Slashdot Mirror
In UK Study, Girls Best Boys At Making Computer Games
New submitter Esteanil writes Researchers in the University of Sussex's Informatics department asked pupils at a secondary school to design and program their own computer game using a new visual programming language. The young people, aged 12-13, spent eight weeks developing their own 3D role-playing games.
The girls in the classroom wrote more complex programs in their games than the boys and also learnt more about coding.
The girls used seven different triggers – almost twice as many as the boys – and were much more successful at creating complex scripts with two or more parts and conditional clauses.
Boys nearly always chose to trigger their scripts on when a character says something, which is the first and easiest trigger to learn.
... Oh wait.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
instead of getting MBAs or children. How can convince girls to sit in front of a computer screen all day...
Just a thought, but there's a slim chance that the boys may have been focusing on simplicity. Now, if the assignment had strict requirements about what must be done, that'd be a better way to measure who is "better" at coding computer games.
"Complex stories"? "Two or more parts or conditional clauses"? Two???
"Trigger their scripts on when a character says something?"
I am a game developer. I have no idea what they are talking about.
More fundamentally: is "complexity" good?
------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
Interesting result.
It will be interesting to see if any of the girls in the class go on to be the next Caitlin Colgrove, Adele Goldberg or Barbara Liskov.
However, I'd expect more of a bell curve in both genders with the average for girls being better than the average for boys. If the girls uniformly did better and the boys uniformly did worse, that sounds strange.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
...while the boys are focused on learning how to be seen and how to claim territory and space. Are we really surprised when the tables are turned later?
Girls are adept at imposing conditions while boys just want to stab things.
Now they can move on to the kitchen. Where they all belong.
And you can go to the toilet to read your copy of the local tabloid while you ponder why you are still single....
How about key grips & focus pullers?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
I can't get to the study but it seems like the sample size was one secondary school class. That's routhly 30 children. How is this considered a scientific study?
News at 11.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
I like how it's been less than 10 days and already the editors did not think to link to the Barbie: Computer Engineer story, where she only thinks up a design and then has to go to the boys to get the coding done.
Ironic the fictional land of Barbie, with a supposedly positive message for girls about careers in tech, is more misogynistic than the reality it seeks to change.
shoot it or drive it, it's not better.
I didn't like the title of the original story that was linked to as well as the title of this post. The words "better" and "best" are used to describe the games made by the girls compared to the boys when in reality, the correct words would have been "more complex" and "different".
I'm all for encouraging more girls to follow their passion and see if they're interested in making games. It's very important that we do it in order to have better diversity of opinions and ideas. But I'm frustrated that they chose to take a study that seems to have interesting results in terms of showing the differences at that age between girls and boys and twisting it to say that the games made by the girls, because of having more triggers for events, made them better.
It's just very disappointing that this could have been an interesting discussion to talk about the various development of the minds of kids and how it can be observed from making simple games with a visual programming language. Instead, it got ruined by an article that makes incorrect conclusions about the study mentioned and then shoehorns Gamergate in at the end, as if they need to make it any clearer that they had no interest in the study and just wanted something to raise the "Girl power!' flag.
As for the actually relevant part, the study, I think that the results line up with what we know about girl's performance in schools and how they can pick up concepts very quickly compared to boys. I'd be interested in the visual programming language being used to help process what goes through the minds of boys and girls at that age, especially with how important that age can be in regards to learning.
Maybe because raping unmarried female children to marry them is illegal in WOMENS CUNTRIES?
(It is Legal in the Old Testament: Deuteronomy 22 28-29 hebrew)
You feminists need to be killed. You NEED to be killed.
This woman's world needs to be destroyed or removed.
Females should NOT have choice.
Men SHOULD.
It's the opposite right now.
Hans Reiser did nothing wrong.
Is it even a Russell Group university? No it's not! So bullshit studies whose result time well with GamerGate. Can females stop leaguing with so-called female victims of GG? It's so unbecoming. It started with the news media, whereby every anti-GG article were written by women or SJW and the likes. When questioned they all admitted to going for harassment angle rather than doing a fair exposé of both sides.
