Female Chess Players Outperform Expectations When Playing Men

Stafford, Tom

doi:10.1177/0956797617736887

Cited by 29 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As for stereotype threat, a recent slew of studies has failed to find evidence that situations likely to induce threat do in fact hamper females’ performance in maths or other cognitive domains. The studies in question include several meta-analyses (Flore & Wicherts, 2015; Stoet & Geary, 2012), a number of large, pre-registered replications (Finnigan & Corker, 2016; Flore et al., 2019) and an analysis of 5.5 million chess games played in international tournaments, which found that women’s performance was better, rather than worse, under conditions of stereotype threat (Stafford, 2018; although see Smerdon et al., 2020). Meanwhile, on the other side of the ledger, a recent study failed to replicate the finding that stereotype threat impairs men’s performance on tests of language ability (Chaffee et al., 2020).…”

Section: Sex Differences In Cognitive Aptitudesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Men, women and STEM: Why the differences and what should be done?

Stewart‐Williams

Halsey

2021

Eur J Pers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is a well-known and widely lamented fact that men outnumber women in a number of fields in STEM (science, technology, engineering and maths). The most commonly discussed explanations for the gender gaps are discrimination and socialization, and the most common policy prescriptions target those ostensible causes. However, a great deal of evidence in the behavioural sciences suggests that discrimination and socialization are only part of the story. The purpose of this paper is to highlight other aspects of the story: aspects that are commonly overlooked or downplayed. More precisely, the paper has two main aims. The first is to examine the evidence that factors other than workplace discrimination contribute to the gender gaps in STEM. These include relatively large average sex differences in career and lifestyle preferences, and relatively small average differences in cognitive aptitudes – some favouring males, others favouring females – which are associated with progressively larger differences the further above the average one looks. The second aim is to examine the evidence suggesting that these sex differences are not purely a product of social factors but also have a substantial biological (i.e. inherited) component. A more complete picture of the causes of the unequal sex ratios in STEM may productively inform policy discussions.

show abstract

Section: Sex Differences In Cognitive Aptitudesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Men, women and STEM: Why the differences and what should be done?

Stewart‐Williams

Halsey

2021

Eur J Pers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As for stereotype threat, a recent slew of studies has failed to find evidence that situations likely to induce threat do in fact hamper females' performance in math or other cognitive domains. The studies in question include several meta-analyses (Flore & Wicherts, 2015;Stoet & Geary, 2012), a number of large, pre-registered replications (Finnigan & Corker, 2016;Flore et al, 2019), and an analysis of 5.5 million chess games played in international tournaments, which found that women's performance was better, rather than worse, under conditions of stereotype threat (Stafford, 2018). Meanwhile, on the other side of the ledger, a recent study failed to replicate the finding that stereotype threat impairs men's performance on tests of language ability (Chaffee et al, 2019).…”

Section: The Nature and Nurture Of Sex Differences In Cognitive Aptitmentioning

confidence: 99%

Men, Women, and STEM: Why the Differences and What Should Be Done?

Stewart‐Williams¹,

Halsey²

2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is a well-known and widely lamented fact that men outnumber women in a number of fields in STEM, including physics, mathematics, and computer science. The most commonly discussed explanations for the gender gaps are discrimination and socialization, and the most common policy prescriptions are targeted at those ostensible causes. However, a great deal of evidence in the behavioral sciences suggests that discrimination and socialization are only part of the story. The purpose of this paper is to highlight other aspects of the story: aspects that are commonly overlooked or downplayed. More precisely, the paper has two main aims. The first is to examine the evidence that factors other than workplace discrimination make a significant contribution to the gender gaps in STEM. These factors include relatively large average sex differences in career and lifestyle preferences, and relatively small average differences in cognitive aptitudessome favoring males, others favoring femaleswhich are associated with progressively larger differences the further above the average one looks. The second aim is to evaluate the evidence suggesting that these sex differences are not purely a product of social factors but also have a substantial biological (or "innate") component. A more complete picture of the many causes of the unequal sex ratios in STEM may productively inform policy debates, and is likely to improve women's situation across the STEM fields. Men, Women, and ScienceWhy the Differences and What Should Be Done?Never has the issue of gender disparities been as widely discussed, or as bitterly contested, as it has been in recent years. From the Oscars to the political podium, from TV shows to the workplace, disparities are identified and debate inevitably ensues. In the occupational realm, one of the primary focuses of this debate has been the differential representation of men and women in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math). 1 This was epitomized by the infamous "Google memo," in which then-Google employee James Damore (2017) questioned the extent to which observed gender disparities in STEM are a product of workplace discrimination. The memo, and Damore's subsequent dismissal from Google, provoked a great deal of discussion and debate about the causes of STEM disparities and the origins of human sex differences. Unfortunately, much of this debate was decidedly inaccurate in its presentation of the research on the topic. A great deal was said about bias and discrimination, but relatively little about other factors contributing to STEM gender gaps (e.g., Chachra, 2017). Furthermore, to the extent that other factors were mentionedfactors such as average sex differences in academic interests these were typically attributed to socialization, rather than to biology or to a 1 Strictly speaking, the issue is not STEM per se, but rather STEM fields that focus on the non-living world, or that have a strong spatial or mathematical component. According to Ceci et al. (2014), the STEM fields should be divided into GE...

show abstract

“…Supporting this criticism, Stafford (2018) found that skilled female chess players show a reverse stereotype-threat effect when they play against men in tournaments, performing slightly better than would be expected on the basis of their Elo ratings (see the following paragraph). Although this reverse stereotype-threat effect is very small, it suggests that underperformance by members of stereotyped groups might not emerge in high-stakes real-world contexts.…”

mentioning

confidence: 90%

“…In the top half of each panel, black dots are point estimates, and gray bars indicate 95% confidence intervals. Panel (a) shows results using the sample of female players (as in Stafford, 2018); in contrast, panel (b) shows results using a sample of male players matched to female players on the basis of age, Elo rating, and their differences to obtain a placebo sample of male players that was younger and lower rated on average than the total pool of male players. The arrow in (a) indicates where we replicated Stafford’s reverse stereotype-threat effect.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%