Slashdot Mirror
Estrogen Linked to Research and Programming Skills
Neil Halelamien writes "Psychologists at the University of Bath have found that male researchers and programmers tend to have higher levels of estrogen, a hormone which promotes development of the right side of the brain (responsible for spatial and analytical skills). Increased estrogen was also linked to having longer index fingers and a decreased likelihood of having children. Men teaching mathematics and physics tended to have unusually long index fingers, while women in the social sciences tended to have more testosterone. The psychologists also found that male and female students with a smaller difference between their index and ring finger lengths tended to do better on their Java programming exams. The research leaves open the question of why women (who typically have more estrogen than men) aren't more prevalent in the science and technology fields."
Does this mean we'll start getting spam for products to lengthen your index finger?
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
..."and a decreased likelihood of having children."
;) Chicken or egg problem?
This explains a lot about geeks
It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
Be yourself no matter what they say
There also seems to be a link between the index finger, ring finger and sport abilities..
0 1/ ringfingers.htm
http://www.liv.ac.uk/pro/news/press_releases/20
"The psychologists also found that male and female students with a smaller difference between their index and ring finger lengths tended to do better on their Java programming exams."
Gee, imagine finger length being correlated to programming skills.
"Derp de derp."
Psychologists at the University of Bath have found that male researchers and programmers tend to have higher levels of estrogen, a hormone which promotes development of the right side of the brain
I guess this is why geek types are less macho. Of course, I am a typical muscle bound macho type, and will spend my nights trying to hack anyone who said otherwise, the only way I get my estrogen s through osmosis via genital contact like any other red blooded male.
o.O
I can imagine spam for testosterone to develop you left side of your brain.
The right side of the brain is commonly reffered to as the arty farty part of the brain, it is thepart that helps you recognise yourself in photos, which is why women take 1hr to get ready, but answer me this, why do geeks take less time to get ready than our estrogen deficient jock counterparts?
Stereotypes aside, dyslexia is formed form dual activity in right and left sides of the brain, intellectual types often have dyslexia and geeks too, whihc may be because of hormonal issues and right/left conflicts.
Or looking at too much p0rn. One or the other.
#hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
Before running out and stocking up on man-boobifier, please read up on estrogen.
Males with higher levels of estrogen (what a difficult word to spell) would have lower sex drives andbe less distracted by all the lovely filthy pictures just a couple of clicks away......
"I could finish this programming task or I could...... oh WOW, is that really possible"
cL0h
Every gender bias related paper I've read is about why women are the inherent underdog, not about the nature of gender bias and programming. Gender bias and programming are inherently equal opportunity victimizations and aggressions perpetrated by society, by natural situations, and by self.
The only equal-opportunity social anti-bias resource I've seen yet is VHEMT. ;-)
Well this is so obvious that I can't believe I'm writing it, but
.net.
A) researchers and programmers aren't exactly the crown monarchs of exorcise. Testosterone isn't just going to pop up out of nowhere while you're setting at a computer.
B) when doing a test for 'which is greater', there will ALWAYS one side coming out ahead. It doesn't matter whether it has anything to do with the subject. I could do the same thing and test the facial hair of programmers, then conclude that having a beard makes you better at
The research leaves open the question of why programmers don't relate to women better.
I was almost going to complain about the spelling, but I decided to check it first.
oestrogen and estrogen are the same thing. It's spelt with an O on this side of the Atlantic (Ireland/UK).
T.
OK. The article is total bollocks here is the New Scientist version. NOTE that it is referring to prenatal levels of hormones not the amounts flowing in peoples bodies when they are adults. Which means that a difference in levels of hormones hardwires the brain for programming, research whatever to a large extent.
Also that the social sciences are where the 'normals' end up.
Bitter and proud of it.
...why there are a disproportionately higher number of transsexuals in the industry than in other industries.
Abstract/creative sciences require a balance of concrete and intuitive thinking--programming is an art as much as it is a science. Not to say that highly gendered males don't grok art, but just that people who are somewhat cross-gendered in the womb (which is what the article was about) may well end up with more of a mixture of skills than their strongly gendered counterparts, allowing them to excel at certain tasks (programming, research, etc.) which require a combination of normally disparate skills.
From the Eugenics department... (even one of
Australia's honored scientists - Mark Oliphant
is said to have held eugenic thoughts in later
life)
Today brought news of another -dark- Australian
tradition:
Giving would-be-TALL girls -estrogen-
to inhibit ("stunt") their growth!!!