My experience is that girls are more commonly better programmers than boys (I've worked with programming for 30+ years). The solutions are more thorough and well-thought in general, and they tend to be better at teamwork, and better at seeking help when they are stuck (instead of being stuck for four weeks until someone pokes them about it).
I've always been sad there are so few girls in programming, since they would do an excellent job.
And, for that matter, engineering in general.
That said, not sure what this study was about and if it gives any conclusion on the matter other than what we already knew - girls and boys have similar brains that can solve complex, abstract problems, and gender difference is overlapped by individual difference...?
Anyway, girls, if you want to become a programmer, please become a programmer.
That girls end up better at game design won't surprise me. They typically have a better understanding of human psychology and I believe that as tools become better, it will become more important than technical skills. 1
But this study say nothing about what will happen when these kids reach adulthood, or even high school. Girls start puberty about 1 year earlier than boys, with all the associated physical and mental changes. At 12-13, the difference in maturity between boys and girls is huge. Boys start to catch up only at about 16 or so.
Why did the editors let this crap through?
...with saying that girls (on average) show different skill-sets to boys ("..are better at...").
But try saying the same thing with people of different colour, nationality or religion...
From experience, you have much better likelihood of getting girls while being a bad boy, than a nice guy. My sexual life skyrocketed when I stopped being one.
Is "The Circle of the Elders of Game Development" now going to consider accepting women into "The Castle f the Chosen 300"? Now that the female has proven herself, she must get the chance to demonstrate her worthiness through a battle to the death! Because THAT is the reason, that so few women are employed in game development. It is not the good old market forces giving the job to the best person, it is because the ancient prophecy demands it!
No, seriously, what's the deal with all that "women can do x better than men!"? Okay, great. I always prefer a better product to a inferior one, given the same price. What chromosomes the person has who built it, is of no concern to me, or anybody else. I guarantee it. Even the greatest misogynist prefers a 10 dollar steak made by a woman over a 20 dollar shit-sandwich made by a man.
I can't get to the paper, but it doesn't actually say anywhere that the girls were uniformly better. All subjects improved their understanding of computation, but the girls as a group did significantly better.
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
This just in MikeUSA, no one gives half a shit about your "game", and that's with or without the sexist easter egg you included.
#NotYourArmy
I'll have you know the best chefs are men. Women are the best housekeepers, though. By far. As long as an infant is in the home. No infant, then the woman is probably down with the plumber, getting her plumbing fixed. Or the landscaper getting her bush trimmed. Or with the neighbor's kid, giving lessons on how to header.
"The girls used seven different triggers"
Girls have 7 erogenous zones, boys just 1, at the tip of their cock.
Girls *do* write computer games... Zoe Quinn wrote a thrilling game, it is so enjoyable the first page features a link to a suicide hotline !
No, seriously, I have no idea on which kind of utterly bad trip she was when she wrote that... "thing". Even more calling it a "game". And worth, she tried to market that thing by literally fucking around... She might have mixed shroom, CNS depressant, and a whole cocktail of other drugs to get there...
Btw, Randi Harper (aka "freebsdgirl") is writting game too. The principle is actually super duper easy, try to have a rational debate with her, and get flagged as an harasser. The more social media profile you get banned from, the more points you win. Currently, my best score is 2, but working on getting a 3rd point.
But if you claim boys are better at other (most) types of programming, it is sexist. Because boys cannot be better than girls at something, but girl
"Girls do better in programming", "girls do better in math".
Being good at entering new territory does not account for much in the real world unless you are able to secure it. As long as girls find themselves unable to mark territory in GamerGate style and would rather leave, they'll be made to leave. Toxicity (like death caps growing in symbiosis with slow-growing hardwood trees that are better off without bark-gnawing deers) is rarely a freak accident in nature.
