Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Brain research on boys’ preference for video games and girls’ for social media

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 199 posts

Re: Brain research on boys’ preference for video games and girls’ for social media

#171

Post by Hitton »

Craighead wrote: post #163
lostjohnny wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet... I've read this[1] yesterday on a complete unrelated topic, and I must say that "I don't buy" it's another form of not understanding statistics. Biology is what it is and controls major aspects of our lives. If you can be stronger of some of the biological instincts, good, but statistically biology always wins. We can say for example that "women prefer laudanum, men prefer opium and pronstitues" is 100% a s…

Please don't use JP as a reliable source. He is extremely subjective and pushes many ideologies in his "non fiction" takes.

He is professor of psychology who taught in top universities, his scientific articles have many citations, why wouldn't he be reliable? As far as I'm concerned he is as reliable as whole field of psychology - there can be multiple competitive theories, but you can't reject his just because you happen to not like them.

Re: Brain research on boys’ preference for video games and girls’ for social media

#172

Post by Hitton »

whatshisface wrote: post #52
neo4sure wrote: post #36

The author should go to India and see the space program. Might offer a different perspective. I myself coming from an Asian country have seen many girl study engineering. It is considered a carier path and nothing more. There is no stigma attached.

In poorer countries there tend to be more female engineers because engineering is a good career for anyone (including women), and in poorer countries, having a good career is proportionally more important. The prevalence of female engineers in India is frequently used as support for the natural preference theory.

If anyone wants a link to the study https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/095679761774171...

Re: Brain research on boys’ preference for video games and girls’ for social media

#173

Post by ivanhoe »

lostjohnny wrote: post #162
ivanhoe wrote: post #159

IMHO a big part of "controversy" surrounding the idea of purely biological male vs. female predispositions comes from people not really understanding how statistics work. People feel that results like this are somehow limiting to them individually so they argue emotionally against it, but statistics don't really deal with the individual outcomes. Statistical researches are never about you, me or any single individual…

And yet... I've read this[1] yesterday on a complete unrelated topic, and I must say that "I don't buy" it's another form of not understanding statistics. Biology is what it is and controls major aspects of our lives. If you can be stronger of some of the biological instincts, good, but statistically biology always wins. We can say for example that "women prefer laudanum, men prefer opium and pronstitues" is 100% a s…

> "Women are better at social activities while men are better at competitive activities" much less so.

I never heard Peterson or any research claiming this. The claim is that women PREFER certain activities, while men PREFER others. Given a free choice, they're (on average) likely to pick different things to do with their time. That is very different from being better or worse in something, in fact it's a huge misinterpretation.

And this directly brings us to my parent post, because I just proposed what I believe is the main reason contributing to huge and very emotional reaction to these theories (and the hate that Peterson is getting for it, among others). People (women to be exact) feel threatened by it, they feel it takes from them the freedom of choice and puts them into boxes. Which, I argue, is misinterpretation of what statistics claim. Statistics don't say anything about any individual person, and deal with purely fictional middle person.

However, I stand corrected, as your own interpretation of Petersons theories itself is a big proof that the fear of females over these theories is not irrational, as obviously many men will not miss a chance to jump to conclusions like "we are better at this", which is a malignant construct that science never implied nor supported. Being good at something depends on many factors, and personal preferences are only a minor one. Intelligence, discipline, motivation, work habits are all much more important, and AFAIK sex doesn't influence these, in fact some researchers claim that women are better at self-discipline (again on average)

Re: Brain research on boys’ preference for video games and girls’ for social media

#174

Post by eej2ya1K »

bildung wrote: post #167
lostjohnny wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet... I've read this[1] yesterday on a complete unrelated topic, and I must say that "I don't buy" it's another form of not understanding statistics. Biology is what it is and controls major aspects of our lives. If you can be stronger of some of the biological instincts, good, but statistically biology always wins. We can say for example that "women prefer laudanum, men prefer opium and pronstitues" is 100% a s…

Peterson is a particularly problematic source because he usually doesn't correctly declare where the science stops and his personal musings start. The Big Five in your quote are a perfect example: They have a significant heritable component, but for all factors heritability ranges from 40 to 60%, meaning 60% to 40% are explained by environment.[0] Yet when listening to Peterson somehow the environmental factor doesn'…

You are either lying about Peterson, or you just haven't listened to him properly. He brings up heritability ranges all the time and he also explains why a seemingly smallish difference between preferences by gender can have surprisingly large effects.

Re: Brain research on boys’ preference for video games and girls’ for social media

#175

Post by Kaiyou »

brodo wrote: post #149
esyir wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It shouldn't be controversial at all. There are sex differences. A good chunk of those differences are the effect of hormonal differences that stem from sexual dimorphism that in turn likely stem from some other evolutionary selection process. Does culture play a role in behavior? Probably. But is there an inherent difference between the sexes? Yes.

In the nature vs nurture debate, every time someone argues for all nature or all nurture it’s an ideological position. That biology has no influence on behavior is as absurd as that society has none. The division into nature and nurture is also not as clean-cut as people think it is. There are many things in human culture that are that way because of biology and our culture influences our biology over the long run.

