Gender, Rationality, and Base-Rate Explanations for Increasing Trends

Abstract

Two experiments examined the effects of gender and rational thinking style on the relative weight accorded base-rate and non-base-rate explanations for increasingly positive and negative trends depicted with frequency data. Experiment 1 revealed men judged base-rate explanations to be more important than non-base-rate explanations for both positive and negative trends, but women showed the same proclivity only for negative trends. High rationals judged non-base-rate explanations for negative trends as less important than did low rationals. When Experiment 2 participants spontaneously generated explanations for the trends, proportionally more high rationals than low rationals adduced base-rate explanations for negative trends, but no rationality differences emerged for positive trends. No gender differences were significant. Results are discussed in terms of gender differences in the utilization of available base-rate cues, and highly rational individuals’ propensity to use based-rate data to explain away threatening trends to buffer themselves from anxiety and depression.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 9 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.