Deficiencies can be compensated with suitable defenses. Males utilize their low sensibilities to create toxic atmospheres in which they are able to prosper without gender competition. Why should females stay in fields they are good at when there is no reasonable emotional return of investment for them in it?
"What do you mean, you don't think you like your job? This is work, you are not supposed to like it!" is a father-to-son statement. It only makes sense in a male world.
So don't try and have a rational debate with her then. She's clearly not interested and if you make it into a game then you're just being a childish troll.
My favorite games have beend made by: Leonard Boyarsky, Jason Anderson, Timothy Cain, Warren Spector, Ken Rolston, Ken Levine, Thomas Biskup, Tarn Adams, with honorary mention of Vince Desiderio and Oscar Jilsén. Well, I'd like to include some girls on this list, but for some reason I always try out the game before checking out who the lead designer is, not otherwise around.
Oh, and I couldn't care less, how many different triggers have been used in the game.
Some games are difficult.
See: Nethack.
Oh noes, eugenics! Lets just stick to making males look silly, that's acceptable.
Oh no... Not the f***ing gamergate again! It's spreading!
Look, kid, why don't you go watch your porn and masturbate while the adults discuss about interesting stuff that actually happened?
Sup cunt.
Capacha: cavity
There's only ONE side to all that gamergate bullshit: misogynist children who are incapable of relating to women and since women won't allow them into their world, they won't allow women inside of what they consider their world (videogames). Guess what: you're full of shit and everybody see right through your bullshit. Grow up or get out.
Fortunately my university provides me with access to the original study, so for those who are interested:
The study was performed on three elementary school classes with a total of 55 students (29 girls, 26 boys). Despite the small sample size, they did perform a statistical analysis and found the results to be significant (p < 0.001), the results being that girls on average scored higher on a computational thinking test before and after the course. The differences in improvement between genders was not significant and it is worth noting that despite having lower average scores before and after the course, the range of scores for boys in post-testing extended higher and lower than those of girls. I wish I could link the boxplot for the data but I'm not sure that's legal.
It is also important to note that the study was not performed in order to measure the difference between boys and girls in programming, but to measure the benefits of using their special programming software over an eight-week course. The software itself is indeed very visual, and the 'programming' is done by dragging around boxes with partial statements and filling in the blanks with object boxes. The software then constructs a text interpretation of the code in a lower box, which is what the computational thinking problems related to.
http://politicalrift.com/female-supremacy-the-endless-quest-2
School forces children to do an activity. Boys cheapskate the task, girls dive into it. What's new here? That's how it was when I went to school.
I remember that in high school we were constantly told by the teachers that girls were better at everything. They may have done so with the best of intentions, but a lot of the boys, including me, felt like there was no point in even trying. The only reason I got through it with reasonable grades was because my parents would give me a beating when they were disappointed with my marks. Some of my friends weren't so lucky.
So like with many studies, this poses questions of sample size and, in consequence, of notoriety bias (where statistical flukes challenging the perceived status quo might get more exposure).
Sure.
But what is definitely outside of the range of a statistical fluke is the resulting level of "fem-bashing" on Slashdot. It appears like the majority of postings addressing problems with the study as such combine this criticism with a load of prejudicial bile. That does not point towards "this would call for a larger sample size" or "it would be good to exclude some systematic errors" but rather "we don't want such studies performed".
I find that kind of obsessive expulsionary behavior troubling. It's not like having a testeron-hazed brain is an inherent accomplishment. It's an operating condition that works better for some things and worse for others. But it is not a virtue and hardly a reason for pride or spite.
The resulting Slashdot discussions from anything touching gender questions are so undignified. They make me want to identify as a transsexual lesbian (even though I am only interested in women regarding my sex life, I am not actively considering a change in my male genitalia and other appearance). Because I really can't identify with "proud" "straight" "males". They are, by and large, embarrassing.
the boys were too busy drooling over the girls and the fact that there were actually girls in the class in the first place.