(The tall-popey syndrome has been with us - in
many ways - for years over here, apparently...)
Anyway, the study (which only looked at females)
supports the conclusion that fertility is REDUCED
in later life.
"Victims" of early estrogen treatments have
been calling for BANNING of the same.
Now, has anyone done research on MALES...?
Anybody (in Oz or elsewhere) been given estrogen
to bring on earlier puberty, thereby stopping
their growth in stature, who's later had issues
when trying to procreate? (Men, I mean...)
(Aussies continue to strike me as REALLY ODD;
positioning their young women to be SHORT?!?)
Draw an outline of your left hand and it will be used to calculate with an error of +/-5% the score you would have gotten had this been more than a pre-school level task.
Programmers are more sensitive, balanced, horny, wealthy, and desperate than your average person. Just ignore the fact that some of our voices sound totally gay.
I read an article in a guitar magazine discussing how having a longer ring finger on the left hand gave you a distinct advantage in playing guitar, and since this implies higher levels of testosterone in the womb, was used to explain why rock and roll guitarists are just born to be wild.
As with most sweeping generalities however, it is bollocks. My ring finger is significantly longer than my index finger, and yet I play guitar poorly, and conform more towards the usual "geek" stereotype than "rampant wild man of rock".
Dr. Brosnan said that men having levels of testosterone very much higher than normal for males would also create the right hemisphere dominated brain, which could help in science. The extremes of low testosterone and high testosterone for men would create the scientific brain, and the normal range in the middle would create the 'social science' brain.
While I cannot say I have met a large enough sample size to distinguish between women and men, I have met lots of people who had great difficulties "getting" CS concepts. (And also certain theoretical math and physics) I would often understand the concept after just hearing the overview, while these people would have to be explained all the details to really understand what is happening.
I believe the problem is spatial orientation. Certain people can create an accurate representation in their minds, and thus can easily "see" the changes happening. In the article I linked to, they give an example of rotating a complex shape in three-dimensional space. Obviously certain concepts in CS (data structures, for instance) involve making a mental picture to understand what's happening, since you can't exactly touch the data.
What I find interesting is how the theory mentioned in this article compares with this theory. According to the article above, only humans with very high or very low levels of testosterone enables humans to think spatially.
In the article I linked to (and many others), there is a theory that men traditionally developped this skill so that they could map out where lunch was, track it and hunt it down, and how they would need to get back home once they had killed it. This is compared to the women, who would stay near home and 'gather' small berries which required more of a sharp eye.
So my question is now, is did these early humans (which obviously must have needed good spatial abiliity) have high or low testosterone? And where are the high-testosterone guys that should be exceeding at spatial orientation now?
An Excellent Post.
I went to a school in Brisbane, Australia where two sisters were given treatment to stop them growing too tall.
This was back in the early 80's. The parents were pressurised into the treatment by the family doctor who said that by stopping the the two girls from growing, they wouldn't be teased at school because of their height.
I was appalled by it at the time, and still am!
Another vague article.
I couldn't find where it stated just how much longer the index finger has to be in order for it to be considered "much" longer.
And what significance have they attached to the situation where the distance between index and ring on one hand is different to the distance between same fingers on the other hand??
An Aussie friend of mine once explained to me that Aussies hate Yanks because: In WWII while the Ozzie guys were off fighting the Japs in Papua & Southeast Asia, Yank guys came and stole their women.
Ozzy chicks do tend to be pretty fine/ fit/ [whatever word you prefer], so I'm guessing this is probably the scheme: Breed them shorter so there won't be so much foreign competition coming in after Aussie women. There aren't that many of them, after all.
I'm always surprised by scientists who take a few meager studies and fill in the huge gaps to come up with such generalizations. This study hasn't proven anything other than their interpretations of what constitutes a profession or field. Beyond this, the differences between finger length ratios cited in the full paper is very small, and close to the likely margin of error for their measurement standards. What constitutes the beginning of the finger for their measurements? The webbing? The bone underneath? It's inexact. There is also variation from hand to hand in individuals (i.e. asymmetry). I smell unconscious bias.
Finger length ratios have also been tied to sexual orientation -- homosexual men (like myself) tend to have longer index fingers relative to their ring fingers, whereas lesbians have more typically male finger length ratios. Which actually makes me wonder whether the reason the estrogen-enhanced researchers, etc, might be having fewer children (as mentioned in TFA) because more of them are gay.
