Are men smarter than women? (merged)

[latinlovegod99]

A report came out about two years ago on brain sizes. It stated then men (on the average) have more brain cells than women, but women tend to utilize theirs more, i.e. men have the potential to be more intelligent than women, but we rarely realize this potential. As far as relationships go, no I don't really think it would affect them all that much. That is, unless you are the type of person who wakes up, reads the Wall-Street journal, writes a novel with your Alpha-Bits cereal, and spends the day trying to disprove Einstein's theory of relativity. Most relationships I've been involved in don't really have anything to do with the intelligence of the girl, moreso our ability to make each other laugh, be weird together, and share common beliefs. Just my take on the subject...

 

[fizzygirl]

zorn:
re: readings
We reviewed many articles, etc in an intelligence testing class that I took in Fall of 2000. I'd have to go back and try to find the references. I just remember the general details and know that intellgence is seen as being far from a concrete concept. I'm pretty sure any general psych intro book would have decent refs for new articles.
It's not my area anymore though, so I didn't keep up with all the publications. I do know though, that from experience in giving the WISC-III, the WAIS-R, and several other tests that are currently used as intellgence assessments, that they cover a wide range of activities. Many of the items are language-use based or spatial tasks, even on the adult measures.

 

[Acuity]

spacey101...women are more rational than men?
oh my. i think not! women are generally regarded as been less so than men because we are guided, or chose to be so, by our emotions rather than our brains. again, this is a choice.

 

[Infinite Jest]

A bit more on the psychological research: historically, men have done better on visual-spatial and mathematical measures of intelligence, and females on verbal/language tasks.
Which might explain why zorn is arguing that men are smarter than women, given he sees mathematical ability as the best measure of intelligence.
If I recall correctly, more recent research shows that women are closing the gap in visual-spatial ability, but men aren't showing similar gains in verbal abilities. (I'll see if I can find any references, we covered this in depth, but it was several years ago).
Anecdotal evidence: most of my university classes were female-dominated (English Lit and Psychology). The top students were definitely female. Also, nationwide exam results at secondary school show girls overall outperforming boys.
Of course, then you run into the question as to whether this is due to ability or motivation/effort.

 

[fairnymph]

As the thread starter, I 'm going to remind you all of something I said right up front:

Note: By intelligence, I am NOT referring to emotional maturity/compassion/perceptiveness. That is a different non-intellectual kind of virtue. And one that I would say that women have more than men -- again, this could be genetic or socially induced.
I am referring to logic/intellect, not other forms of mental acuity. I'm not sure if I would go so far as to call it "mathmatical ability" but I am definitely not referring to intelligence in the fields of say, psychology and art etc.
Moving on.
I was discussing this topic with my roommate, who is a very very intelligent man (he is getting his MD and a PhD in neurology here at Stanford, concurrently!), and we were trying to figure out -- if men are more intelligent, why? Of course, being scientists, we immediately began thinking physiologically. I brought up Catch-22's comment about how in the highest levels of intelligence, men and women are more androgynous. This led us to a theory: testorone levels. Too much, and you are dumb manly man; too little, and you are a silly girly girl. It would make sense that women with higher testosterone levels would be more masculine, and that men with lower testorone levels would be more feminine. While this is a theory we haven't thought out much yet, I do think it 's something interesting to think about...

 

[RiCePlaYa]

Good thought but there are many 'manly' men and 'silly girly girls' that aren't necessarily dumb.
I'm not EXACTLY sure how you're defining intelligence - I think you said "logic/intellect" which is still pretty broad. Genetically both men and woman could possess the same logic/intellect but over time whoever uses the logic/intellect MORE, will end up being more logical and intellectual.
Therefore, men

 

[Infinite Jest]

I am referring to logic/intellect, not other forms of mental acuity. I'm not sure if I would go so far as to call it "mathmatical ability" but I am definitely not referring to intelligence in the fields of say, psychology and art etc.
I'm verrrrrry hungover, so I'm not quite I'm following ya here, Ms Nymph. Surely intelligence in psychology (say) involves intellect and logical thinking?

