Abstract:Some scientists and public figures have hypothesized that women and men differ in their pursuit of careers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) owing to biological differences in mathematics aptitude. However, little evidence supports such claims. Some studies of children and adults show gender differences in mathematics performance but in those studies it is impossible to disentangle intrinsic, biological differences from sociocultural influences. To investigate the early biology of mat… Show more
“…To summarize research on VSWM and spatial reasoning, Figure 1 was created to illustrate the involvement of the DLPFC, VLPFC, and the IPS areas. Areas illustrated in Figure 1 were similarly identified in a recent study of children aged 4-10, which suggests a lack of gender differences during mathematics development (Kersey, Csumitta, & Cantlon, 2019).…”
This exploratory study investigated behavioral and neural correlates of spatial reasoning in 21 children aged 6-12 years-old during educational video game play. Behavioral measures included child performance in learning the concept during the pretest, practice, and posttest portions of the game. Neural correlates using electroencephalography focused on event-related potentials, N2 and P3, and joint-time frequencies specifically alpha at three sites; F3, F4, and Pz. Results indicate that all of the participants exhibited naïve conceptions regarding the optics concept, and children 8-12 were successful in learning through video game play. Analyses of correct versus incorrect trials uncovered several interaction effects at the left superior frontal sulcus (F3). Suppression of alpha waves at F3 coincided with correct responses on the posttest. We conclude that suppression of alpha at F3 is essential for spatial concept learning and suggest further research into the field of optical spatial reasoning and spatial learning limitations exhibited by young children. The development of spatial reasoning abilities can be considered one of the most important areas of cognitive development in children. Newcombe and Huttenlocher (2000) note that, "to understand human cognitive functioning, we must
“…To summarize research on VSWM and spatial reasoning, Figure 1 was created to illustrate the involvement of the DLPFC, VLPFC, and the IPS areas. Areas illustrated in Figure 1 were similarly identified in a recent study of children aged 4-10, which suggests a lack of gender differences during mathematics development (Kersey, Csumitta, & Cantlon, 2019).…”
This exploratory study investigated behavioral and neural correlates of spatial reasoning in 21 children aged 6-12 years-old during educational video game play. Behavioral measures included child performance in learning the concept during the pretest, practice, and posttest portions of the game. Neural correlates using electroencephalography focused on event-related potentials, N2 and P3, and joint-time frequencies specifically alpha at three sites; F3, F4, and Pz. Results indicate that all of the participants exhibited naïve conceptions regarding the optics concept, and children 8-12 were successful in learning through video game play. Analyses of correct versus incorrect trials uncovered several interaction effects at the left superior frontal sulcus (F3). Suppression of alpha waves at F3 coincided with correct responses on the posttest. We conclude that suppression of alpha at F3 is essential for spatial concept learning and suggest further research into the field of optical spatial reasoning and spatial learning limitations exhibited by young children. The development of spatial reasoning abilities can be considered one of the most important areas of cognitive development in children. Newcombe and Huttenlocher (2000) note that, "to understand human cognitive functioning, we must
“…More controversial is the debate about the underlying causes. Arguments based on early biological differences in mathematical ability among the sexes do not seem to be supported by current experimental evidence (Hutchison, Lyons, & Ansari, 2018;Kersey, Csumitta, & Cantlon, 2019); actually, sociocultural influences rather than biological factors appear more likely to have an impact (Andreescu, Gallian, et al, 2008;Wang & Degol, 2016). Regardless, gender segregation concerning career preferences already manifests by high school and continues through college major choices.…”
Despite increasing rates of women researching in math-intensive fields, publications by female authors remain underrepresented. By analyzing millions of records from dedicated bibliographic databases zbMATH, arXiv, and ADS, we unveil the chronological evolution of authorships by women in mathematics, physics, and astronomy. We observe a pronounced shortage of female authors in top-ranked journals, with quasi-stagnant figures in various distinguished periodicals in the first two disciplines and a significantly more equitable situation in the latter. Additionally, we provide an interactive open-access web interface to further examine the data. To address whether female scholars submit fewer articles for publication to relevant journals or whether they are consciously or unconsciously disadvantaged by the peer review system, we also study authors’ perceptions of their submission practices and analyze around 10,000 responses, collected as part of a recent global survey of scientists. Our analysis indicates that men and women perceive their submission practices to be similar, with no evidence that a significantly lower number of submissions by women is responsible for their underrepresentation in top-ranked journals. According to the self-reported responses, a larger number of articles submitted to prestigious venues correlates rather with aspects associated with pronounced research activity, a well-established network, and academic seniority.
“…Thus, on the basis of a review of studies of sex differences in human brain structure, Eliot concluded that when brain size is controlled for, sex category accounts for less than 2% of the variability in brain structure ( 19 ). Recent studies, which assessed the contribution of several factors to variability in brain function (measured using functional MRI), reported that sex category explained only a small fraction of this variability ( 20, 21 ). Finally, an assessment of the relations between the number of sex differences in functional MRI studies and sample size did not reveal the positive correlation expected if brain function of women and men belonged to two populations ( 22 ).…”
For over 60 years, the masculinization hypothesis dominates our understanding of sex effects on the brain. According to this view, the male distribution for single brain measures and for the brain as a whole is shifted away from the female distribution. In the last decade this view has been challenged by evidence that sex effects on single brain features may be opposite under different conditions, resulting in brains comprised of unique mosaics of female-typical and male-typical features. Analysis of 289 MRI-derived measures of grey and white matter from 23935 brains revealed only three brain measures for which the masculinization hypothesis was not rejected in favor of the alternative hypothesis that women and men sample from the same two phenotypes. Moreover, at the individual level, sampling was not consistent across brain measures, as some measures were likely sampled from the female-favored phenotype while others were likely sampled from the male-favored phenotype. Last, considering the relations between brain measures, the brain architecture of women and men was remarkably similar. These results do not support the masculinization hypothesis but are consistent with the mosaic hypothesis as well as with other lines of evidence showing that the brain architectures typical of women are also typical of men, and vice versa, and that sex category explains a very small part of the variability in human brain structure.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.