But seems unwilling to comment on biological biases. Maybe boys are really just better at Maths.

Come on, dont be racist.

 

[Escape Goat]

Come on, dont be racist.

erm...

 

[Apple Sauce]

Maths sucks. Reading is awesome. I am a boy.

 

[SnakeswithLasers]

Maths sucks. Reading is awesome. I am a boy.

Sure are.

 

[C.Dark.DN]

Girls can be quite smart, but they don't really go for subjects that are math heavy. In my calc 2 and 3 classes, there were about 3 or 4 girls out of about 40 people. Sucks to stereotype but sometimes it's the truth.

That's college level. They're choosing majors that don't require high Calc.

In my elementary and middle school experience girls were usually the smartest ones in each class, and the boy girl ratio was near even.

We has the same teachers the first 80% of elementary, so said girls were good in all subjects.

Excluding nerds, most guys wanted to talk and do recess.

 

[Kitsunebaby]

This is actually kind of odd to me. When I was a in school I remember being about the only girl in my class who really enjoyed reading. I usually saw far more boys bringing books to class for personal reading. Also, girls tended to dominate my math classes. Personally, I'm pretty good at both but I far prefer reading.

 

[ToxicAdam]

This is actually kind of odd to me. When I was a in school I remember being about the only girl in my class who really enjoyed reading. I usually saw far more boys bringing books to class for personal reading. Also, girls tended to dominate my math classes. Personally, I'm pretty good at both but I far prefer reading.

This was my experience in school also. If we ever had math competitions in class, it was the girls that would also dominate.

 

[JGS]

This is actually kind of odd to me. When I was a in school I remember being about the only girl in my class who really enjoyed reading. I usually saw far more boys bringing books to class for personal reading. Also, girls tended to dominate my math classes. Personally, I'm pretty good at both but I far prefer reading.

Again, this is what's bugging me too. The boys would at least be reading comic books all day but we actually got into the literature classess as well.

This is why I'm having a hard time linking what girls learn at an early age with what they want to do later in life regarding advanced mathematics which is an entirely different animal imo. If the study had been conducted at college level, I would find it a bit more understandable as I'm sure there's some type of boys' club assumptions going on in the math and sciences.

 

[Champomade]

Why isn't the thread title "Reading is for girls ? etc." ?
I sometimes feel there is a hidden feminist agenda on GAF

 

[Devolution]

I was great at math till I hit algebra. But I think the study is trying to hit on the tropes that make many girls internalize they're not as good at math as boys. They're also often told they're better suited for humanities courses. The exception of course being the asian stereotype that suggests they're better at math than everyone else. There are quite a bit of stereotypes that are more insidious in the classroom than I think people want to admit.