 

[beatbeat]

I realize that there are different types of "intelligence" and that in general it is hard to evaluate intelligence. But, in spite of this, I think it can safely be said that we all judge others' intelligence, whether consciously or not...Although I consider myself more intelligent than many people, I have to admit that I think the number of men smarter than me is significantly higher than the number of women smarter than me.
So is this thread is really are men better at math than women, then can we call it that? Yes, we all judge intelligence maybe - I know I do. And I love a razor-sharp intellect. And I know that doesn't have so very much to do with math.
But "smarter" - well, I'm just not sure of the terms that you think we all judge each other on. They really aren't too defined yet. "Logic" and "intellect" say to me the accumulation of a wide variety of knowledge and the ability to synthesize and integrate concepts culled from those and organize that into cohesive thinking. That's what I judge people on. And anyone that doesn't recognize the way that a strong intellect can contribute to the making of art, let's say, or is required to generate fine literature...well, that's being misinformed and not having familiarity with those fields really.
[ 23 February 2002: Message edited by: beatbeat ]

 

[zorn]

I want to clarify two things:
First, I don't believe mathematical ability defines intelligence. From experience, I think it provides a good measure. Second, by mathematical ability, I mean the ability to understand and do abstract mathematics: proofs especially, not just doing equations and integrals.
I tend to view verbal measures as more of a derived quantity: they are strongly related to how much experience you've had with verbal thinking, esp the particular kind of thinking involved. Mathematical ability IME seems to benefit much less from experience: you get a little better, but not a hell of a lot.
Interesting idea, fairnymph. I do want to raise the point that a large degree of this androngyny might be a product of <shudder> the social conception of gender norms. Or, alternatively, they might represent a secondary effect of increased intelligence. It is known that decorticate animals (missing the cerebral cortex, the "thinking" part of the brain) display impulsive, hypersexual behaviors.
This suggests that, if increased intelligence somehow represents a more-developed or more-influential cortex, it might cause the brain's primitive emotional systems to have less influence on behavior. Since these emotional systems are almost certainly largely responsible for driving the development of stereotyped gender identity, this could account for the observed androgyny. It would be interesting to see if impulsiveness and emotionality negatively correlate with intelligence under various circumstances.
ADHD may provide another interesting data point, as it's believed to be possibly caused by inadequate cortical stimulation/control of primitive emotion circuits. Isn't ADHD highly positively correlated with intelligence? This would be a strike against this theory... but given the complexities of the brain there are a myriad of explanations.
The link is exceedingly tenuous, but I thought the idea was intriguing.
-Zorn

 

[zorn]

^^^^ offtopic: God, I've been reading too many fucking papers lately, I'm starting to sound like a goddamn journal article. Time for some more NWA....

 

[Catch-22]

I know the feeling, zorn! LOL Worse, I simply can't respond to the great number of issues being thrown into the pot, all of which merit discussion.
As I said in my first post, I think that there is equality between genders if all the data is "normalized" for other differences. I think the same holds true for different races, too. I am just convinced that the variation in intelligence is larger for men than for women, which causes the observed (in my personal experience) discrepancy in the number of men and women at the highest levels of intelligence.
Since fairnymph addressed me specifically: The level of estrogen rises dramatically in a woman while she is pregnant. I would be interested in knowing what impact maternal estrogen has on the intelligence of the child? Is it different by gender? What about the role that testosterone plays in the utilization of DHEA? I hate to sound artificial or conjure up images of Brave New World, but in general I think more credence is given to environmental factors than the evidence really merits.
Let me focus on tackling this part of the original question:

If my hypothesis is true, what implications does it have for heterosexual relationships and male-female friendships? Obviously we love people for more than just their minds, but intellect DOES play a role in relationships, and in compatability.
Many of my male friends have expressed disappointment at the shortage of women at the highest levels of intelligence. They eventually find smart women who are well rounded. My friends will be happy with the relationship because their mate fills most of their needs and provides a balance in other areas where they have always felt deficient.
But are they really happy in other ways? LiquidMagic said:

