Sex differences in exclusion and aggression on single-sex sports teams.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert O. Deaner ◽  
Amanda McClellan ◽  
Virgil Zeigler-Hill ◽  
Joyce F. Benenson
Keyword(s):  
Sex Differences ◽  
Sports Teams ◽  
Single Sex

Attention to Sex in Psychological Research as Related to Journal Policy and Author Sex

1979 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 175-184 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claire Etaugh ◽  
Deborah Bohn Spandikow
Keyword(s):  
Sex Differences ◽  
Child Development ◽  
Developmental Psychology ◽  
Editorial Policy ◽  
Psychological Research ◽  
Senior Author ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Female Authors ◽  
Single Sex ◽  
Opposite Sex

From 1969 to 1974, Developmental Psychology, but not Child Development, specified that authors analyze for sex differences. The authors examined 503 studies published in Child Development and Developmental Psychology in 1971 and 1975. Sex of senior author, subjects and experimenter(s) were recorded for each study. If subjects of both sexes were used, the presence or absence of the following were noted: (a) analysis of sex differences; (b) hypotheses regarding sex differences; (c) mention of subjects' sex in the abstract. For single-sex-subject studies, mention of subjects' sex in the discussion or conclusion was noted. Using these data as dependent variables, chi-square analyses were performed comparing: (a) the two journals; (b) 1971 and 1975 authors; and (c) male and female authors. The findings were: (a) More attention was paid to sex in Developmental Psychology when the journal had a written editorial policy regarding this factor; (b) Evidence was mixed for increasing awareness of sex as a variable between 1971 and 1975; (c) Female authors were more aware of sex than were male authors in 1971 but not in 1975; (d) In both years, authors used own-sex subjects and experimenters more than those of the opposite sex; (e) Developmental psychologists, as compared to psychologists in other areas previously examined, were more sensitive to sex as a variable.

scholarly journals Sexual segregation in human conversations

Behaviour ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 153 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
R.I.M. Dunbar
Keyword(s):  
Sex Differences ◽  
Group Size ◽  
Social Group ◽  
Census Data ◽  
Social Groups ◽  
Characteristic Size ◽  
Sexual Segregation ◽  
Fractal Pattern ◽  
Single Sex ◽  
Conversational Style

Human conversation groups have a characteristic size limit at around four individuals. Although mixed-sex social groups can be significantly larger than this, census data on casual social groups suggest that there is a fractal pattern of fission in conversations when social group size is a multiple of this value. This study suggests that, as social group size increases beyond four, there is a tendency for sexual segregation to occur resulting in an increasing frequency of single-sex conversational subgroups. It is not clear why conversations fragment in this way, but a likely explanation is that sex differences in conversational style result in women (in particular) preferring to join all-female conversations when a social group is large enough to allow this.

Single-Sex Groupings: A Solution for Sex Differences in Mathematics Learning?

1997 ◽  
Vol 84 (1) ◽  
pp. 194-194
Author(s):  
Gilah C. Leder ◽  
Helen J. Forgasz
Keyword(s):  
Sex Differences ◽  
Mathematics Learning ◽  
Task Support ◽  
Self Rating ◽  
Single Sex ◽  
Mathematics Program ◽  
Achievement In Mathematics ◽  
Attribution For Failure

Data from an evaluation and a re-evaluation three years later of a Grade 10 single-sex mathematics program showed in 1996 significant differences on rating mathematics as a male domain, higher self-rating by boys of achievement in mathematics, and girls higher attribution for failure in mathematics to the task. Support for a single-sex program has lessened.

Sex Differences in the Human Brain

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
David D. Franks
Keyword(s):  
Sex Differences ◽  
White Matter ◽  
Human Brain ◽  
Sex Education ◽  
Sleep Problems ◽  
Sex And Gender ◽  
Single Sex ◽  
And Gender ◽  
The Brain ◽  
Biological Differences

In this chapter, the different meanings of the terms sex and gender are discussed: Sex is biological, and gender has to do with social roles. Biological differences such as genes are discussed next, including a discussion of whether these differences should be considered as either/or distinctions or as continuums. Differences in social skills are discussed. Next, differences in the brain’s gray and white matter are explored. Various parts of the brain and the abilities they support are then presented. How sex differences in the brain complement each other is explored, as well as differences and overlaps. The implications for single-sex education are presented. Reasons to discuss brain differences and other differences follow, including sleep problems, anorexia, and bulimia. A subsection on memory and emotion follows.

