Is it true that guys are better than girls at Physics?

[Miyu]

Konnichiwa minna!

Well I'm just curious as to whether guys are better than girls at physics naturally. Or is it a mere mindset? Can girls ever lead in the field of physics?

Just want to hear from you!

Love, Miyuki.

 

[futz]

Girls can be just as good at physics as guys. It just happens there are more guys than girls (at my university anyway).

 

[HallsofIvy]

Not that I've noticed. The two best physicists I've ever known were black women.

 

[suyver]

I think the average female physicist is most likely 'better' (whatever that may mean) than the average male one. In my opinion this is just because women are discouraged to study physics. This means that they feel they have to be quite good at it before they could ever risk such a socially unaccepted undertaking. Resulting: only the best females study physics, while any average guy does it too (I know, I did!).

 

[ShawnD]

I would definitely say guys on average are better at physics. That doesn't mean that women can't do physics though. In my grade 12 physics class, the highest mark went to a girl, she had the highest physics mark for the semster. She also won the award for the highest math mark of the semester and she won the award for the highest chemistry mark the semester prior.
My physics class was almost 30 students; only 2 girls by the end. Wow. Right now I'm in mechanical engineering (which is almost entirely math and physics) and there are 3 girls IN THE ENTIRE PROGRAM; that's for ALL YEARS. That's out of like almost 200 students.

 

[jimmy p]

I wouldn't say that either sex was better at the subject. Obviously there are studies on which subjects each sex is more adept at. The reason there seem to be more males than females in physics is that usually it is a more male subject. There is a lot of engineering and things like that in physics and usually girls arent interested. HOWEVER there are women in those fields of work and usually they DO excel.

 

[Norman]

QUOTE:
There is a lot of engineering and things like that in physics and usually girls arent interested

This is a common misconception about women and math/hard science. They are interested, but women are generally socialized (in the west, where I have my experience) to not go into hard science fields unless it involves the so called "caretaker fields"- Medicine, Nursing and Teaching. In fact there are serveral large movements to help encourage women to go into physics, ie programs by AAPT, AIP and the APS. I think that suyver pinned it down well. Read his post.
Cheers,
Norm

 

[Chi Meson]

From a teacher's perspective, many girls when faced with the first "B" of their high school careers will drop out of physics because it is not a graduation requirement. Guys do this too, but many more guys will "stick it out," for a B. I think because of the stigmas that have been mentioned already, girls are socially expected to not "get it" and the first sign of difficultly is more likely to be thought of a proof that they can't.

Of my top five best students of all time, two have been girls, so I am certain that there is no genetic "wiring" that determines ability for physics.

 

[ShawnD]

I don't know if it is "accepted more" or anything like that for them to fail. In my engineering group, the 2 girls in class simply don't understand a lot of the stuff. Things like how the direction of force changes when you change what you are looking at. Things like keeping the same value for a force even though it's in a different direction. One of the girls has already failed so now we're down to 2 girls for the whole program.

 

[Zantra]

ohyao gozyamusen

no that's a fallacy.

 

[KLscilevothma]

I think girls can be as good as boys in physics, maths and engineering. Some girls graduated from my secondary school got first honor in engineerings.

Can girls ever lead in the field of physics?

Madame Wu Chien-Shiung was one of the most famous experimental physicist. I'm sure this is one of the many examples that female can lead in the field of physics.

 

[Pyrite]

I think that it isn't just as simple as "Women are bad at physics." Some of the best physics minds are women. I think it has more to do with the way women and men percieve the world. Men tend (that means not all do!) to look at the world in a materialistic fashion, and the Idea of physics just generally appeals to most of them more than women. The classical example is that generally men are interested in objects, while women are interested in people. The physical and scientific view is a more tangible view than most women would perfer to take.

Also, it has been shown, (mostly through SAT scores) that men tend to understand and score better in math, while women tend to score better in writing. This applies because there is an immense deal of math in physics.

 

[Yahweh]

From http://academics.tjhsst.edu/psych/oldPsych/ch14-2/ :

Eleanor Maccoby and Carol Nagy Jacklin conducted a study in 1974 that suggested no noticeable difference in overall cognitive ability. Girls exhibited very minor superiority in verbal skills, and boys exhibited very minor superiority in visual-spatial skills. Mathematics, however, were more complex.