As I recall, research has also found that sex-atypical finger length ratios and homosexuality both were more prevalent in chess masters and mathematicians than in the general population. Why, if the pre-natal androgens are operative in both cases, gays seem to be so good at dressing and mathematicians, researchers and chessmasters so bad, I can't begin to guess.
Always a godfather; never a god. -Gore Vidal
We're girlie men!
Male fetuses have alpha-fetoprotein as well, but it does not bind to testosterone (which is of course present to a much larger degree in normal male fetuses than in females), and while the steroid testosterone can pass through the blood-brain barrier, alpha-fetoprotein cannot, so testosterone passes into the brain, where aromatase converts it to estrogens and it then carries out its effects.
Of course, having sexual dimorphism tied to the levels of certain hormones brings you naturally to the results obtained in this particular study, that is to say, there is room for tremendous variation in the phenotypes of persons with the same sexual genotype. Your biological "sex" (in a more overall sense that includes physical and behavioral characteristics of the mature organism)is determined only at a rough level by the count of X and Y chromosomes; they are a starting point for the complex web of genes, proteins, and signalling cascades- as well as conditions in utero, a long neglected aspect of human development finally starting to be recognized- that produce an end result. As a result, while we may be on gross observation "male" or "female," internally we may lie somewhere on a continuum. Individuals with an outwardly male appearances but with female brains are possible, and vice versa. This idea is taken to the the extreme in cases like 5-alpha reductase syndrome, where XY males lack or cannot correctly produce an enzyme that converts testosterone into 5-DHT, which is far more potent in developing secondary sex characteristics- individuals have female genitalia (the default option), but attempts to raise them as female have generally been terrible failures. In other words, our sex isn't digital; it's analog.
"FDA staff reviewers expressed concern about the number of patients who were left out of the study because they died."
Thinking, gee, I must have mismatched hands, I put my palms together, and saw that in fact both hands match up perfectly. They are shaped the same, including finger lengths.]
So then, I figured that the difference must be in the way that I was holding the hands up to examine them. I held both up at once next to each other. I put both my index fingers side by side, and looked at the backs of my hands. Both the left and right index fingers were obviously the same length. But it seemed that my right ring finger was much longer than my left one. With some practice, I learned to make the index finger on my left hand appear much shorter than the ring finger on that hand. I also learned to make my right index finger appear to be as long or even slightly longer than my right ring finger if I really stretched.
Stretched may be a misnomer, the muscular movement was to imperceptably tilt all four fingers away from the thumb, and to 'suck in' the ring finger and 'push out' the index finger. It was a bit like learning to wink one eye at a time.
Yeah, well, I can change my penis length by looking a pr0n. When my penis is long, I can wiggle it up and down.
...proof that stupid people have a reproductive advantage over smart people.
:)
That explains a lot of things.
set softtabstop=4 shiftwidth=4 expandtab nocp worlddomination
I knew it! Testosterone is the... wait... ...ESTROGEN... aw, crap...
The research leaves open the question of why women (who typically have more estrogen than men) aren't more prevalent in the science and technology fields."
because men are smarter regardless of hormon levels or finger length!
I believe that women are for more intelligent than men.
First, I'll lead you with this idea: Einstein was really not that smart. In fact, it was his lack of intelligence but careful attention to details that made him a phenomenal physicist. Too often, a smart person will overlook interesting results because they don't seem correct. (How long before someone realized that the other answer to the square root is the positron?) Einstein was simple enough to examine the results closely, despite their odd initial appearance. He was simple enough to write it down in a clear manner. He was simple enough to believe in pure logic.
Now on to the questions: Are women smart? Yes. Very much so. Human relations are the one area that women truly shine. They are able to identify emotion and character with a simple glance. I still have problems identifying the emotional state of someone, even under careful examination. (Humm, you are grimacing, your eyes are squinting, and your fists are clenched... so you must be happy to see me?)
Human relations are also one area that is so complicated that scientists don't even know where to begin. At least we understand that no human language can be described with a formal language.
The intelligence of women really shows in the natural instincts of a woman to mother a child. I tend to drive the children to strict obedience because it simplifies life tremendously if people do what they say. My wife is perfectly happy to live in this limbo of uncertainty, where every word and every action is part of a dialog with the child.
Let's compare something I am really good at with her. I think I am pretty smart with programming and such, but my wife is quite frankly *bored* with the topic, as it is not interesting enough compared to the art of dealing with children and friends and neighbors. Yes, that is true. One of the reasons why I like programming so much is because it is one of the simplest things in this world that is actually useful.
