Can Sex Differences in Science Be Tied to the Long Reach of Prenatal Hormones? Brain Organization Theory,Digit Ratio (2D/4D),and Sex Differences in Preferences and Cognition
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online March, 2011
Can Sex Differences in Science Be Tied to the Long Reach of Prenatal Hormones? Brain Organization Theory,Digit Ratio (2D/4D),and Sex Differences in Preferences and Cognition
Brain organization theory posits a cascade of physiological and behavioral changes initiated and shaped by prenatal hormones. Recently, this theory has been associated with outcomes including gendered toy preference, 2D/4D digit ratio, personality characteristics, sexual orientation, and cognitive profile (spatial, verbal, and mathematical abilities). We examine the evidence for this claim, focusing on 2D/4D and its putative role as a biomarker for organizational features that influence cognitive abilities/interests predisposing males toward mathematically and spatially intensive careers. Although massive support exists for early brain organization theory overall, there are myriad inconsistencies, alternative explanations, and outright contradictions that must be addressed while still taking the entire theory into account. Like a fractal within the larger theory, the 2D/4D hypothesis mirrors this overall support on a smaller scale while likewise suffering from inconsistencies (positive, negative, and sex-dependent correlations), alternative explanations (2D/4D related to spatial preferences rather than abilities per se), and contradictions (feminine 2D/4D in men associated with higher spatial ability). Using the debate over brain organization theory as the theoretical stage, we focus on 2D/4D evidence as an increasingly important player on this stage, a demonstrative case in point of the evidential complexities of the broader debate, and an increasingly important topic in its own right.
AlexanderG. (2006). Associations among gender-linked toy preferences, spatial ability, and digit ratio: Evidence from eye-tracking analysis. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 35, 699–709.
2.
Baron-CohenS. (2003). The essential difference: The truth about the male and female brain. London: Penguin.
3.
BerenbaumS.ResnickS. (2007). The seeds of career choices: Prenatal sex hormone effects on psychological sex differences. In CeciS.J.WilliamsW.M. (Eds.), Why aren’t more women in science? Top researchers debate the evidence (pp. 147–158). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
4.
BronfenbrennerU.CeciS.J. (1994). Nature–nurture in developmental perspective: A bioecological theory. Psychological Review, 101, 568–586.
5.
BrookesH.NeaveN.HamiltonC.FinkB. (2007). Digit ratio (2D/4D) and lateralization for basic numerical quantification. Journal of Individual Differences, 28, 55–59.
6.
BrosnanM. (2006). Digit ratio and academia: Implications for the relationship between prenatal testosterone and academia. British Journal of Psychology, 97, 455–466.
7.
BrosnanM. (2008). Digit ratio as an indicator of numeracy relative to literacy in 7-year-old British schoolchildren. British Journal of Psychology, 99, 75–85.
8.
BullR.BensonP. (2006). Digit ratio (2D/4D) and the spatial representation of magnitude. Hormones and Behavior, 50, 194–199.
9.
BurrelliJ. (2008). Thirty-three years of women in S&E faculty positions (NSF 08-308). Washington, DC: National Science Foundation. Retrieved fromhttp://www.nsf.gov/statistics/infbrief/nsf08308/
10.
CeciS.J. (1996). On intelligence: A bioecological treatise. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
11.
CeciS.J.WilliamsW.M. (Eds.). (2007). Why aren't there more women in science? Top researchers debate the evidence. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
12.
CeciS.J.WilliamsW.M. (2010a). The mathematics of sex: How biology and society conspire to limit talented women and girls. New York: Oxford University Press.
13.
CeciS.J.WilliamsW.M. (2010b). Sex differences in math-intensive fields. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19, 275–279.
14.
CeciS.J.WilliamsW.M. (in press). Understanding current causes of women's underrepresentation in science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA
15.
CeciS.J.WilliamsW.M.BarnettS.M. (2009). Women’s underrepresentation in science: Sociocultural and biological considerations. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 218–261.
16.
CoatesJ.M.GurnellM.RustichiniA. (2009). Second-to-fourth digit ratio predicts success among high-frequency financial traders. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 106, 623–628.
17.