Girls learn basic language before boys do. They speak their first words about half a month (on average) before boys do. They learn more vocabulary quicker, and they generally pronounce words better than boys. High School girls seem to be superior to boys in spelling, reading comprehension, vocabulary, punctuation and in solving analogies. Many more boys than girls have reading problems throughout all ages of development, ranging from simple problems to severe disabilities. However, boys seem to catch up to girls in language skills at about the age that they go to college.

Mathematics are, as said above, more complex. Contrary to popular belief, males are not better than females at math. Females actually show superiority during elementary school in computational ability. Males do, however, excel in mathematical problem solving ability. The perceived mathematical inferiority of females is often based on the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT), which is administered to high school juniors and seniors. The SAT's math section is mostly mathematical problem solving, which accounts for the difference in scores by gender (twice as many boys than girls receive scores of 500 or more).

So, the perceived differences in intelligence between girls and boys are true, but not on the same scale as most people believe. The actual differences are very small, and may largely reflect sociocultural expectations and environmental influences rather than actual biological differences. These differences are getting smaller, and we must remember that there are always exceptions to this "rule." There will always be great women physicists and great men playwrights.

Males apparently excel in visual-spatial abilities. Beginning in adolescence, boys usually outperform girls on tests of spatial ability which assess skills such as mentally rotating figures in space and finding figures embedded within larger designs.

Other information: http://course.wilkes.edu/psy331/stories/storyReader $32

 

[Carlos Hernandez]

According to Professor Rushton (http://www.ssc.uwo.ca/psychology/faculty/rushton.html ), on average, men score better on visio-spatial/mathematical tests, and he has also found that men, on average, have slightly more brain neurons after adjusting for body mass. He believes these extra neurons give men a boost in analytical thinking. So, though many women can be good at physics, men will produce a larger amount of physicists/scientists due to brain biology.

 

[Yahweh]

Originally posted by Carlos Hernandez
According to Professor Rushton (http://www.ssc.uwo.ca/psychology/faculty/rushton.html ), on average, men score better on visio-spatial/mathematical tests, and he has also found that men, on average, have slightly more brain neurons after adjusting for body mass. He believes these extra neurons give men a boost in analytical thinking. So, though many women can be good at physics, men will produce a larger amount of physicists/scientists due to brain biology.

I think the "more neurons" information is a little misleading, having more neurons has nothing to do with analytical thinking. The reason why men are better visual-spatial thinkers because they have what are called "compartmentalized" brains. By "compartmentalized", it a male's brain have fewer fibers (called the http://www.disenchanted.com/dis/lookup.html?node=1852) connecting the 2 hemispheres (the reason why there are fewer connections is due to higher concetrations of whatever neuro-chemical I can't seem to remember of the top of my head).

What this means is that the 2 hemisperes of a woman's brain communicate with each other better. Because they communicate better, women will recognize faces better and faster, but men's compartmentalized brains will recognize shapes better and faster (i.e. better visual-spatial skills).

Here's some information on Compartmentalized brains of men and women.

There are some interesting studies involving what happens when the corpus callosum is cut (which means the 2 hemispheres of the brain can no longer communicate with one another... when the corpus callosum is cut, it is called "split-brain syndrome"). See http://www.nobel.se/medicine/educational/split-brain/background.html for information or you can read this thread on the JREF boards.

 

[feynmanRocks]

Of course!

The preponderance of evidence suggests that extreme levels of intelligence (genius) tends to be more common in males than females. As a simple example, check the list of nobel prize winners.
Also look at the number of 'significant' publications, patents, inventions and discoveries happening on a daily basis. to this day, it would seem that, at least in certain areas, women are yet to prove themselves.
Another simple exercise. Search on google and make a list. Name a hundred women who have made significant contributions in any area like physics, mathematics or engineering. It will be an effort. Naming a hundred or a thousand men in these areas is no trouble.

