"People are particularly hostile to men-smarter findings, which from this Bayesian perspective would imply that they hold a strong prior against this conclusion."
Another possibility is not that they hold a strong prior that men aren't smarter, but instead that they hold a strong prior that there are a lot of biased people pushing bad research showing men are smarter. This is because from a Bayesian perspective, it matters not just how strongly the given hypothesis predicts the outcome, but also how strongly alternative hypotheses predict the outcome.
That said, this possibility seems even stupider since clearly there's a lot more people who want to push bad research showing women are smarter than there are people who want to push bad research showing men are smarter.
The fact that progressives are so protective of blacks/women/other minorities means that they think they are worth protecting implying they genuinely don't really think these groups are "equal". Every liberal will switch grocery stores when it gets too black. Everyone believes in stereotypes but some people are in denial.
I don't really like this study, because drawing is very much not a sex-neutral trait. There is much greater female interest in being able to draw, with the result that, population-wide, female drawing ability is much higher than male ability. Everyone should be familiar with this, and it tends to undermine a study purporting to show that male drawing ability is higher than female drawing ability.
It would be better to assess pro-male or pro-female bias by using a trait that doesn't display such an obvious sex-based skew. If people trust studies that say "girls are better at drawing than boys" more than they trust studies that say "boys are better at drawing than girls", the most likely reason is that people are already aware that girls are better at drawing than boys.
"People are particularly hostile to men-smarter findings, which from this Bayesian perspective would imply that they hold a strong prior against this conclusion."
Another possibility is not that they hold a strong prior that men aren't smarter, but instead that they hold a strong prior that there are a lot of biased people pushing bad research showing men are smarter. This is because from a Bayesian perspective, it matters not just how strongly the given hypothesis predicts the outcome, but also how strongly alternative hypotheses predict the outcome.
That said, this possibility seems even stupider since clearly there's a lot more people who want to push bad research showing women are smarter than there are people who want to push bad research showing men are smarter.
The fact that progressives are so protective of blacks/women/other minorities means that they think they are worth protecting implying they genuinely don't really think these groups are "equal". Every liberal will switch grocery stores when it gets too black. Everyone believes in stereotypes but some people are in denial.
I don't really like this study, because drawing is very much not a sex-neutral trait. There is much greater female interest in being able to draw, with the result that, population-wide, female drawing ability is much higher than male ability. Everyone should be familiar with this, and it tends to undermine a study purporting to show that male drawing ability is higher than female drawing ability.
It would be better to assess pro-male or pro-female bias by using a trait that doesn't display such an obvious sex-based skew. If people trust studies that say "girls are better at drawing than boys" more than they trust studies that say "boys are better at drawing than girls", the most likely reason is that people are already aware that girls are better at drawing than boys.