That is, unless you are the type of person who wakes up, reads the Wall-Street journal, writes a novel with your Alpha-Bits cereal, and spends the day trying to disprove Einstein's theory of relativity.
See, I actually know people like that in real life. A highly intelligent person is going to pursue the challenges that strike them as most exciting. People at the highest level of intelligence are driven by curiosity. I don't mean casual pondering, I mean sitting at a kitchen table for 30 hours trying to solve Fermat’s Last Theorem type of intensity. Or writing a 10,000-word essay about something in a single sitting just for fun. They are compelled to test the limits of their own powers. Later on they might be inclined to share those accomplishments with their partner. If there is a discrepancy in intelligence levels, the partner might be intimidated or not appreciate the achievement of the more intelligent individual. This might cause the intelligent person to unfairly try to force the issue or one-up the spouse in an area where the spouse is supposed to be dominant.
Or an intelligent person might just crave stimulation and their partner provides a convenient sparring partner. Unfortunately, if the spouse is not equally matched, the "vigorous discussion" can really poison a relationship. We all want to share equality with our partner. But what happens when equality is not possible? (And this happens in many other areas besides just intelligence. What if someone composes concertos and their partner is deaf?)
So while my highly intelligent male friends accept and love their spouses, they are never completely satisfied because their partner does not fully appreciate their capabilities and share their passionate curiosity. We all want to be satisfied by our partner. I think it comes down to making the necessary adjustment. The intelligent individual needs to pay proper attention to the happiness of their partner, while the partner needs to accept the baggage that can come with having an intelligent mate.
For personal reasons I am reticent to share my own experiences, but I have generally been more satisfied with the more intelligent women I have dated. I am very forgiving of current girlfriends who don't measure up sexually or in appearance to past girlfriends. When it comes to intelligence, however, I will unfortunately always compare future girlfriends to my smartest ex-girlfriend. And I know that programs most of my relationships for failure....

 

[fairnymph]

Thank you catch, that was exactly the response that I was looking for. Unfortunately, I have to agree with you. And while I think that most smarter men do find happiness, there is always a part of them that is unsatisfied/not fully stimulated by their less-intelligent female partners.
Ironically, it has been said that physical beauty if more important for women than for men when it comes to attracting a mate. You can see this in any advertisement that has a man and a woman -- the woman is almost always better looking. The message conveyed is, if you are a man, and you are rich and successful, you don't need good looks to get a mate. However, physical appearance has always (at least in recent times) been considered the most important factor in a woman's eligibility.
You would think, though, that since there are fewer intelligent women than intelligent men, that the intelligent men would be competing heavily for the limited intelligent women. Thus, since the women would be in demand, they would not need to care as much about other factors, such as appearance, while the men, to distinguish themselves, WOULD need to pay attention to their appearance.
Why don't we see this playing out in the world today? (or maybe we do: I remember having a crush on my biology teacher in high school, who was maybe in his very early 30s, and thinking -- "why is he married to that woman, he could be with someone so much hotter; I am so much hotter!" -- my bio teacher was quite hot by the way) If we don't see it playing out, is it because society is too great a force and since the percentages of the population that we are discussing are so small, intelligent people are overwhelmend and thus follow the rest of society's rules?

 

[TheLoveBandit]

What to say? Where to start? Where to go? I think I may muddle this first response, as it is 3:30 AM and I should have gone to bed hours ago.
First, your definitions. I don't agree that "intelligent" is fairly defined by mathmatical and scientific abilities. I think intelligence is the ability to logically take in, analyze and assess, and then successfully interact with any given situation. This may call upon any mix of skills ranging from social interaction and forethought of repurcussions to application of numerical analysis or past experiences (yes, I think people that are more experienced in life and can learn from those events ARE more intelligent than someone who has not experienced such events).
Second, the gender issues of society. I think the male dominated world has molded society to believe that intelligence should be based on male skills such as math and science, and have therefore perpetuated and strengthened this concept. Males, the providers, the protectors, the decision makers, dammit - we need to prove that we deserve this role for our benefit (continued domination and control) and therefore have to make the world believe that a) we are better at these skills, and b) the skills we possess are THE important ones (or more intelligent ones, if you will). Not until recent generations have females been encouraged to pursue these areas and develope thier skills in the "intellectual fields", and yet men are still usually looked down upon for pursuing careers in less intelligent, more emotional, fields. It is engrained in our culture, that women need men as a big strong hero to do things for them and save them from the real tough situations, and men can have women for their soft emotional side only shown in dark bedrooms or private discussions between a couple.
I honestly don't buy into the statement that men are more intelligent, I think we are just encouraged to utilize those skills in too many ways to even count them all. Society is still evolving to view women as being as capable as men, despite a genetic equivalence for opportunity from birth. I believe reports that indicate many women are more skilled than (most) men at certain areas of math and science, at least from a decision making point of view. Despite being considered emotional workers as opposed to logical workers, it is said that women are less inclined to make important decisions with an emotional bias - for example, pushing a button to launch a missle. Men would be swayed by the fact that they have friends in the firing zone, or that they were wronged by the people they are firing on. Women more consistently decided to launch or not based on what was best for the overall situation, not past experiences with or perceived impressions of those on the receiving end.
Lastly (for now) I'll elaborate on my idea of intelligence and who has more of it in relationships. I am of the more modern thinkers that emotional and social skills are as important and require as much intelligence as mathmatics and science. In an effort to become as successsful as possible, we (as individuals) need to be able to function in the widest array of challenges possible - social/emotional situations as well as math and science issues. We need to use our intelligence (ability to use logic, regardless of conditions, IMO) in all aspects of our lives. We seek mates that can balance us, by presenting an opportunity to learn from someone that has the areas of skill that we lack, and to rely on them when we are in over our heads in areas they already function well in. Relationships require a reliance and appreciation of the other person. As such, we need to value what they bring to the relationship as it compares to our own skills, abilities, and experience.