... researchers found that girls totally outshine boys in basketball and football while using more complex and diverse plays. They also learned more because they're smarter. The NBA and NFL have, so far, withheld comment.
When it's "learnt" and not "learned".
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
- Calling Flip a "programming language" is quite a stretch. It is not. That's the whole point in it, in fact.
- The metric to determine how good a game is is not how "complex" it is, but how much fun it is.
Notice that the average for girls was not as significant as the average for boys (p<0.05). It was significant, though.
Timmyboy is only known for his village idiocy of spreading FUD. This article is nothing else.
Not balanced then you are not looking at any sort of tree but rather now at a linked list: insert already-sorted data and if you aren't balanced, you have a linked list. Find or insert into, or delete, from that! You want slow? You got slow!
Some popular implementations work like that; they delay balance until a reindex. It's terrible. Absolutely terrible. And already-or-nearly-so-sorted input is not uncommon. B* is ALWAYS balanced. B+ is not. This is really, really, old stuff.
Girls excel at everything in school. Since the feminisation of the school system their is not a single subject that boys do not lag behind in. It is impossible to compete when the entire system is against you.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
Maybe this is the future of programming; drag blocks and symbols around the screen so they snap together into a working program. It doesn't surprise me though, visual WYSIWYG editors like Dreamweaver aren't really programming anyway.
YES! It's is spreading and it is REAL. Do some research before commenting bullshit. You can start here.
And worth,
Ba, nok da gaim awl u lyke, butt yer speling id event worth.
What's spreading? Bad grammar? Your ass cheeks?
1/10 I am not even mad but I did reply. Keep up the good work.
Games are not programmed or developed by 12 year olds.
Commercial console games aren't. But a 25 year old who has been making computer games since 12 is going to have an advantage over someone who didn't write a line of code until university.
I see you're still suffering from TPS, Tiny Penis Syndrome.
They have surgery for that now though, so there is hope. Although I don't think any amount of medical treatment will cure your disease.
The last paragraph of the article makes it clear that it's a spin.
However, the industry has been blighted with accusations of misogyny and harassment after female game developer Zoe Quinn became the target of abuse when her former boyfriend accused her of cheating on him with a games journalist, under the social media hashtag Gamergate
Yeah, because Gamergate was only about misogyny. Ignore the original issue of journalists fucking developers, developers fucking people for advancement (literally and figuratively), and so called game journalists all publishing similar articles telling consumers of games to die after people started questioning their practices and behavior.
girls develop earlier than boys and even get better notes by being more organized. Later boys develop at it's full and then things turn the other way around. We have learn't nothing new but another incorrectly done experiment trying to explain how women are being discriminated in society when we in return die more of labour accidents and have overall lower life expentacy. Go grow and cure your hate against male we don't like male hater women nor we need them. And use your skills or your work to get higger payment instead of trying to explain payment gap by discrimination or use the fact you are a woman to get higher pay. We men are the ones discriminated as we don't have maternity leave and that is why we are more valuble for the industry. Tell that to feminist groups that want to discriminate us more.
Offtopic? Really? She "wrote" Depression Quest using something called Twine. From the Twine homepage:
You don't need to write any code to create a simple story with Twine, but you can extend your stories with variables, conditional logic, images, CSS, and JavaScript when you're ready.
Twine publishes directly to HTML, so you can post your work nearly anywhere.
So basically it is the web version of Flip (what the kids used in TFA).
And about Quinn herself:
she made her first forays into video game programming. Her first game was the result of a six-week course on video-game creation that she attended after seeing an advertisement in a newspaper.
So here is the real life version of the Barbi video game developer book we saw a few weeks ago.
to distinguish the "men" from the "women" in the UK!
Gamergate is a crock of shit.
SJWs are the new boogeyman. -Me
So, you CRETIN, reading a comic strip is the same as reading a novel. I mean in both cases you look at words and perceive their meaning to follow a narrative.
