Archive for May, 2008

Career Preferences

Thursday, May 22nd, 2008

Women constitute only about 1/5 of US engineers, 1/3 of chemists, and 1/4 of computer and math professionals.

Joshua Rosenbloom surveyed hundreds of professionals in information technology, a career in which women are significantly underrepresented (”Why are there so few women in Information Technology?”; pdf file here). He also surveyed hundreds in comparable careers more evenly balanced between men and women.

The lower numbers of women in IT careers weren’t explained by work-family pressures, since computer careers made no greater time demands than those in the control group. Ability wasn’t the reason, since the women in both groups had substantial math backgrounds.

Using a standard personality-inventory test, Rosenbloom found that men and women who enjoyed the manipulation of tools or machines were more likely to choose IT careers - and it was mostly men who scored high in this area. Meanwhile, people who enjoyed working with others were less likely to choose IT careers. And, on this, women scored higher, on average.

The researchers calculated that preference accounted for about two-thirds of the gender imbalance in the IT field.

According to Susan Pinker  (in The Sexual Paradox), the countries that offer women the most financial stability and legal protections in job choice, have the greatest gender split in careers. For example, in countries with less economic opportunity, like the Philippines, Thailand, and Russia, the number of women in physics is about 30%, versus 5% in Canada, Japan, and Germany.

The freedom to say ‘no’,” by Elaine McArdle

Tune Out, Plug In

Monday, May 12th, 2008

If you take Wikipedia as a unit — every page, edit, talk page, & line of code, in every language — that represents something like the cumulation of 100 million hours of human thought (according to Clay Shirkyon & Martin Wattenberg).

Television-watching represents about two hundred billion hours, in the US alone, every year. That’s 2,000 Wikipedia projects a year. Americans spend 100 million hours every weekend just watching the ads.

Imagine that people replace only 1% of the their TV time with the production & sharing of online content. The Internet-connected population watches roughly a trillion hours of TV a year. One per cent of that is 100 Wikipedia projects per year worth of participation.

Gin, Television, and Social Surplus,” by Clay Shirkyon

Technological Progress> Globalization

Monday, May 5th, 2008

Globalization has accounted for only a small share of job creation and destruction over the past few decades. According to Pankaj Ghemawat, 90% of fixed investment around the world is domestic. Companies open plants overseas, but that’s mainly so their production facilities can be close to local markets.

According to Thomas Duesterberg, the US’s share of global manufacturing output has actually increased slightly since 1980.

The chief force reshaping manufacturing is technological change (hastened by competition with other companies, foreign and domestic). Manufacturing productivity has doubled over two decades. Employers now require fewer but more highly skilled workers. According to William Overholt, between 1994 and 2004 the Chinese shed 25 million manufacturing jobs, 10 times more than the US.

The Cognitive Age,” by David Brooks

Costly Smarts

Friday, May 2nd, 2008
http://www.unifr.ch/biol/ecology/kawecki/index.html 

Using selective breeding, researchers can make rats, bees and flies a lot better at learning. Animals that are better learners should over time come to dominate a population. Yet improved learning ability does not get selected amongst these animals in the wild. Tadeusz Kawecki may have discovered why.

Kawecki gave flies two different fruits as egg laying sites. One of these was laced with a bitter additive that could be detected only on contact. The flies were then given the same fruit but without an additive. Flies that avoided the fruit which had been bitter were deemed to have learned from their experience. Their offspring were reared and the experiment was run again.

After repeating the experiment for 30 generations, the offspring of the learned flies were compared with normal flies. Learning ability was bred into the flies, but it shortened their lives by 15%. And when flies were bread to live abnormally long lives, they learned less well than even average flies.

Critical thinking,” The Economist