Cohen-BendahanC.C.van de BeekC.BerenbaumS.A. (2005). Prenatal sex hormone effects on child and adult sex-typed behavior: Methods and findings. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 29, 353–384.
18.
DickensW.T.FlynnJ.R. (2001). Heritability estimates versus large environmental effects: The IQ paradox resolved. Psychological Review, 108, 346–369.
19.
Else-QuestN.HydeJ.S.LinnM.C. (2010). Cross-national patterns of gender differences in mathematics: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 103–127.
20.
FalterC.M.ArroyoM.DavisG.J. (2006). Testosterone: Activation or organization of spatial cognition?. Biological Psychology, 73, 132–140.
21.
FeingoldA. (1994). Gender differences in variability in intellectual abilities: A cross-cultural perspective. Sex Roles, 30, 81–92.
22.
FineganJ.NiccolsG.A.SitareniosG. (1992). Relations between prenatal testosterone levels and cognitive abilities at 4 years. Developmental Psychology, 28, 1075–1089.
23.
FinkB.BrookesH.NeaveN.ManningJ.T.GearyD.C. (2006). Second to fourth digit ratio and numerical competence in children. Brain and Cognition, 61, 211–218.
24.
GallagherA.M.KaufmanJ.C. (2005). Gender differences in mathematics: An integrative psychological approach. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
25.
GeschwindN.GalaburdaA.M. (1987). Cerebral lateralization: Biological mechanisms, associations, and pathology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
26.
GuoG.StearnsE. (2002). The social influences on the realization of genetic potential for intellectual development. Social Forces, 80, 881–910.
27.
HalpernD.F. (2004). A cognitive taxonomy for sex differences in cognitive abilities. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13, 135–139.
28.
HalpernD.F.BenbowC.P.GearyD.GurR.HydeJ.S.GernsbacherM.A. (2007). The science of sex differences in science and mathematics. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 8, 1–51.
29.
HönekoppJ.BartholdtL.BeierL.LiebertA. (2007). Second to fourth digit length ratio (2D/4D) and adult sex hormone levels: New data and a meta-analytic review. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 32, 313–321.
30.
HoovenC.ChabrisC.EllisonP.KosslynS. (2004). The relationship of male testosterone to components of mental rotation. Neuropsychology, 42, 782–790.
31.
HydeJ.S. (2005). The gender similarity hypothesis. American Psychologist, 60, 581–592.
32.
HydeJ.S.LindbergS.M.LinnM.C.EllisA.B.WilliamsC.C. (2008). Gender similarities characterize math performance. Science, 321, 494–495.
33.
HydeJ.S.MertzJ.E. (2009). Gender, culture, and mathematics performance. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, USA, 106, 8801–8807.
34.
Jordan-YoungR. (2010). Brain storm: The flaws in the science of sex differences. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
KondoT.ZákányJ.InnisJ.DubouleD. (1997). Of fingers, toes and penises. Nature, 390, 29–30.
37.
LohmanD.LakinJ. (2009). Consistencies in sex differences on the cognitive abilities test across countries, grades, test forms, and cohorts. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 389–407.
38.
LutchmayaS.Baron-CohenS.RaggettP. (2002). Foetal testosterone and eye contact in 12-month old infants. Infant Behavior and Development, 25, 327–335.
39.
LutchmayaS.Baron-CohenS.RaggattP.KnickmeyerR.ManningJ. (2004). 2nd to 4th digit ratios, fetal testosterone and estradiol. Early Human Development, 77, 23–28.
40.
ManningJ. (2002). Digit ratio: A pointer to fertility, behavior and health. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
41.
ManningJ.BarleyL.WaltonJ.Lewis-JonesD.TriversR.SinghD. (2000). The 2nd and 4th digit ratio, sexual dimorphism, population differences, and reproductive success: Evidence for sexually antagonistic genes?Evolution & Human Behavior, 21, 163–183.
42.
ManningJ.LeinsterS. (2001). 2nd to 4th digit ratio and age at presentation of breast cancer. Breast, 10, 355–357.
43.
