Do Measures of Systemizing and Empathizing Reflect Perceptions of Gender Differences in Learning Affordances?

Abstract

Gender differences in systemizing and empathizing are sometimes attributed to inherent biological factors. We tested whether such effects are more often interpreted as reflecting men's and women's different learning affordances. Study 1 (N = 624) estimated gender differences in item-level activities from systemizing and empathizing scales (SQ, EQ) in large representative samples. Lay coders (Study 2, N = 199) and psychology experts (Study 3, N = 116) rated SQ and EQ activities as being more learned (vs. innate) and believed that men receive more systemizing and women receive more empathizing (Study 3 only) affordances. Items showing the largest gender differences in Study 1 were those rated as having the largest gender affordances (more than gendered genetic advantages) in Studies 2 and 3. Claims about inherent sex differences in systemizing, and to a lesser degree empathizing, appear to be out of step with a consensus view from the public and psychological scientists.