Gaming is MASSIVELY male dominated- and the difficult (and expensive to create) AAA games rely 99%+ on a male customer base. Females mostly 'play' the gaming equivalent to a COMIC STRIP. This is no more 'gaming' in the significant sense than reading the Sunday 'Funnies' is 'reading'.
Any AAA publisher that tries to be 'politically correct' will see their business tank. Interesting this has happened, indirectly, already- when many traditional AAA publishers attempted to jump on the 'Facebook casual game' trend for the very reason that it attracted a previously untapped customer base, including MANY females. Experiments in casual gaming were HORRIBLE financial disasters for the big boys. But this is good- casual games SHOULD be bottom-up, cheaply produced and often independently published.
Remember folks- there is NOTHING stopping girly programmers competing in the creation of casual games- costs are rock bottom, and one's identity as a creator is whatever you choose it to be. So clearly, current casual games have a 50% female developer base. Hahahahahahaha! Hohohohohohoho! No problem- just invent another raft of excuses as to why this isn't so.
You must be one CRAP coder for the technical PROPAGANDA of this piece to fly over your head- Tell me, do you work on character AI on Elder Scroll games down at Bethesda?
PS for you Skyrim fans, please, please, PLEASE check out 'INIGO'. A young Scottish bloke who understands WHY you want events triggered in more sophisticated ways has created a companion Bethesda (and the hopeless 'popo') could never conceive in their wildest dreams. "IS COMPLEXITY GOOD?"- the cry of EVERY crap coder.
This article is BS. Teacher laid down the template of teacher-pleasing work, and the girls simply obeyed more closely, as they are wont (if able) at such an age. Mind you, I will grant that just on the cusp of puberty- the 'best' girls in my experience showed similar aptitude to the better boys. That said, I had taught my brother to be fluent in assembler at 11- UK schools are rubbish at stretching the minds of males before 14 years old.
At uni, the worst creeps amongst the lecturers LOVED to give 'special' attention to female students- and I mean the age old tactic designed to get 'in their pants'. But as part of the process, they would help do their 'homework' for them.
The difference at 12 is the 'good girls' will be more likely to listen carefully to teacher, and teacher will be more likely to GUIDE the little girls in the right direction. The boys get the hint, 'strong' enough to go off on their own, and work things out for themselves. Thus the 'smarter' girls turn in TEACHER'S solution- which is then presented in this propaganda piece as their own.
It's a lot like some of those reality TV shows where some contestants LISTEN to the expert advice, and some do not. But FOLLOWING INSTRUCTIONS is NOT the same thing as being fundamentally skilled yourself (even if the ability to accurately follow instructions is a USEFUL skillset in itself).
The problem with programming is that following instructions only gets you so far- and that is NOT very far at all. Most would be programmers fail because their ability to move to the next step is missing.
To summarise, this Blairite propaganda peice relied on the old psychological trick called PROJECTION. The teacher imprinted on the girls but not the boys. Since teacher's skill made the difference, the group less susceptible to projection 'failed'. The real world of coding does not work this way.
Everywhere. Kill them all. But wait, what will women complain about then?
All the world smell my vagina!
At the beginning, I thought she was a reasonable person...
Why is complaining about corruption in games media a crock of shit?
I have taken graduate level math classes in 'hard' subjects, and the ratio of females to males was about 2:5. Math is around 40% female by major in the states. So please look up some numbers before you spout nonsense regarding gender ratios. http://www.randalolson.com/2014/06/14/percentage-of-bachelors-degrees-conferred-to-women-by-major-1970-2012/
My experience is that girls are more commonly better programmers than boys (I've worked with programming for 30+ years). The solutions are more thorough and well-thought in general, and they tend to be better at teamwork, and better at seeking help when they are stuck (instead of being stuck for four weeks until someone pokes them about it).
I've always been sad there are so few girls in programming, since they would do an excellent job.
And, for that matter, engineering in general.
