How about some SCIENCE in Social Science > G&WS?

Question

This place is so damned funny since, really, there ain't no gender here except the gender indicated by an odd little picture.

Hypothesis: the use of gender specific avatars significantly influences peoples reactions to the posts made by the avatar's owner.

Is this too bloody obvious? Is this just too ridiculous?

I've been thinking about it and it wouldn't be too difficult to come up with a protocol. Perhaps take several dozens of statements made here (sans avatar and Id) and have people rate them on a Likert scale (strongly disagree ... strongly agree). I'll bet that not knowing the gender of the poster will make it difficult for some people to determine if they agree or disagree and other people will change from "agree" to "disagree" based on gender.

Oh, certainly the idea that people are influenced by avatars is not original. I'm just very amused by the idea that we all think we "know" something about someone because we see their little picture.

Certainly there are some serious logistical issues. Posts would have to be selected carefully so that obvious identifying traits are not included.

For now, take it as a thought experiment: would people's opinions change AT ALL if there no identifying information associated with posts?

Thank you all so much for your thoughtful responses. I'd love to publicly reply to you all here but would rather avoid the dreaded "chat".

Interesting links teeleecee posted looking at the question sideways, sorta - more hypothesis generation.

Answer 1

Hypothesis: the use of gender specific avatars significantly influences peoples reactions to the posts made by the avatar's owner. - Strongly Agree.

As for science in social science - what a great idea.

Answer 2

When I first started here, I had the generic avatar, which was a smiley face then. When I changed it, the effect was almost immediate, no joke. I started getting a lot more thumbs down, and more people would directly criticize the content of my posts, which almost never happened before. And I wasn't even in this section then, I hung out in politics all the time. It was pretty weird.

Not very scientific, but there it is.

Answer 3

Perhaps this would be true if you conducted this experiment outside of G & WS. But in here, everyone pretty much knows everyone else, and since there are such extremes found in this forum, I think it would be easy to tell not only the gender of the person asking the question but also the identity, as well. In this forum, unless you're a "regular", your avatar is NOT the first clue to deciding if your identity is male or female. We have trolls here who often have avatars that are not representative of their gender.

Strange, but true.

I love social science. (Majoring in psychology). I've done a few "little" experiments here of my own. I'm not going to say what, exactly, because that would make it harder to repeat again in the future...but if you email me, I'd be happy to discuss it with you!

Answer 4

Well, that is interesting. What I find more interesting is that even though most men and women who visit this site abuse each other with words through this site...they still show up here every day to wallow in negativity. At first I was intrigued at the hatefullness and surpised by such sexist viewpoints. Now I'm kinda just over it; it's just an internet forum with absolutely no real value. What some idgit says on here cannot touch me.

Answer 5

Bear in mind, in yahoo's classificatory scheme, apparently "Dream Interpretation" is also "science".

An interesting proposal. I believe however that in this section, people judge more on where the post sits vis-a-vis feminism. For example, when someone with a female avatar posts criticism of feminism, they are often suspected (and probably often rightly) of being a male troll in disguise. And when someone with a male avatar or who identifies themselves as male expresses views sympathetic with feminism, they are often labeled "feminized".

However, I do not doubt that there would be variances in other sections, e.g. in whether answers to math, science, or automotive questions are deemed more likely to be accurate if the avatar is male, because of assumptions about male and female competency.

Answer 6

Ive always used the default avatar for this reason. The responses can be amusing sometimes. Of course your observation is 100% correct. In fact, I 'strongly agree'. The mechanism by which this works is of course, subconscious, and Wendy knows this too. Her personal experience underscores how much we are motivated by CUES not even in our conscious awareness.

edit:
This 'section' isn't taken seriously at all much of the time. You wouldn't expect to see so many dopey questions/answers in the sociology, anthropology, psychology or history sections, now would you? Women's Studies is an area of scholarly investigation, yet our regulars include:

- sex perverts (with a 'thing' for feces, urine, etc)
- crossdressers in search of fashion advice
- misognyists venting and spewing hatred
- trolls engaging in disruptive cyber 'vandalism' on the site

And more. Same old, same old. How much crap there is to plod through in search of genuine questions appropriate to the forum.

In short, there is a distinct absence of science in G&WS because people haven't bothered to educate themselves, and clearly don't take the subject matter seriously to begin with. It's unfortunate - and frustrating sometimes.

Answer 7

There are many studies on this, not a very original idea. Google psychology and avatars.

Answer 8

Sounds like an excellent idea.

Answer 9

Personally, I don't like anything about avatars...

Answer 10

I know that jonmcn49 would certainly appreciate that plan. We could use the scientific method around here on occasion.