MayhewT.M.L.GillamR.McDonaldJ.EblingF.J.P. (2007). Human 2D (index) and 4D (ring) digit lengths: Their variation and relationship during the menstrual cycle. Journal of Anatomy, 211, 630–638.
44.
MoffatS.HampsonE. (1996). A curvilinear relationship between testosterone cognition in humans. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 21, 323–337.
45.
MullisI.V.S.MartinM.O.FierrosE.G.GoldbergA.L.StemlerS.E. (2000, July). Gender differences in achievement: IEA’s third international mathematics and science study (TIMSS). Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College, Lynch School of Education, International Study Center. Retrieved fromhttp://timss.bc.edu/timss1995i/TIMSSPDF/t95_gender_all.pdf
NosekB.A.SmythF.L.SriramN.LindnerN.M.DevosT.AyalaA. (2009). National differences in gender-science stereotypes predict national sex differences in science and math achievement. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, USA,106, 10593–10597.
48.
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2004). Learning for tomorrow’s world: First results from PISA 2003. Paris: Author.
49.
OktenA.KalyoncuM.YarisN. (2002). The ratio of second- and fourth-digit lengths and congenital adrenal hyperplasia due to 21-hydroxylase deficiency. Early Human Development, 70, 47–54.
50.
PennerA.M. (2008). Gender differences in extreme mathematical achievement: An international perspective on biological and social factors. American Journal of Sociology, 114(Suppl.):S138–S170.
51.
PutsD.McDanielM.JordanC.BreedloveS. (2008). Spatial ability and prenatal androgens: Meta-analyses of congenital adrenal hyperplasia. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 37, 100–111.
52.
RomanoM.LeoniB.SainoN. (2006). Examination marks of male university students positively correlate with finger length ratios (2D/4D). Biological Psychology, 7, 175–182.
53.
ShalalaD.E.AgoginoA.M.BailynL.BirgeneauR.CauceA.M.DeangelesC. (2007). Beyond bias and barriers: Fulfilling the potential of women in academic science and engineering. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
54.
ShonkoffJ.P.PhillipsD. (Eds.). From neurons to neighborhoods: The science of early childhood development. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
SpelkeE.S. (2005). Sex differences in intrinsic aptitude for mathematics and science: A critical review. American Psychologist, 60, 950–958.
57.
StrandS.DearyI.J.SmithP. (2006). Sex differences in Cognitive Abilities Test scores: A UK national picture. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 463–480.
58.
VallaJ.M.GanzelB.L.YoderK.J.ChenG.M.LymanL.T.SidariA.P. (2010). More than maths and mindreading: Sex differences in empathising/systemising covariance. Autism Research, 3, 174–184.
59.
van AndersS.HampsonE. (2005). Testing the prenatal androgen hypothesis: Measuring digit ratios, sexual orientation, and spatial abilities in adults. Hormones and Behavior, 47, 92–98.
60.
VoracekM.LoiblL. (2009). Scientometric analysis and bibliography of digit ratio (2D/4D) research, 1998–2008. Psychological Reports, 104, 922–956.
61.
VuoksimaaE.KaprioJ.KremenW.S.HokkanenL.VikenR.J.Tuulio-HenrikssonA.RoseR.J. (2010). Having a male co-twin masculinizes mental rotation performance in females. Psychological Science, 21, 1069–1071.
62.
WaiJ.CacchioM.PutallazM.MakelM.C. (2010). Sex differences in the right tail of cognitive abilities: A 30-year examination. Intelligence, 38, 412–423.
63.
WainerH.SteinbergL. (1992). Sex differences in performance on the mathematics section of the Scholastic Aptitude Test: A bidirectional validity study. Harvard Educational Review, 62, 323–326.
64.
WeisS.E.FirkerA.HennigJ. (2007). Associations between the second to fourth digit ratio and career interests. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 485–493.
65.
WisniewskiA. (1998). Sexually-dimorphic patterns of cortical asymmetry, and the role for sex steroid hormones in determining cortical patterns of lateralization. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 23, 519–547.
66.
WitelsonS.NowakowskiR. (1991). Left out axons make men right: A hypothesis for the origin of handedness and functional asymmetry. Neuropsychologia, 29, 327–333.