That said, not sure what this study was about and if it gives any conclusion on the matter other than what we already knew - girls and boys have similar brains that can solve complex, abstract problems, and gender difference is overlapped by individual difference...?
Anyway, girls, if you want to become a programmer, please become a programmer.
The first company I worked - 90% young hires with only highschool training. Equal ratio of male and female. Females were better because they were less distracted as programming was a job and not an interest as such. I met a few girls (perhaps 3 I knew well) when I went back and did my uni degree in a very male dominated field. As time's gone on that lack of hobby interest has become a real problem - very few women stick with coding for long enough to get really good - they see it as a stepping stone. Whereas a lot of the male programmers I work with still have a passion for it in their 40s and beyond.
My conclusion is it's not that women can't code well, it's that they're not interested. That lack of interest gives them focus on the job at hand early on but down the track there are fewer who stick with it as they move into management and other roles. Any woman who's interested shouldn't be discouraged and a woman shouldn't be pre-judged based on what genitals she sports. There are exceptions to every rule and there is no need to throw away talented people based on idiotic gender bias. At the same time I don't feel we need affirmative action to even the numbers.
Nothing more than the same rehashed formulas over and over. Nothing much has changed, the same old tired FPS. Or adventure quests which are FPS with elves. No creativity or imagination. Sort of like fast food or the mega beer brewers or the soda manufacturers. The same old formula.
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
If the study found the opposite:
1)- Would it make slashdot?
2)- Would there be some social reason given?
So seriously, why? Choosing 12 years old for the study- instead of 9, say, when boys and girls are basically the same thing- is a very odd choice, given the later development of boys. Choosing 15 would also give very different results. Generalizing the one point of human development when girls are ahead of boys is very odd, but why doesn't the article spend a million words saying that we need to help the boys get on the same level as the girls?
Almost every sex article- and CERTAINLY every gender one- is so political it's fucking insane.
There was an anecdote in a recentish book (sorry, blanking on the book) where a teacher noticed that the girls were doing better in language, and the boys in math. This bothered her- after all, boys shouldn't do better in math. Bothered her a lot, because, after all, she "knew" that boys and girls have similar math skills. Her solution was to segregate the boys and the girls math studies, based on the assumption that the girls were being intimidated by the boys, who held up their hands faster, etc. Eventually after doing this, the scores evened out or something, and she was happy that the world was exactly as she thought it was (after a lot of manipulation on her part). But, of course...
1)- Were the classes taught the same? If you care enough to teach math twice because the girls being behind enrages you, you are unlikely to be the most impartial teacher, right?
2)- If the girls being ahead in language and the boys being ahead in math enrages you because the boys are ahead, what happened when they split the language classes? They didn't do this part, of course- it was fine that the boys were behind in language. Not even the author relaying the ancedote seemed to consider this point.
3)- If there really is a better way to teach girls, then it stands to reason that there's a better way to teach boys. There's some gender zealots searching for the first, but shouldn't we be all about the second?
Anyway, back on topic, the program in question has nothing to do with anything, or real games. This study was likely designed from the start to show this, or spun that way for attention, and the metric for what "better" is seems entirely related to the "types of triggers" used. But I'm sure the rest of slashdot will poke holes in that obvious attention grab metric, and likely point out some more details with the NWN engine.
What would be interesting would be to take the scripted things and have them rated blindly by another group of 12-13 year olds.
Anyway, gender politics are so fucking all over the internet, and every side so zealous, that it's ludicrous to see slashdot dip their toe in it. I come here to read about tech, not read about some loopy gender warrior finding a way to spin their point of view (which is one of: sex A is worse at X, and that's society's fault, OR, sex A is worse at X, and that's because gender B is shining and perfect and obviously superior at X).
White people have created 93 percent of all patented inventions. Why not write an article extolling their mental prowess?
The study picked an age where this would be bound to happen. It would be more interesting to see the same study where the subjects where 17 or older.
The disease of wanting a nice pretty cute young girl? I could see how a woman would think that is a disease: as clearly she is none of that.
