Do Measures of Systemizing and Empathizing Reflect Perceptions of Gender Differences in Learning Affordances?

Area of Science:

• Psychology
• Cognitive Science
• Social Psychology

Background:

• Gender differences in systemizing and empathizing are frequently attributed to biological factors.
• This study investigates whether these perceived differences are more accurately explained by differential learning affordances for men and women.

Purpose of the Study:

• To examine the extent to which gender differences in systemizing and empathizing are perceived as learned versus innate.
• To explore the role of learning affordances in shaping these observed gender differences.

Main Methods:

• Study 1: Quantified gender differences in systemizing (SQ) and empathizing (EQ) activities across large samples.
• Study 2 & 3: Assessed lay coders' and psychology experts' perceptions of SQ and EQ activities as learned or innate, and identified gendered affordances.

Main Results:

• Gender differences in systemizing and empathizing activities were identified in large representative samples.
• Activities exhibiting the largest gender differences were rated as having greater gendered learning affordances, rather than innate genetic advantages.
• Both laypeople and experts viewed these activities as more learned than innate.

Conclusions:

• Perceived gender differences in systemizing and empathizing are more strongly associated with differential learning experiences than with inherent biological predispositions.
• The consensus among the public and psychological scientists suggests that claims of innate sex differences in these domains may not align with current understanding.