 

[*bubble-fish*]

well said LoveBandit. i agree that what society beleives to be indicators of intellegence are not necessarily the ultimate and true indicators of intellegence. Also, a number of people seem to indicating that eduacation and intellegence are the same thing, which IMHO they are not.
[ 25 February 2002: Message edited by: *bubble-fish* ]

 

[beatbeat]

WORK, LoveBandit. That is exactly what I wanted to say. (I guess you're smarter than me in that you are able to express it so clearly! whatever)
I just can't believe it when the dynamics of power between the genders aren't taken into consideration when thinking through issues like this. I adore men. And nothing is as much as a turn-on for me as a strong intellect. (Of a certain kind anyway, which is more literate than math/physics) In my experience, though, many men seem to have this need to feel superior to me and other women, so they devalue our intelligence in their own minds. This is true of even men that I love. I mainly forgive them because they're doing the best they can. But then why am I not surprised when I hear they're frustrated about the 'lack of intelligent women'? What a conundrum - they need to feel all dominant, and be able to pontificate and interrupt me, and win little intellectual arguments, etc., and subtly belittle their women friends mentally, and then they feel a lack of partners they can relate to? Hello...

 

[respect]

I wish I could find this experiment somewhere on the web so I don't misrepresent it. I'll just let fly with the gist of it and if anyone knows who the experimenter was or can find a link I'd be very grateful.
Sample groups of basketball teams are given different coaches for a day and analysed on basic skills. On one day teams get given a short white coach and on another a tall black coach. Long and short (sorry I love a bad pun) of it is players are intimidated by tall black coaches and don't perform as well. This is tested with several different coaches, so it's not about coaching style, and lots of different teams. Results are statistically significant.
If you were to broaden the range of this observed effect then it is entirely possible for women on the whole to underperform. In the world of basketball the power players are all tall and black. In the big bad real world all the power players are men.

 

[pfunk]

the study done a couple of years ago (well, one anyway) dealt with how much of the brain men/women use.
it stated that women use more of their brain than men do.
however, this does not mean that women are smarter, it might mean that women require the use of more of their brain to do the things that men do with less of their brain.
just thought i'd throw that out there.

 

[Brainrape]

In my experience, those with a pre-disposition for excelling at disciplined acamdemic study were those that I've never found intelligent, or at least able to meet my definition of it. Perhpas it is that dreaded "discipline" gene I have found so stifiling in people. As smart as they way be, they just stagnate, they always do...
I went out with the salutatorian of my high school (the valedectorian was a guy, doesn't that just prove it all ) and she ended up being one of the biggest dissapointments of my life. She was so conventionally brilliant and academically bred to succeed it ruined her, but I so had the biggest crush on her, and she had one on me, it was cute. Anyways, oh and she is NOT one of the 3 relationships I have ever had, at least not in my opinion...
I'm sure she thought the exact same of things of me, she said so several times in not so many words, see, I graduated in the very bottom 5% of my class. The attraction was probably one of juvenilie fantasy in retrospect. (There is a cool story about my hyper-dramatic and self-destrucive teenage years, it's wrought with angst, drama and foreign travel, it's better than the best movie).
And in my experience, by far are women more intelligent, but it's so totally based on enviornmental and sociological conditions it's almost irrelevant. But then again my definitions of intelligence differ from most I suppose.
My theory is all this useless analysis is of a convention so personally relative to each person and so heavily dependent on enviornemnt, it cannot yield any results of practical value. Unless of course, you want it to...