In a politically correct world where people are afraid to stereotype , it would not be appropriate to say oughtright that in general women tend to be worse off in certain areas of intelligence. However, to ignore the difference and pretend that everything is equal would be silly too.

 

[Mr. Robin Parsons]

Originally posted by feynmanRocks
(SNIP)[/color] The preponderance of evidence suggests that extreme levels of intelligence (genius) tends to be more common in males than females. As a simple example, check the list of nobel prize winners.
Also look at the number of 'significant' publications, patents, inventions and discoveries happening on a daily basis. to this day, it would seem that, at least in certain areas, women are yet to prove themselves. (SNoP)[/color]

Historical reference is simply evidence of the Historical Bais that was in the teaching, back then...can't expect the entire world to change in a day, now can we...

 

[master_coda]

Originally posted by feynmanRocks
The preponderance of evidence suggests that extreme levels of intelligence (genius) tends to be more common in males than females. As a simple example, check the list of nobel prize winners.
Also look at the number of 'significant' publications, patents, inventions and discoveries happening on a daily basis. to this day, it would seem that, at least in certain areas, women are yet to prove themselves.

If this counts as evidence, then I can easily prove that white men are obviously far more intelligent than any other demographic of people. After all, there's always been equal opportunity for every human throughout history, right?

 

[selfAdjoint]

There is strong evidence that the IQ distributions for men and women have equal means (they are constructed to do so), but different standard deviations. In pictures, the curve for women has a narrower and higher bulge than the one for men, and the tails for the women's curve are skinnier than the ones for men.

This means that more men than women will be represented both at the highest levels and at the lowest. In Nobel Lauriates and in Death Row inmates.

 

[Monique]

Originally posted by feynmanRocks
The preponderance of evidence suggests that extreme levels of intelligence (genius) tends to be more common in males than females. As a simple example, check the list of nobel prize winners.
Also look at the number of 'significant' publications, patents, inventions and discoveries happening on a daily basis. to this day, it would seem that, at least in certain areas, women are yet to prove themselves.
Another simple exercise. Search on google and make a list. Name a hundred women who have made significant contributions in any area like physics, mathematics or engineering. It will be an effort. Naming a hundred or a thousand men in these areas is no trouble.

In a politically correct world where people are afraid to stereotype , it would not be appropriate to say oughtright that in general women tend to be worse off in certain areas of intelligence. However, to ignore the difference and pretend that everything is equal would be silly too.

OHCOMMON! Just how long have women been oppressed by men? Just when were we given the opportunity to find a job? Just when has it become socially acceptible for a female to work while raising a family?

Just who are winning the nobel prizes and have worked their way up to significant positions where they can make great impact? People who have been around for a while in the field of science: from a time that women couldn't even THINK about going into technical fields.

You know it was not too long ago that even here in The Netherlands a female couldn't apply for renting a house on her own? Only males could apply. That is one generation above me.

Apparently you are not male by your own criteria, ever heard of biases in measurement? Why are there few females in science, one: because they are not smart enough, or two: because society dictated it.

 

[Monique]

Originally posted by Mr. Robin Parsons
Historical reference is simply evidence of the Historical Bais that was in the teaching, back then...can't expect the entire world to change in a day, now can we...

Yeah, I guess someone has not been paying attention in class

 

[suyver]

Originally posted by selfAdjoint
There is strong evidence that the IQ distributions for men and women have equal means (they are constructed to do so), but different standard deviations. In pictures, the curve for women has a narrower and higher bulge than the one for men, and the tails for the women's curve are skinnier than the ones for men.

This means that more men than women will be represented both at the highest levels and at the lowest. In Nobel Lauriates and in Death Row inmates.

I believe that this could be true. See for example chess: of the top-100 chess-players in the world, there is only one woman (Polgar). And in the top-500 there are maybe 25. I'm sure that this is indicative of something more than that chess is unpopular amongst woman the world over. Because on average woman are probably better at chess than men...

Still, I stand by my original claim: I think the average female physicist/chemist/mathematician is most likely 'better' (whatever that may mean) than the average male one.

By the way selfAdjoint: do you have a reference/link confirming your claim?

 

[Monique]

I still think that is has a lot to do with social behaviour, and not necessarily intelligence.