Put out any new games recently, cunt, or ever?
Do you put out at all?
"Role playing" is more social. Boys tend to be more physical. Make it more physics- and action-based and you may see a flip, especially if you add explosions.
Table-ized A.I.
Some might say that an incredibly short HTML choose-your-own-adventure book with one ending doesn't qualify as a video game. But to tell the truth, choose-your-own-adventure books do a better job of offering an interactive plot than most "AAA" video games that claim to do so (see: Mass Effect 3). Bringing that kind of format to the game industry is a legitimately good idea - although I would have probably brought the multiple endings
The problem with Depression Quest is that it doesn't really help anyone. Which wouldn't be a problem, except that the stated purpose of the game was to help people with depression. As I recall, the game's only ending roughly goes "You quit acting like such an asshole, and because of that, you start to feel better." I am, admittedly, not a neuroscientist, a psychologist or even a 10-cent psychiatrist, but I don't think that's how it works. Moreover, the fact that it's the only ending you can get - despite the suicide hotline on the front page - presents a mixed message that a depressed mind is unlikely to accept well.
One almost gets the impression that it was the work of a privileged white woman who mistook her own experiences with minor emotional instability for clinical depression... or something.
I don't care about plot, character development, etc. Whose games had the most explosions?
Completely agree. It may not "feel good" and it may not jive with PC ideology, but damned if it doesn't work.
Maybe she is, maybe she isn't. But clearly she doesn't want to have this debate separately with hundreds of different people.
Geez! Go to a public forum and discuss it there. You'll find people who are willing to talk about it, I'm sure.
Females are clustered around normal whereas males have more exceptionally dumb and brilliant members, the curve is lower and wider. This may come back to chromosomal differences and the greater risks and benefits males face with x-linked variations. This is for genes that are involved in brain development and function, obviously.
In a nut shell, you can't simplistically compare males and females without being misleading and any reported study results that are simplistic should be clarified, or ignored.
Most of the posters either denigrated the study or made the assertion that we catch up later in life.
This defensive response validates the study and shows the insecurity of the male mindset.
Female minds integrate facts faster and better than the male mind and females multitask better than males.
I believe that the female mind is more adapted to the psychology of game-making than the male mind. The programming technology for game development allows this difference to manifest.
Programming is the means to an end. Remove the technological hurdle and the innate abilities show themselves.
Males are better at learning programming; it's a cognitive task that we are good at. Females want to "get to it" without having to learn the language.
Girl-invented games would be more relational than sequential, have more intricate plots and provide more variety of response to a (perceived) threat.
So there.
Official Pi Ambassador -- inquire for details!
But to tell the truth, choose-your-own-adventure books do a better job of offering an interactive plot than most "AAA" video games that claim to do so (see: Mass Effect 3).
As I recall, the game's only ending roughly goes "You quit acting like such an asshole, and because of that, you start to feel better."
ironically, if you say just that to explain all her 'gamergate problems' you get branded a misogynist. She behaved like an asshole it's no wonder her game is shit and she should feel like shit for it.
Women's brain is horizontally wired and good at multitasking.
Women's brains are designed for social skills and memory while men's are for perception and coordination.
http://m.timesofindia.com/home...
Casteism
Boys are dumb and girls are smart, we get it lol
Girls were dominant in general when I was in grade school but I dominated them in all classes. Teachers made pets out of the smart girls and tended to ignore me but I did not care. I had as many stars as the top girls did in the lower grades and got as many E's and then A's on tests as the smartest girls as well.
In the third grade, we had a math face-off competition. All the smart girls ended up on one team and one by one, my team kept falling into the smart girls team until I was the only one left in my team. It was me against the smartest girl. I beat her. The bell rang to end the class but I knew that I had won the entire contest. Once I had the smartest girl on my team, the other smart girls would "fail" to her on purpose and to me because I was smarter. At that point, it was over.
In summary, girls may dominate subjects in general during grade school but it is not always true.
"Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen