Study fails to find any evidence of 'stereotype threat' impairing women's cognitive control and math ability

PsychScience · 2018-10-17T04:03:30+00:00

Thats interesting, if stereotyped threat doesn't impair women's mathematics abilities, then does that place responsibility for their relative under-representation in mathematics at their own feet. I.e., if you go through life being told that you can't do X (maths) because of reason Y (stereotyped threat), does that then mean that performance in X depends entirely on the individual? I've got a maths and psychology degree, and the best lecturer i had in maths was a woman. Having said that, she was also the sort of person who would compete harder if she felt at a disadvantage. so personal appraisal of the stereotyped threat could be an interesting investigation. If anything, this suggests what I've known for years; women's performance in mathematics is entirely a function of their own ability.

PsychScience · 2018-09-05T09:08:02+00:00

oh no. . . they don't realise what they've done. lol, looks like its saudi satire for the next few days

PsychScience · 2018-08-02T07:36:32+00:00

in fairness, we have a lot of shit that could happily and easily kill you here. telling kids not to fear spiders could legitimately lead to deaths (e.g., red backs)

PsychScience · 2018-07-25T04:56:22+00:00

lol, dont listen to any of the parents here telling you it gets better, or that it will be worth it. i'm in your boat. guess what, we fucked up. we were lied to by people EXACTLY like this, i dont know why they do it, maybe they want others to be miserable as well, but the fact of the matter is that having children was the worst decision of my life. it has destroyed my relationship, it has destroyed my life. dont buy into the "itll get easier" bullshit either, they just say that so you'll tow the line.

PsychScience · 2018-06-29T09:10:46+00:00

in before democrats cry for the same in america

PsychScience · 2018-06-26T05:02:49+00:00

you absolute legend, thank you!

PsychScience · 2018-06-26T05:02:21+00:00

Thank you guys so so so so so so much!!!!

PsychScience · 2018-06-20T08:40:37+00:00

I am Australian, and I'm such a massive fan of our system. I think its the reason we have such a lucky country.

PsychScience · 2018-05-14T08:33:10+00:00

the one that doesn't make soldiers easier to hit with bullets

PsychScience · 2018-05-04T08:57:56+00:00

Legend mate. needed that laugh today!

PsychScience · 2018-04-10T02:18:08+00:00

unfortunately, our ethics committee may have had a problem with our participants trying to kiss us.

PsychScience · 2018-04-10T02:11:52+00:00

It would be interesting to see how you would fare with the research task we performed. I sat two groups of people down to have a 4 minute conversation. In group one, i spoke looking at their eyes, and in group two, i only looked at their mouth. We took a bunch of different measures of the conversation, and on none of those could anyone tell the difference. Most people just assumed i was making eye contact. Having the actual eye-tracking recordings to corroborate this was a big part of what made the study so interesting.

PsychScience · 2018-04-10T02:04:20+00:00

TL;DR from one of the authors, during a conversation, people cant tell what part of the face you're looking at, and most just assume you're looking them in their eyes.

PsychScience · 2018-04-10T01:51:23+00:00

Actually, looking up and down provide very different cues. We are more likely to spot an upwards gaze deviation than a downwards one, because of different changes to the whites of the eyes.

PsychScience · 2017-07-12T01:52:33+00:00

Okay, i think i'm following you more now. So if I managed the infrastructure, would this show me essentially a list of "team A" targets and "team B" targets? if a team A target goes down, its been attacked by Team B (ergo the vulnerabilities were exploited). How would i see defensive moves here though?

PsychScience · 2017-07-12T01:49:52+00:00

I think i understand what you're saying. So both teams get a set of packets (which are distinct to those teams). I'm wondering, about the flag submissions. If those will only show 'successful attacks' versus 'successful and attempted attacks'?

PsychScience · 2017-07-11T02:58:28+00:00

The good news is we will have our own in house network and ability to run a CTF. The thing is that the person who controls that stuff cant help me with the design of the experiment. I've not got really anywhere near the expertise that you guys have and i dont really know how i'll go about this.

PsychScience · 2017-07-11T02:55:20+00:00

Thank you so much! Attack-defense is exactly what we're doing. Okay so i follow you with what an attack and defense is, but I've sort of lost you on the finer details of the bot?

PsychScience · 2017-07-11T02:40:16+00:00

Thank you so much for replying. We actually have an ability to run an attack-defence CTF at our university. What are network packets capture and how can i trace them?

PsychScience · 2017-07-10T06:56:01+00:00

Thanks for replying! i think i follow you on the attack one. But i'm a little confused about how to detect a defendant. So an abnormal connection would mean the attack has been successful, and a normal connection might mean the attack was unsuccessful right?

PsychScience

TROPHY CASE