Monday, February 23, 2015

Life satisfaction was uniformly high for both sexes, as was psychological well-being.

Very interesting. Looks at a cohort of some 1,500 students testing in the top 1% mathematically of students from the 1970s over time.

Some of it confirms what would be anticipated - these bright students ended up having great life outcomes. However it goes into a lot of worthwhile detail that is reveling. In addition it looks at the different career trajectories of men and women and how they were affected by the different values and goals.
This is the first study to document the career paths of mathematically talented males and females over four decades in which women had high-level career options. Although we found many similarities between men and women, their career paths did diverge. Also, on the whole, both men and women became the critical human capital needed for driving modern-day, conceptual economies. Early manifestations of exceptional mathematical talent did lead to outstanding creative accomplishment and professional leadership, but with notable sex differences. Life satisfaction was uniformly high for both sexes, as was psychological well-being. The mathematically talented were doing exceedingly well for both themselves and society.

Understanding remarkable adult accomplishments and creativity in high-potential populations requires looking beyond abilities, occupational preferences, and opportunity. The data suggest that all aspects of life competing for and structuring the use of time need to be assessed. Cutting-edge advances, high-powered careers, and important leadership roles demand substantial time commitment and intense engagement. And this is where the males and females in our samples diverged in aggregate. Compared with mathematically gifted women, mathematically gifted men expressed stronger preferences for developing high-impact careers and were willing to invest more time in their careers. Conversely, the women expressed stronger preferences for and devoted more time to advancing family and community, compared with the men. Both groups advanced society, though in varying ways, traveling different paths to their current highly productive and satisfying lives.
It should be obvious but it runs counter to so many of the egalitarian arguments today: "Life satisfaction was uniformly high for both sexes, as was psychological well-being." In other words, one size does not fit all. We should be mindful of bias and discrimination but we should not risk an equal moral calamity of forcing everyone towards the same outcomes despite their personal preferences.

No comments:

Post a Comment