"Little Game!"

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

Go down

"Little Game!" - Page 2 Empty Re: "Little Game!"

Post by kath on Tue Nov 04, 2014 2:57 am

Reboot, you've seemed to be pretty darn smart to me, so whether it was "natural" or not, your thinking skills are sure on point.
kath
kath

Posts : 352
Reputation : 159
Join date : 2014-10-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

"Little Game!" - Page 2 Empty Re: "Little Game!"

Post by azazel on Tue Nov 04, 2014 11:10 am

kath wrote:
Lemminkamen, what you are seeing is a documented thing (don't have links on me at the moment). Men present their accomplishments as being innate and due to their own inherent greatness (IE, natural talent or genius - they aren't supposed to have worked for it and don't present themselves that way, on the whole) whereas women frame their success in terms of external factors - luck, help they've gotten from others, hard work.

Mel wrote:Isn't there also research showing that school-age boys tend to get praise in terms of effort ("Good try!" "You worked really hard on that!") and girls tend to get praise in terms of talent/ability ("You're such a good speller!" "You're so smart!"), which may hold girls back from trying fields that require a lot of effort to get good at because they start to assume that their skills are based on what they can do right away, whereas boys assume they can work to get better?  It seems like there could be some interesting intersections between that and the ideas above.

Funny thing is that those two views don't mash well with each other, but they're both well-documented. Probably cultural differences?
My personal experience is closer to one where everyone is shamed for putting in hard work, but women are super-extra shamed for not getting good grades while men got a somewhat softer shaming for not getting good grades.

I hypothesize that that's the reason why girls are currently doing better in school than boys. Boys tend to get by by the least amount of effort they can, which fucks them up later in life when innate ability isn't good enough anymore.

kleenestar wrote:Azazel: no, girls didn't give me flak per se, though they did reinforce the "he'll resent you if you're smart" narrative. I got a lot of well-meaning advice about how to seem dumber so the guy I liked would like me back, but that's not the same as the contempt and hostility I got from outperforming dudes.

Aaahhhh... well-meaning advice is always great.

azazel

Posts : 136
Reputation : 37
Join date : 2014-10-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

"Little Game!" - Page 2 Empty Re: "Little Game!"

Post by kath on Tue Nov 04, 2014 11:53 am

azazel wrote:
Funny thing is that those two views don't mash well with each other, but they're both well-documented. Probably cultural differences?

Maybe. It's actually not something I'd heard before - if you had links, Mel, that would be awesome!

Or the discussion of success as adults is just down to the modesty thing / other things we aren't talking about right now.
kath
kath

Posts : 352
Reputation : 159
Join date : 2014-10-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

"Little Game!" - Page 2 Empty Re: "Little Game!"

Post by Mel on Tue Nov 04, 2014 12:21 pm

kath wrote:Maybe. It's actually not something I'd heard before - if you had links, Mel, that would be awesome!

This (non-scholarly) article references the general idea, although I'm not sure her exact sources for some of it: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-science-success/201101/the-trouble-bright-girls

And this article by the woman she does reference talks about the issue in a broader sense referencing studies across the last few decades: https://web.stanford.edu/dept/psychology/cgi-bin/drupalm/system/files/cdweckmathgift.pdf
Mel
Mel
Roving Moderator

Posts : 317
Reputation : 182
Join date : 2014-09-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

"Little Game!" - Page 2 Empty Re: "Little Game!"

Post by kleenestar on Tue Nov 04, 2014 1:12 pm

I don't have time for a longer post right now, but briefly: men & women using different attribution styles is not the same as the male overconfidence thing. These are separate effects. Men tend to credit themselves for inherent talent (internal locus of control) AND they also give themselves more credit than they deserve (overestimation of ability - though depressed men tend to, like women, estimate their abilities accurately). There's cross-cultural research on the latter point that suggests the degree of male overconfidence varies across cultures but I don't have the details at my fingertips.
kleenestar
kleenestar

Posts : 289
Reputation : 204
Join date : 2014-10-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

"Little Game!" - Page 2 Empty Re: "Little Game!"

Post by nearly_takuan on Tue Nov 04, 2014 6:48 pm

azazel wrote:
kath wrote:
Lemminkamen, what you are seeing is a documented thing (don't have links on me at the moment). Men present their accomplishments as being innate and due to their own inherent greatness (IE, natural talent or genius - they aren't supposed to have worked for it and don't present themselves that way, on the whole) whereas women frame their success in terms of external factors - luck, help they've gotten from others, hard work.

Mel wrote:Isn't there also research showing that school-age boys tend to get praise in terms of effort ("Good try!" "You worked really hard on that!") and girls tend to get praise in terms of talent/ability ("You're such a good speller!" "You're so smart!"), which may hold girls back from trying fields that require a lot of effort to get good at because they start to assume that their skills are based on what they can do right away, whereas boys assume they can work to get better?  It seems like there could be some interesting intersections between that and the ideas above.

Funny thing is that those two views don't mash well with each other, but they're both well-documented. Probably cultural differences?
My personal experience is closer to one where everyone is shamed for putting in hard work, but women are super-extra shamed for not getting good grades while men got a somewhat softer shaming for not getting good grades.

I hypothesize that that's the reason why girls are currently doing better in school than boys. Boys tend to get by by the least amount of effort they can, which fucks them up later in life when innate ability isn't good enough anymore.

I think those two ideas line up pretty well, actually.

At some level, I think we all recognize that you need hard work and talent to excel at anything. So when boys are told "work harder", the implication is that they already have the talent and just need to apply effort. When girls are told they are good/bad at a thing, the implication is that this is a fixed trait and only hard work can overcome it.
nearly_takuan
nearly_takuan

Posts : 1069
Reputation : 456
Join date : 2014-10-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

"Little Game!" - Page 2 Empty Re: "Little Game!"

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum