Morbid schrieb:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Let's just say that I give you the advantage on
> defaulting on the Iron in the head theory. I can
> still back my claims up.
>
>
>
> In a study of sex differences in navigation
> strategy and geographic knowledge, 90 men
> and 104 women completed cognitive spatial tests,
> gave directions from local maps, and
> identified places on a world map. On the spatial
> tests, men were better than women in
> mental rotation skill, but men and women were
> similar in object location memory. In
> giving directions, men were more abstract and
> Euclidian, using miles and north–south–
> east–west terms, whereas women were more
> concrete and personal, using landmarks
> and left–right terms. Older subjects of both
> sexes gave more abstract Euclidian direc-
> tions than younger subjects did. On the world map,
> men identified more places than
> women did. The data fit a causal model in which
> sex predicts world map knowledge and
> the use of Euclidian directions, both directly and
> indirectly through a sex difference in
> spatial skills. The age effect, which was
> independent of sex, supports a developmental
> view of spatial cognition.
>
> We found sex differences in spatial skill,
> navigation strategy, and geographic
> knowledge. Men excelled at mental rotation,
> although men and women did not dif-
> fer in object location memory. Men knew more than
> women did about world geog-
> raphy. Men and women differed in navigation
> strategy, with men using miles and
> NSEW directions and women using landmarks and
> left–right directions. Navigation
> strategy was not related to knowledge of world
> geography. Relations among the
> variables can be seen more easily in the path
> model than in the raw correlations,
> because the path model provides an overall picture
> of relations among the variables.
> Fitting correlational data to the model tells us
> how much of each variable can be
> explained by each preceding variable, and the
> overall goodness of fit of the model
> indicates how well the model summarizes the raw
> correlational findings.
> The sex differences are consistent with Silverman
> and Eals’ (1992) evolution-
> ary perspective, which holds that a prehistoric
> division of labor supported differing
> reproductive needs of men and women. Women who
> could better keep track of rela-
> tionships, activities, objects, locations, and
> landmarks near home were more suc-
> cessful at acquiring resources needed to bear and
> raise offspring. Men who could
> travel in unfamiliar territory, estimate distance,
> and navigate using a bird’s-eye
> orientation were more successful at competing with
> other males, finding mates, and fa-
> thering offspring. In this view, neither sex has
> superior spatial skills. Men and
> women have different skills, suitable to handling
> different aspects of the environ-
> ment most important to their own sex.
>
> Having spatial skills that support your ability
> "to keep track of relationships, activities,
> objects, locations, and landmarks near home" will
> not earn you an F1 seat. Having spatial skills
> that allow you to "travel in unfamiliar territory,
> estimate distance, and navigate using a
> bird’s-eye orientation" will. Being able to
> express you navigation in standardized abstract
> units, instead of personal meaningful symbols, and
> knowing north, south, east and west, will also
> support your progress in motor sports. Excelling
> at mental rotation is @#$%& important when 90% of
> your concentration is being spent on other tasks,
> like keeping car balance in check and dicing with
> the other guys around you.
agreed, i have heard about that before. as long as we can agree on the fact that this is an evolutionary feat and not related to iron in our heads there's nothing to add to the point you make.
used to be GPGSL's Nick Heidfeld