Contribution
Are natural scientists more masculine than humanists? The association patterns between 2D:4D ratio and field of study
Kainz, Sarah; Weitzer, Jakob; Zingale, Stefania; Köllner, Johanna; Albrecht, Cornelia; Gaidora, Angelika; Rudorfer, Marie-Theres; Nürnberger, Anna; Kirchengast, Sylvia
Anthropologischer Anzeiger Volume 75 No. 3 (2018), p. 193 - 200
publié: Aug 27, 2018
publication en ligne: Jun 11, 2018
manuscrit accepté: May 14, 2018
révision final du manuscrit reçu: May 5, 2018
révision du manuscrit demandée: Mar 26, 2018
manuscrit reçu: Nov 15, 2017
DOI: 10.1127/anthranz/2018/0831
ArtNo. ESP140007503002, Prix: 29.00 €
Abstract
Natural sciences are still considered as typical male fields, while humanities are interpreted as typical female topics. Economic, social but also biological factors are discussed to influence the choice of study field. In the present study, the impact of prenatal sex hormone exposure – estimated by 2D:4D ratio – on the choice of study field was analyzed. Two hundred Viennese students between the ages 18 and 28 years were enrolled. Lengths of the index finger and the ring finger were measured directly from the hand of the participants. 2D:4D ratios were calculated. Male and female students differed significantly in 2D:4D ratio. As expected, female students showed significantly higher 2D:4D ratios than their male counterparts (p < 0.001). Male scientists and male humanists differed significantly in 2D:4D ratio. The 2D:4D of male humanists was significantly higher than that of scientists (p = 0.037). Female scientists and female humanists however, did not differ significantly in 2D:4D ratio. Both showed a typical female 2D:4D ratio. This was also true of male humanists. Consequently low prenatal androgen exposure may be associated with the choice of humanities among male students.
Mots-clefs
gender gap • natural sciences • humanities • 2D:4D ratio