I recommend first reviewing the methods of any study making bold, universal claims. This one relies on self reporting surveys. We know that stated behaviors (and preferences) vary from revealed behaviors.
There were three studies of a few hundred people max, and all three recruited participants from the alumni of a private university in the American northeast (possibly a different one, possibly the same one --- who knows?). From this we get an article that claims to know truths about all men and women, everywhere on earth.
We also need to be careful trusting headlines that might confirm our existing beliefs. I see a lot of comments here amounting to “well obviously, everyone has known this for centuries”. But none of us have been alive for centuries or across many cultures. The way the culture we live in represents history informs our biases, and may not be accurate. In fact it can serve the status quo to suggest that the way things are now “have always been this way” regardless of the veracity of these claims.
This happened to me recently. A car traded paint with mine; there was no real damage (scuffs) and I didn't file a report or claim. Then I forgot about it altogether.
It was a non-event to me until my wife found out, months later. I get why she was upset (it's data) but don't (it's noise) at the same time.
Even if we paint women as overreactive, that's kinda their survival mechanism. Men are just as easily painted as dismissive; we only concern ourselves with immediate threats. Someone shooting at you and missing isn't a non-event because they missed, it's eventful because it signals the threat that someone shot at you.
Gender: the uniform of polarized intelligence analysts who divine different insights from the same information.
The event is the attempt at the promotion. That the outcome was failure doesn't make it a 'non-event', and I think this is what the study is kind of getting at. Men mentally reconfigure these things into ways that protect our ego and/or status, whether we realize we're doing it or not. Maybe they chose that one over yours because getting fired is too difficult to not disclose. Your friends and dependents would certainly notice you've stopped going to work lol
Yeah i can now see your reading of my comment. By "Non event" i meant the absence of an event. not that it's non-impactful. I guess the difference is objective measure of "did a thing occur?" vs the subjective "Did the thing I wanted/expected occur?" (my usage of non-event being the former) .
People who've worked in the service industry in general seem less likely to be prone to leaving negative reviews. In some populations this probably equates to more men than women, depending on socioeconomic demographics, but as others have said, this methodology is crap.
I can't see the difference between phrenology associating different Skull shapes with behavior and this study.
As far as I can tell it's the same pseudoscience except it doesn't offend the morality of people in charge. If I'm missing something please let me know.
The issue with i.e. phrenology is that there's no association between skull shapes and behavior, as far as anyone can tell. There do seem to be a bunch of correlations relating to gender and behavior (although why exactly those correlations exist is certainly actively debated).
"Cranial capacity was found to correlate significantly with performance IQ (0.14) and total IQ (0.13)."[0]
Does this prove Phrenology is a science?
I think it's unscientific because polls are not an accurate test parameter to evaluate behavior, it can't be reproduced without a lot of bias and variables. The questions, subjects and practice of analysing yourself is full of parameters the researchers fail to account for. It's very rudimentary and below the quality of a MythBusters episode, I don't get how this can be replicated let alone trusted as is.
There are fundamental genetic differences between men and women, which determine differences in our brain structure, therefore behaviour. The study is not pseudoscience. Social constructivism is an anti-scientific perspective.
Even if the behavioural differences between men and women were purely socially determined, the study would still be scientific, in that it investigates and measures one of those differences.
If you believe there are zero behavioural differences between men and women on average (whether genetic or socially determined) then you are completely lost.
I don't think polls are precise enough to be used as a measuring tool in science.
If you replicate the measurements and get different results, how can that be? Aren't you failing to account for all other variable parameters when investigating the phenomenon?
Which is a flawed use of math because margin of error expectations are based on an empirical rule based on a random variable and answers to a poll are not random.
> The reality is that men are hurting and that the whole culture responds to them by saying, “Please do not tell us what you feel.” I have always been a fan of the Sylvia cartoon where two women sit, one looking into a crystal ball as the other woman says, “He never talks about his feelings.” And the woman who can see the future says, “At two P.M. all over the world men will begin to talk about their feelings—and women all over the world will be sorry.”
> "The results from our studies revealed a consistent, and to the best of our knowledge not previously identified, nuanced pattern, wherein the tendency for women to disclose more than men depends crucially on the nature of the information shared."
Just to clarify: when these papers say "not previously identified", that is academic vernacular for "not previously written up in a peer-reviewed article", not "hasn't been pointed out thousands of times in history by everyone from poets to stand up comedians".
Just to clarify your clarification, it means in this particular case the authors performed controlled experiments that attempted to account for other factors that might explain the difference they found.
Of course people have talked about difference between genders since... forever, but women have also experienced a significant amount of very real discrimination and that almost certainly has also had an influence on that narrative.
Don’t trust surveys or polls.