A Tale of Two Types of Perspective Taking: Sex Differences in Spatial Ability
A Tale of Two Types of Perspective Taking: Sex Differences in Spatial Ability
复制标题
DOI：
10.1177/0956797616667459
复制
发表时间：
2016-11-01
影响因子：
8.2
通讯作者：
Hegarty, Mary
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Tarampi, Margaret R.;Heydari, Nahal;Hegarty, Mary
有利于男性的性别差异已被记录在空间观点采取措施。在这项研究中，我们研究了社会因素（即，刻板印象威胁和任务中包含人物）解释了这些差异。在实验1中，我们评估的性能时，观点采择测试被框定为测量空间或社会（移情）的观点采择能力。在空间条件下，任务被框定为男性具有优势的空间能力的措施。在社会条件下，修改后的任务包含人类的数字，并被框定为措施的同理心，女性有优势。结果表明，有利于男性的空间条件，但不是社会条件的性别差异。实验2和实验3表明，刻板印象威胁和人物形象对这些效应都有影响。结果表明，女性可能表现不佳的空间测试，部分原因是负面的性能预期和空间测试的特点，而不是因为实际缺乏的能力。
Sex differences in favor of males have been documented in measures of spatial perspective taking. In this research, we examined whether social factors (i.e., stereotype threat and the inclusion of human figures in tasks) account for these differences. In Experiment 1, we evaluated performance when perspective-taking tests were framed as measuring either spatial or social (empathetic) perspective-taking abilities. In the spatial condition, tasks were framed as measures of spatial ability on which males have an advantage. In the social condition, modified tasks contained human figures and were framed as measures of empathy on which females have an advantage. Results showed a sex difference in favor of males in the spatial condition but not the social condition. Experiments 2 and 3 indicated that both stereotype threat and including human figures contributed to these effects. Results suggest that females may underperform on spatial tests in part because of negative performance expectations and the character of the spatial tests rather than because of actual lack of abilities.