Hopefully we can just all agree that no amount of nurture will turn a duck into a swan or vice versa.

Re: Brain research on boys’ preference for video games and girls’ for social media

#176

Post by lostjohnny »

ivanhoe wrote: post #173
lostjohnny wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet... I've read this[1] yesterday on a complete unrelated topic, and I must say that "I don't buy" it's another form of not understanding statistics. Biology is what it is and controls major aspects of our lives. If you can be stronger of some of the biological instincts, good, but statistically biology always wins. We can say for example that "women prefer laudanum, men prefer opium and pronstitues" is 100% a s…

> "Women are better at social activities while men are better at competitive activities" much less so. I never heard Peterson or any research claiming this. The claim is that women PREFER certain activities, while men PREFER others. Given a free choice, they're (on average) likely to pick different things to do with their time. That is very different from being better or worse in something, in fact it's a huge misint…

> many men will not miss a chance to jump to conclusions like "we are better at this", which is a malignant construct that science never implied nor supported

Exactly.

And there is no amount of social construct that can change this "opportunism".

Either we stop doing and publishing researches on social behavior or we have to assume that it will be distorted and used by malevolent actors or by sheer ignorance.

> and AFAIK sex doesn't influence these

I agree, the only exception I could see is testosterone.

Testosterone, among its other properties, is linked to risk taking behaviour, and risk taking behaviour, apart being of course dangerous, is a way to improve faster.

Re: Brain research on boys’ preference for video games and girls’ for social media

#177

Post by ZeroGravitas »

throwaway010718 wrote: post #136

Imagine if this headline read "Research on drunks' preference for aggressiveness and sobers' for politeness". Would anyone argue that nurture and societal norms is the reason drunks behave more aggressively ? As someone who has been drunk on testosterone most of their life, I can testify it is a powerful and fun drug. Perhaps if research was framed in terms of hormonal differences rather than sex differences it would…

It seems to me that if it is the case that testosterone is responsible, then it would be much better science to identify that and have "high testosterone" vs "low testosterone" groups. You'd be able to predict more strongly if the evidence isn't binary but rather a variable.

This is similar to the claims that "race" predicts health issues, when actually it's usually some specific gene which is only correlated with race.

I don't see how it helps to introduce that extra layer of indirection.

Re: Brain research on boys’ preference for video games and girls’ for social media

#178

Post by ZeroGravitas »

Lio wrote: post #170
baroffoos wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Guns and heavy machinery are not topics for boys. Its just that those things are pushed on boys more while they are growing up. My sisters main game right now is counter strike. I saw an interesting video last year where they used toddlers young enough to have no visible gender and they got in babysitters to help the toddlers play with toys. They gave the toddlers random gendered names and clothes. They then asked th…

I'd offer the counter example of other infant primates expressing gender preferences for toys. https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13596-male-monkeys-pr...

An interesting fact from that study that gets often overlooked is that the female monkeys spent as much time playing with the "boy" toys as the male monkies.

They only had a stronger preference because the boys didn't play with the cuddly toys as much.

A subtle but important distinction.

This is similar to studies that show women's favourite colour is actually blue. But what gets reported is that they have a stronger preference for pink, because, compared with men, more chose that and that somehow gets into the consciousness as "girls prefer pink over blue".

Re: Brain research on boys’ preference for video games and girls’ for social media

#179

Post by dsafklndl234 »

whatshisface wrote: post #50
belorn wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we take a look at the animal kingdom, females compete for social status over other females in order to get the best males, and males compete for social status over other males in order to get the best females. Both does this in order to get the best offspring as part of evolution and natural selection. You get differences when there is a difference in investment during the reproduction, like egg and sperm. Looking…

> In one culture the apex male attribute to reach the top of the social status ladder would be to go into the jungle and kill a lion with nothing but a spear. In an other it is to have the title of CEO and have a high number listed in a bank account. These are very similar from a behavioral perspective because they both involve aggression and risk-seeking.

No. Inheritance plays a larger role in becoming a successful CEO/"professional" than it would in hunting a lion. The biggest lie Americans tell themselves is that the wealthy got wealthy by "taking risks" and that they deserve their wealth.

What takes more risk: having large amounts of capital accumulate wealth over time due or switching between multiple jobs, working longer hours, and being more stressed as you try to keep your family alive?

Re: Brain research on boys’ preference for video games and girls’ for social media

#180

Post by alfromspace »

cm2187 wrote: post #154
brodo wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the nature vs nurture debate, every time someone argues for all nature or all nurture it’s an ideological position. That biology has no influence on behavior is as absurd as that society has none. The division into nature and nurture is also not as clean-cut as people think it is. There are many things in human culture that are that way because of biology and our culture influences our biology over the long run.

Plus unless the person arguing is a biologist backed by some hard evidence, it is only ideology talking.

Unless it's James Watson, then shut him up, fire him, and take all his awards away.

Plenty of biologists see what happens, and toe the line so they can keep their lives and pay their mortgages.

Post reply on HN