Women Who Know Their Place
- 825 Downloads
Differences between men and women in the performance of tests designed to measure spatial abilities are explained by evolutionary psychologists in terms of adaptive design. The Hunter-Gatherer Theory of Spatial Ability suggests that the adoption of a hunter-gatherer lifestyle (assuming a sexual division of labor) created differential selective pressure on the development of spatial skills in men and women and, therefore, cognitive differences between the sexes. Here, we examine a basic spatial skill—wayfinding (the ability to plan routes and navigate a landscape)—in men and women in a natural, real-world setting as a means of testing the proposition that sex-based differences in spatial ability exist outside of the laboratory. Our results indicate that when physical differences are accounted for, men and women with equivalent experience perform equally well at complex navigation tasks in a real-world setting. We conclude that experience, gendered patterns of activity, and self-assessment are contributing factors in producing previously reported differences in spatial ability.
KeywordsEvolutionary psychology Spatial cognition Gender Wayfinding
This research would not have been possible without the support of the AHRC Centre for the Evolution of Cultural Diversity, Institute of Archaeology, UCL, with special thanks to Dr. James Steele (Director, CECD), and the Leverhulme Centre for Human Evolutionary Studies, Cambridge University. The help and advice of organizers of the 2009 Scottish 6-Day Orienteering Festival is gratefully acknowledged, with special thanks to Mr. Gareth Bryan-Jones. A.K. was supported by a Leverhulme Trust Early Career Fellowship. The authors would also like to acknowledge Prof. F. Grine, Dr. Jay Stock, and Dr. Tom Smulders for their comments during the preparation of this manuscript.
- Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: the exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman.Google Scholar
- Golledge, R. G. (1999). Human wayfinding and cognitive maps. In R. G. Golledge (Ed.), Wayfinding behaviour (pp. 5–45). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
- Golledge, R. G. (2003). Human wayfinding and cognitive maps. In M. Rockman & J. Steele (Eds.), Colonization of unfamiliar landscapes: the archaeology of adaptation (pp. 25–43). London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Johansen, B. T. (1997). Thinking in orienteering. Scientific Journal of Orienteering, 13, 38–46.Google Scholar
- Lobben, A. K. (2004). Tasks, strategies, and cognitive processes associated with navigational map reading: a review perspective. The Professional Geographer, 56(2), 270–281.Google Scholar
- Loomis, J. M., Klatzky, R. L., Golledge, R. G., & Philbeck, J. W. (1999). Human navigation by path integration. In R. G. Golledge (Ed.), Wayfinding behavior (pp. 125–151). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
- Myrvold, B. (1996). Is it possible to find a “best” route? A look at accuracy and significance in route choice comparison. Scientific Journal of Orienteering, 12, 19–36.Google Scholar
- Reis, S. M., & Park, S. (2001). Gender differences in high-achieving students in math and science. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 25(1), 52–73.Google Scholar
- Silverman, I., and Eals, M. (1992). Sex differences in spatial abilities: evolutionnary theory and data. In J. Barkow, L. Cosmides and L. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind: evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture (pp. 487–503). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Whitaker, L. A., & Cuqlock-Knopp, G. (1992). Navigation in off-road environments: orienteering interviews. Scientific Journal of Orienteering, 8, 55–71.Google Scholar