You should take into account the number of people that take up chess in the first place, and then start comparing how many of those play at top level. Just because fewer woman take up the game, doesn't mean they are bad at it per definition.

 

[Monique]

I mean, there are few women in the wrestling sport: does that mean that women are weak per definition? I once beat a guy with a game of arm wrestling.. *very proud*

 

[jimmy p]

i would have to agree with monique here, there will be more women doing 'mans' work when society decides its everyone's work. It's always been everybody's work really just that people are stupid. but they have power. as i said in another thread.

"never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups".

Personally i think that women are a lot better than men at a lot of things, and if i were a prime example for men, hell, males would be in trouble the world all over! its just that nowadays women are 'allowed' to explore all fields, and a better at it usually. different ways of thinking...

 

[Monique]

And I think that a lot of girls will be hesitant themselves to go into certain fields, since someone has to become pregnant and take care of the household and kids. It sounds really stupid, I know, but I have seen female professionals regretting never having had the opportunity to raise kids because of work pressures.

How many males are prepared to sacrifice their career for their wife?
It is assumed to be the other way around.

 

[Monique]

I wonder:

what percentage of active US female scientists have kids (few?)
what percentage of active US male scientists have kids (lot?)

 

[Thallium]

My math teacher(from last year) was a female. She teached in both maths and physics and to me she appeared very masculine and manly. I read an interview in an education magazine about a Norwegian female mathematician. She trained on her spare-time and had pretty decent upper-arm muscles. Also she appeared to be extremely masculine. These two women - I cannot imagine them being heterosexual, but some females have higher testosterone production than what is normal for a woman. Perhaps this tells us something.

Either way, I like the fact that men are dominant. Male scientists are awesome. Roger Penrose? He is SO cute! (Irrelevance alert: Irrelevance alert!)

I am quite frightened myself to go into physics studies because I am afraid that I cannot make it. Partly because I have other talents like great imagination, musicality and I am good with understanding languages.

However, I do not want any kids so that will be no problem to me.

 

[Monique]

Originally posted by Thallium
I cannot imagine them being heterosexual

That just proves my point :P (to make it in academics you can't afford to have to raise kids ;P)

 

[Norman]

that fact that there was even a discussion of this topic in this day and age says that we have a lot farther to go in gender equality. It is a little scary that someone even asked this question. But I think that Monique raises a good question about the decisions a women would have to make to become a "physicist." In our department, all of the female professors (there are 3) have children (I think). I personally (though I am not a women) think that it is very possible to do both, but, I imagine that it would be much more difficult. Just my buck two eighty worth.
cheers

 

[Monique]

At my department there was a female technician, she would start work at 4 am, after a while she would go home, prep the kids for school etc, return to work and complete the day, go pick up the kids, prepare them diner, do household activities, go to sleep at 10 or so to wake up again at 3..

 

[chroot]

Not to be sexist, but there have been studies that have shown that males and females (even very young ones) display different aptitudes for spatial reasoning. Spatial reasoning is extremely important in the study of physics.

- Warren

 

[Monique]

so how was that tested?

 

[chroot]

Originally posted by Monique
so how was that tested?

Let me see if I can find the study again...

- Warren

 

[chroot]

Here's one...

http://peabody.vanderbilt.edu/depts/psych_and_hd/smpy/SexDiffs.PDF

I believe the article I read recently was in Nature, but so far I'm not having much luck finding it. There are loads of studies done on rats and lower mammals, but I'm more interested in studies of humans...

- Warren

 

[chroot]

And another... the credibility may be questionable:

http://www.iupe.org.br/nws/men/men-030906-sciam-sexoementehumana-1.htm

- Warren

 

[chroot]

Here's the same article in better format... it was in Scientific American. The author, Doreen Kimura, has quite a bit of credibility!

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=00018E9D-879D-1D06-8E49809EC588EEDF

- Warren

 

[Monique]

How about this commentary:
http://www.nature.com/nature/debates/women/women_25.html

 

[Norman]

From monique's post:

quote:
When presented with the decision of who shall stay home with their children, most married couples choose the female member of the husband-wife team.