Another example. In financial matters, we tend to be equally weak. That is because, in my mind, it is too simple for a woman to understand, and just a bit more complicated than men can understand. I see how she handles our account - she has a running total of all of our accounts in her head, and can predict what we will have in our accounts 6 months out, pretty much for each week. I can't do that. I have to sit down and write it all out and then look at the numbers and then draw up a budget to figure it all out. It takes me hours to come to the conclusions that she has made 6 months ago. Unfortunately, she isn't careful with her math and sometimes makes poor decisions - like paying off the lower interest debt first - but that is only because she trusts her natural intelligence and allows her mind to carry her to conclusions without understanding the "why".
The radical sect of Islam would either see you dead or "reverted" to Islam.
NT
No, that's Perl you're thinking of. Goddamn hippies. ;)
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
Male programmer-researchers have higher levels of estrogen, and females in social sciences have higher levels of testosterone? Well, that explains a LOT of what happens between me and my wife...
I am reminded of the Computer Science curriculum where I went to school long ago. There was one unofficial but absolute requirement: Every programming student had to take Social Dance, on the theory that programmers (nearly all male, in those days) were naturally antisocial.
I'm sure that long-term male discrimination has been a factor, but I also suspect (from my own experience) that there are relatively few women in hard science and technology because, while they and their male counterparts may be equally talented in analytical tasks, the women tend to be more socially capable. Research says male scientists tend to have fewer children; is this partly because they tend to have fewer successful marriages?
In simple terms, perhaps the women are more likely to have a real life.I figure by 2030 or so my 6-digit UID will be something to brag about.
"Women are far more intelligent than men" or, alternatively titled: "MY WIFE is far more intelligent than ME, now watch me to generalize this observation to over 3 billion men and 3 billion women".
I suspect that estrogen levels have nothing to do with whether someone is better at these tasks or not. It's just that men with higher estrogen and lower testosterone tend to a) have less sexual desire and therefore be less concerned with sex than men with lower estrogen and higher testoterone levels, b) tend to be less attractive and geeky than other men and so have less success finding [a] mate[s], let alone reproducing, particularly during the formative years (such as high school and college/uni). These two factors give these "lucky" men the time to focus more on "geeky" activities.
I think the research is probably bogus because of these reasons, thus explaining why estrogen in women doesn't improve the % of women that have talent in these areas.
Now where's that grain of salt?
Wow, so can I shove this in the face of all those people making fun of me asking "Don't you have any balls?!" when I order all those girly drinks?
I suspect not, but still...
[o]_O
no seriously
pull my finger
i need a job
Practicing? Practising to be more dyslexic, less dyslexic or is it you religion? (as in a non-pratising[insert-crazy-religious-type-here[or- sane-one]])
a ys .htm
Anyway, to address the issue - dyslexia is based on (or related to) right/left brain conditions accoridng to this research (below) and also hormonal conditions apply according to:
Are boys affected more than girls?
Three times as many boys as girls are affected, and the role of the hormone testosterone during the fetal stage is being investigated as a possible cause of inherited (developmental) dyslexia.
Although that would suggest less dyslexia ammongst geek types is they have more estrogen.
http://www.dyslexia.com/science/different_pathw
This shows that dyslexic people use thier right brain for left brain tasks. This is the symptom of dyslexia, which is what I said. (formed from - ok misleading, I mean caused by, but not developed because of).
Yes the research is inconclusive, but it does seem that if you seperate it out efficiently:
Possible causes:
environmental dampening of left/right brain stimulous ('glue ear?')
Visible Symptoms (net effect):
Various
Underlying condition:
Right/left brain confusion - brain forces pathways to be created because of the nature of right/left stimulus (visual, touch, aural, dont know about taste/smell - seperate areas of brain? maybe there are people who are taste dyslexic or smell-dyslexic (pardon my terminology))
So if you grew up without right sde stimulus, then you may progress through a type of dyslexia, my guess is, as apparent through researhc, dyslexia is the name given to an observable conidtion exhibited by an individual that stems from a *different* but perhaps not ab-normal (except if you look at a statistic model) organisational setup of the brain, in response to the dichtomous processing of right/left simulii and the environmental conditions that modified them in the subject.
Wow that was more bullshit than a SCO legal document, but yeah, that is my guess.
DISCLAIMER 1: I have no direct experience or reading on dyslexia, but a mild interest in organisational structure in the brain, like the recent rat brain controlling flight sim.
DISCLAIMER 2: I might be wrong.
DISCLAIMER 3: You might be wrong.
#hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com