I have yet to see a convincing meta-analysis on this subject. All of the reasonably broad ones I have encountered fail to reject the null for a difference in mean, though most show marginally higher variance for males. Obviously also depends on the subscales and coeffs for g.
-
-
This is about the well-studied male-favoring difference in means on tests of mathematical and visuospatial cognitive abilities. I am aware-- as your OP noted, it arises from greater systematizing tendencies. However, this post does not address the question of g more broadly.
-
I'd say the evidence on general intelligence is inconclusive due to a variety of reasons but especially psychometric and sampling issues. But my posterior mode is on male advantage of perhaps 3 IQ.
-
Regarding sampling issues, definitely, particularly if one hypothesizes that late developmental effects (e.g. during ages 20-30) might contribute to any deviation that does exist. Very difficult to sample.
-
I skimmed through abstracts from a few more modern reviews, and everything I see is at ~0-2. Possible age-dependent effects. This is all further dependent on the extent to which each of the respective tests manage to capture e.g. spatial abilities, social abilities, etc.
-
Read through these two recent issues in MQ. http://www.mankindquarterly.org/archive/issue/58-1 … and http://www.mankindquarterly.org/archive/issue/57-1 …
-
Thanks; this looks closer to what I had in mind. Again, given caveats about choice of subscales etc. I hope there are plenty of funnel plots as well.
-
Probably not. But I'd bet that there's pub bias in favor of null sex differences.
-
Overall? Perhaps. In this publication, though, I might reasonably expect the opposite. Anyway, need meta-analysis to make much sense of the results as a whole.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.