 

[Brainrape]

In my experience, those with a pre-disposition for excelling at disciplined acamdemic study were those that I've never found intelligent, or at least able to meet my definition of it. Perhpas it is that dreaded "discipline" gene I have found so stifiling in people. As smart as they way be, they just stagnate, they always do...
I went out with the salutatorian of my high school (the valedectorian was a guy, doesn't that just prove it all ) and she ended up being one of the biggest dissapointments of my life. She was so conventionally brilliant and academically bred to succeed it ruined her, but I so had the biggest crush on her, and she had one on me, it was cute. Anyways, oh and she is NOT one of the 3 relationships I have ever had, at least not in my opinion...
I'm sure she thought the exact same of things of me, she said so several times in not so many words, see, I graduated in the very bottom 5% of my class. The attraction was probably one of juvenilie fantasy in retrospect. (There is a cool story about my hyper-dramatic and self-destrucive teenage years, it's wrought with angst, drama and foreign travel, it's better than the best movie).
And in my experience, by far are women more intelligent, but it's so totally based on enviornmental and sociological conditions it's almost irrelevant. But then again my definitions of intelligence differ from most I suppose.
My theory is all this useless analysis is of a convention so personally relative to each person and so heavily dependent on enviornemnt, it cannot yield any results of practical value. Unless of course, you want it to...

 

[fizzygirl]

These are the basics that someone would learn of this stuff from intro psych:
With basic intelligence tests, the total IQ scores are comparable for men and women. What then, of specific abilities? The stereotype has been found to be true for specifics. Even today, among high school students who take the AP and SAT II tests, males score higher on average in physics, economics, computer science, chemistry, US government, biology and calculus. Females score higher in Spanish, French, German, art history, studio art and english literature.
At this point, this is what else specific studies have shown to occur:
*Verbal abilities From data gathered from millions of students from 1947-1980 girls outscored boys but the gap was narrowing. Girls are (on average) better spellers. They also score slightly higher than boys on tests of reading comprehension, writing and foreign languages.
* Mathematical abilities Girls are better at arithmetic in grade school, but males surpass females early in jr high school--a difference that continues to college and beyond and is found in other countries as well. This difference may also underlie the fact that males score higher on high-school physics, chemistry, and computer science achievement tests.
Spatial abilities Males outperform females on spatial tasks such as mentally rotating objects to determine what they would look like from another perspective and tracking moving objects in space. These skills are used in architecture, mechanical engineering, flight navigation and certain other types of work. This difference occurs as early as age 4 or 5. This may account for the disparity in SAT math scores. Studies have been conducted where scores were statistically adjusted to account for differences in spatial ability, the gender gap in math disappeared. Thus, the male advantage in math is intimately tied to the difference in spatial skills.
Why are there disparities in spatial relations?
Biological side The claim is made that the male hormone testosterone slows the fetal development of the left hemisphere, thereby enhancing the growth of the more spatial right hemisphere. Highly talented math students are thus also more likely to be left-handed, nearsighted and allergy sufferers--traits seen as linked to high prenatal levels of testosterone exposure.
Social side Some attributed the gender gap to stereotypes of math as a masculine subject, less encouragement of girls by parents and teachers, and different experiences in childhood. For example, boys use spatial skills more often through contact sports, action-packed video games, construction sets and transformer type toys. Consistent with this hypothesis, two studies have shown that playing action video games improves spatial-test performance--in girls as well as boys.
I'm too lazy to list all the references, but these I thought were the most interesting. They aren't in standard form, but I just put what you'd need to look the shit up. If you need others, let me know
testosterone and performance
Benbow (198 8) Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 11, 169-232
Kimura (1999) Sex and Cognition, Cambridge, MA: MIT press
Video games and spatial performance:
Okagski and Frensch (1994) Journal of applied developmental psych, 15, 33-58
Subrahmanyan and Greenfield (same journal issue), 13-32
[ 25 February 2002: Message edited by: fizzygirl ]