Sex Differences in 32,347 Jordanian 4th Graders on the National Exam of Mathematics

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 71-81
Author(s):  
Ismael S. Al-Bursan ◽  
Emil O. W. Kirkegaard ◽  
John Fuerst ◽  
Salaheldin Farah Attallah Bakhiet ◽  
Mohammad F. Al Qudah ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sex Differences ◽  
Measurement Invariance ◽  
Item Difficulty ◽  
School Type ◽  
Male Advantage ◽  
Single Sex ◽  
Item Position ◽  
Mathematics Test ◽  
Item Response Theory Analysis ◽  
Coed Schools

Abstract. Sex differences in mathematical ability were examined in a nation-wide sample of 32,346 Jordanian 4th graders (age 9–10 year) on a 40-item mathematics test. Overall, boys were found to perform slightly worse ( d = −0.12) but had slightly more variation in scores ( SD = 1.02 and SD = 0.98 for boys and girls, respectively). However, when results were disaggregated by school type, single-sex versus coed (i.e., coeducational), boys were found to perform better than girls in coed schools ( d = 0.27) but worse across single-sex schools ( d = −0.37). Two-parameter item response theory analysis showed that item difficulty was similar across sexes in the full sample. Item loadings exhibited substantial departure from measurement invariance with respect to boys and girls at single-sex schools, though. For boys and girls at coed schools, both the item difficulty and item loading correlations were highly similar, evincing that measurement invariance largely held in this case. Partially consistent with findings from other countries, a correlation between item difficulty and male advantage was observed, r = .57, such that the relative male advantage increased with increased item difficulty. Complicating interpretation, this association did not replicate within coed schools. Item content, Bloom’s cognitive taxonomy category, and item position showed no relation to sex differences.

The Experience of Competition in Same- Versus Mixed-Sex Team Sports

2016 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-13
Author(s):  
Joseph A. Knutson ◽  
Francis T. McAndrew
Keyword(s):  
Laboratory Experiment ◽  
Team Sports ◽  
Field Studies ◽  
Men And Women ◽  
Sports Teams ◽  
Future Studies ◽  
Single Sex ◽  
The Mean

It is not yet clear how the enjoyment of playing a sport is related to the degree of involvement an athlete feels in a game. This issue was examined in two field studies and one laboratory experiment focusing on how men and women experience competition on mixed-sex and single-sex sports teams, with a greater emphasis on the experience of women in these situations. The results showed that while the mean enjoyment levels for women in mixed-sex and single-sex games were not different, individual women usually display a preference for either mixed-sex or single-sex teams. The results also revealed that women felt more involved on single-sex teams and that both men and women passed to men more often in mixed-sex games. Future studies should look at possible differences between men and women in the sources of the rewards derived from competition.

Gifted Girls and Women

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara A. Kerr ◽  
Robyn N. Malmsten
Keyword(s):  
Sex Differences ◽  
Career Development ◽  
Sex Education ◽  
Cognitive Abilities ◽  
Gender Relations ◽  
Important Variable ◽  
Child Rearing ◽  
Single Sex ◽  
Single Sex Education ◽  
Gifted Girls

There are many special characteristics and needs of gifted girls and women throughout the lifespan. As young girls, gifted girls can often be identified by early language development and precocious reading, and often need early admission to schooling, the opportunity for alone time, and encouragement and specialized training in the domains of their greatest interest. Adolescent gifted girls are often bored in school, conflicted about relationships and achievement, and eager for mentoring; they may need to advance through high school and early entry to college course-taking as well as strong relationships with master teachers and mentors. Gifted teens also need clear information about sexuality and sexual identity, particularly about the association of early sexual activity with lower achievement. Gifted women struggle throughout the world with gender relations, that is, the requirements by most societies that they bear an unequal share of the work of marriage and family life. How gifted women negotiate the dual demands of their societies often determines whether or not they will achieve eminence in their fields. Long-standing controversies concerning sex differences, women’s education, and definitions of eminence continue to have an impact on the educational and career development of gifted girls and women. Moderate sex differences favoring boys and men in sub-factors of cognitive abilities, like spatial-rotation abilities, continue to be highly publicized and are often interpreted to mean that gifted girls and women are less able than men to achieve in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) fields. Differences in adult gifted women’s and men’s STEM achievement are also attributed to preferences, when research shows that the most important variable associated with highest achievements are responsibilities in marriage and child-rearing, or gender relations. Controversies over single-sex education continue, with research both supporting and disputing the superiority of single-sex education for women; it may be that gifted women benefit more that average women from this kind of higher education. Whether single-sex or co-educational, the presence of a mentor may be most important to gifted women’s academic and career development. Finally, the concepts of eminence and genius are increasingly under scrutiny by scholars who claim they are highly gendered, with genius nearly always being associated with male dominated professions. Each of these controversies can affect gifted girls’ self-confidence, engagement, and persistence.

Sex Bias in Research Design

1981 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 628-636 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathleen E. Grady
Keyword(s):  
Sex Differences ◽  
Research Methods ◽  
Research Design ◽  
Scientific Method ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Sex Bias ◽  
Single Sex ◽  
Subject Selection ◽  
Interpretation Of Results

Feminist criticisms of selected aspects of research methods in psychology are presented. Data relevant to sex bias in topic selection, subject selection and single-sex designs, operationalization of variables, testing for sex differences, and interpretation of results are reviewed. Suggestions for achieving more “sex fair” research methods are discussed in terms of a more meticulous application of scientific method and an awareness of the sometimes subtle ways in which a sexist culture influences the research process.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document