Why might that be? Well with the inequity of male-female pay rates for the same job, I know which of my fiance and myself I might shoot for. Personally, I don't think that underlying cognitive abilities are going to be the major deciding factor. Because with that argument you would see many more women trying to go into the hard sciences and failing to do so. I am not convinced that is the case.

 

[Norman]

From monique's post:

quote:
When presented with the decision of who shall stay home with their children, most married couples choose the female member of the husband-wife team.

Why might that be? Well with the inequity of male-female pay rates for the same job, I know which of my fiance and myself I might shoot for. Personally, I don't think that underlying cognitive abilities are going to be the major deciding factor. Because with that argument you would see many more women trying to go into the hard sciences and failing to do so. I am not convinced that is the case.

 

[Evo]

Perhaps math is one of the factors? Not that women aren't good at it, but most aren't crazy about it? In school, I blew out math scores, but I didn't find it interesting. My daughter just got her achievement test scores back, national level, she made the 99th percentile, and she hates math and wasn't even trying. She would never consider physics because of the math.

I also believe that chroot is right about the spatial perception abilities, not to say women can't do as well, but it is more an exception than a rule. Also, I've noticed that men seem to be able to do math in their heads much easier and faster than women, but the women can calculate as quickly if they have pen & paper, could this be related to the same thing?

 

[chroot]

Well, I'm certainly not sexist in the sense that I believe either sex is superior to the other, but I do believe the sexes are a little better equipped for different tasks.

I won't descend into a discussion of why men are better at spatial reasoning and women have better memories. Some people would probably like us to believe that these skills evolved due to traditional roles in society (women take care of children, men become engineers) -- but no one with any sense would advance that argument. There are many non-Western cultures in which those roles are not assumed at all, but the differences remain.

In my opinion, the cognitive differences are slight -- diligence and perseverance easily overwhelm them. Further, in my opinion, the differences are probably just random, and do not lend support to any arguments about what men or women are "supposed" to do.

- Warren

 

[hypnagogue]

Originally posted by Norman
that fact that there was even a discussion of this topic in this day and age says that we have a lot farther to go in gender equality. It is a little scary that someone even asked this question.

No offense, but that's a bunch of baloney. Men and women have different physiologies; cognitive ability arises from physiology; so it is natural to ask how the different physiologies of the sexes might affect their respective cognitive abilities. The answer to the question is open to empirical investigation, so there may or may not be any significant differences. But there is nothing wrong with merely asking this question and then trying to find out the answer.

Also, I would like to point out that saying "women can be very good at physics" or "women can be just as good or better than men at physics" is not an answer to the question "are men better than women at physics?" This a basic matter of statistics. We are comparing averages here, and a handful of data points does not an average make. For instance, even if the top female physicists were 'better' on average than the top male physicists, it could still be the case that males on the whole are better on average.

 

[Mr. Robin Parsons]

Can someone please tell me what "better at physics" means, especially that Better word...

 

[Monique]

I don't see either how you are ever going to measure being better at physics. Being good at something is more than just spatial something.

In my college I switched from Medical Biology to Biochemistry. Medical Biology was 90% girls, while Biochemistry was 90% guys. The girl group was very hard working and always got good grades and passed all the exams, the guy group were the stupidist ever, never passed a single class and IF they passed, it was barely.

Maybe it is just Dutch people, that are odd..

 

[chroot]

So us guys are stupid?

- Warren

 

[Monique]

According to statistics you are! Just that the 20 smart men on this globe converge here on PF, doesn't mean all men are smart

 

[chroot]

Originally posted by Monique
According to statistics you are! Just that the 20 smart men on this globe converge here on PF, doesn't mean all men are smart

I'm feeling a little man-hating going on here. Did you have a bad date recently or something?

- Warren

 

[Monique]

You could ask if the male brain is more adept to analyzing physics problems (whatever thàt may mean..)

 

[Monique]

Originally posted by chroot
I'm feeling a little man-hating going on here. Did you have a bad date recently or something?

- Warren

I am going out with three (maybe even four) guys tonight (movie and diner), I am feeling lucky! Um, just to emphisize statistics: they probably think physics is a type of workout routine