Is a gender better at driving? (to be extended to other skills / tasks)

#1
We had a discussion about the presence or absence of any superiority of one gender over the other in different tasks. I believe genders are extremely different, and while one is better at something, the other is better at another thing. They are not by any means equal or similar, IMO.

This particular post deals with my idea about driving. Lazar brought about the notion of insurance, as an evidence for women being better at driving (or at least women not worse than men). I forgot to first define my meaning of better. What is better driving?

A better driving means to me to operate the vehicle more efficiently, with less effort. The number of accidents and the insurance rates do not reflect driving skills. People do not need to be better in order to have fewer accidents. They just need to be over cautious, scared, and always driving at a straight line, in order to have zero accidents. Also another way to have fewer accidents is "not to drive"... So a statistics that this or that gender has fewer accidents is not relevant to a better driving skills.

Another point that should be noted is different countries we reside in. I don't know, maybe in Australia, women are different. But in my country, women always drive much slower than men and are always road hogs. They almost never look at the side or rear mirrors, never look at their mirror's blind spot, never bother to turn they head when merging into a new traffic... I see this for numerous times, every time I drive for at least 1 hour. On the other hand, almost no men drive without looking at their mirrors etc... But since they always drive very slow, they always are safe and their car accidents are always minor. (but they make men crazy by being road hogs, which this causes other accidents!)... This very today, I was being killed in the highway by a young lady who suddenly turned the wheel on me, to pass a stopped car; she did not bother to first look at the side mirror and brake a little... In my whole life, I have had a couple of such experiences where men were behind the wheel. About 99% of cases, it was a lady who wanted to kill me!

So if someone defines a good driving as driving very slowly and very very cautiously, then I agree that women are better drivers. I also agree that 3-year-old children driving plastic cars (no-battery), are even better drivers! Studies like this one seem to define a good driver as a robot that does all the rules one by one, slowly, and in a memorized sequence! In this case, I totally agree women are at best such robots which slowly and cautiously move after a long delay of thinking. This driving style only and only belongs to three groups: women, elderly, and people making phone calls (or do other stuff with their partners). But usually, they are my road nightmares who never bother to even look at their mirrors before changing lanes. The one thing they have learned pretty well is the place of the horn!

But if you define driving as a smooth art of operating a delicate 3D object in a dangerous, dynamic, and rapidly ever changing 3D maze, as fast as possible (eg, Formula 1), and without getting killed or killing others, well then there remains nothing to argue about.
 

Englund

TS Contributor
#2
One possible solution to your questions is simply to look amongst all drivers, which gender has driven the most on average? Men or women? The more you practice the better you get. As cognitive skills doesn't differ between genders to a great degree the learning curve should be somewhat similar. Therefore the gender that on average practice the most should on average also be the better gender at this particular skill.

This way of approaching the problem isn't bullet proof but I think it's a start. Men, on average, are better at spatial reasoning which should be beneficial on the road. Women on the other hand are less frequent risk takers which could inhibit learning; taking risks and pushing oneself to the (or at least closer to) edge should not be non-beneficial for enhancing driving skills, at least as long as one does not get injured.

I am not sure this answers your question as it is possible that your real question may be: Which gender would on average be more skilled at driving a car when all relevant confounders are controlled for? I.e which gender would on average be better at driving if they practiced the exact same way and exactly as much as the other gender?
 

Englund

TS Contributor
#3
And I'm sorry but I don't give much for your anecdotal evidence as you probably are a victim of severe confirmation bias and some other cognitive delusions/effects.
 
#4
Although fewer women drive, there are women who have the experience of driving as long as men, or even more than men. It is quite possible to study men and women with equal driving experience levels at driving simulation games. Plus, you see a woman with 10 years of experience, and compare her with a man with 2 years of experience. Now, monitor 100 women with 10 years of experience and compare them with 100 men with 2 years of experience. My bet is on men. Plus, I have many female colleagues and friends who have much more experience than my male friends do. And the number of my female colleagues is 10 times the number of males. Still most of my male friends are good drivers, while females are not (except by one who is now in Sweden).

And I'm sorry but I don't give much for your anecdotal evidence as you probably are a victim of severe confirmation bias and some other cognitive delusions/effects.
And I am sorry but I don't give much for your words as you probably are a victim of severe confirmation bias and some other cognitive delusions/effects.
 

Englund

TS Contributor
#5
I could easily come up with as much anecdotal evidence that says the exact opposite of what your's does. My point is that anecdotes aren't worth that much.
And I am sorry but I don't give much for your words as you probably are a victim of severe confirmation bias and some other cognitive delusions/effects.
Care to elaborate? I don't even think I said anything at all that could be subject to confirmation bias.
 
#6
Pease note that there is no bias or delusion that you know but I don't know (and thus am a victim of). Plus, the word "delusion" is a psychiatric diagnosis and is not the best choice to use in a friendly chat, especially when we do not know how to diagnose delusion.

Lol every single thought can be subjected to confirmation bias! When you thought you know something that I am a victim of, you were being subjected to confirmation bias. This very thought of mine was affected by confirmation bias as well!
:)

It is not that I don't know that anecdote is worth for sh*t! I will show you my arguments with other people that confirm I know this. However, this thread is more for writing my ideas (fueled by the last discussion), rather than attempting to prove them.
 

Englund

TS Contributor
#7
No problemo, but it is obvious. If you knew what you told me, then you would know what I told you.
In that you are correct. I know what your words meant, but the complete sentence didn't make sense. "Was the chocolate you had a minute ago any good?" makes sense for a person who just had chocolate, but not otherwise.
Plus, the word "delusion" is a psychiatric diagnosis and is not the best choice to use in a friendly chat, especially when we do not know how to diagnose delusion.
Maybe "delusion" was a bad choice of word then. Sorry for that! In my defense the Swedish word for illusion (villfarelse) is translated to English both as delusion, illusion and fallacy; with fallacy probably being the best word in English, or maybe bias is even better.
So when I speak, I have already thought of such biases too. and even if there is some bias in my thought, it is not something you can catch and I have not already.
I doubt that that's always the case. We are all subject to cognitive fallacies on a daily basis. With that attitude, why even bother talking to others if you already know you haven't made a mistake?
 
#8
Oh I have deleted my comments, just to see them resurrected! Too late :(

Ha thanks for clarifying the word "delusion". :)

Well, you have seen a condensed version of my comment (it was more extensive originally :D). In the more extensive version, I had said that I have thought of such biases, and if there is some bias, it will not be "severe" bias.

Well I don't have that attitude. I did not say I am free of bias. I said there is not a bias that you are aware of and I am a victim of... It was a response to your "tone" rather than to your word. I was meaning that you think and imply by your use of words ("victim of severe bias", "cognitive delusion") that you are better than me? Well you are not!

I personally don't have attitudes towards people that I hold dear, and tell them "I miss you" when they become pilots. When I feel attacked, my amygdalae activate in an instance! So sorry for my counter attack. :) :eek: Now I see that translation bias was a major culprit in misunderstanding.
 

hlsmith

Less is more. Stay pure. Stay poor.
#9
I have not read the above posts, but Vic I would imagine that even given your conclusions are can be substantiated, they may not be generalizable beyond your local sphere.