Queen's Gambit Declined: The Gender-Equality Paradox in Chess Participation Across 160 Countries

The Gender-Equality Paradox in Chess Holds Among Young Players: A Commentary on the Vishkin (2022) Study

Vishkin (2022) shows that female participation in chess is lower in more gender equal countries (the "gender-equality paradox") but that this relation is driven by the mean age of the players in a country, which makes it more of an epiphenomenon than a real paradox. Relying on the same data on competitive chess players (N = 768,480 from 91 countries) as well as on data on 15-year-old students (N = 312,571 from 64 countries), we show that the gender-equality paradox for chess holds among young players. The paradox also remains on the whole population of chess players when controlling for the age of the players at the individual rather than at the country level or when controlling for age differences across countries. Therefore, there is a gender-equality paradox in chess that is not entirely driven by a generational shift mechanism as argued by Vishkin (2022), and previous explanations for the paradox cannot be dismissed.

The Gender-Equality Paradox in Chess Participation Is Partially Explained by the Generational-Shift Account but Fully Inconsistent With Existing Alternative Accounts: A Partial Concession and Reply to Napp and Breda (2023)

Napp and Breda (2023) raised three arguments against the generational-shift account of the gender-equality paradox (GEP) in chess participation. First, using finer operationalizations of the age structure of players, they showed that it partially but not fully accounts for the GEP in chess participation. I find merit in these analyses and conclusion. Second, they argued that the country-level age structure is unrelated to the GEP in chess participation, which undermines the generational-shift account of the GEP. In contrast, I provide new analyses to show that the two are related after adjusting for the U-shaped relation between gender equality and female chess participation. Finally, they argued that previous explanations of the GEP are viable for explaining the GEP in chess participation. In contrast, I argue that the global increase in the proportion of female players is incompatible with previous explanations of the GEP, and I provide new analyses to support this.

Thinking Structurally: A Cognitive Framework for Understanding How People Attribute Inequality to Structural Causes

To make accurate causal inferences about social-group inequalities, people must consider structural causes. Structural causes are a distinct type of extrinsic cause-they are stable, interconnected societal forces that systematically advantage some social groups and disadvantage others. We propose a new cognitive framework to specify how people attribute inequality to structural causes. This framework is rooted in counterfactual theories of causal judgment and suggests that people will recognize structural factors as causal when they are perceived as "difference-making" for inequality above and beyond any intrinsic causes. Building on this foundation, our framework makes the following contributions. First, we propose specific types of evidence that support difference-making inferences about structural factors: within-group change (i.e., observing that disadvantaged groups' outcomes improve under better societal conditions) and well-matched between-group comparisons (i.e., observing that advantaged group members, who have similar baseline traits to the disadvantaged group, experience more favorable societal conditions and life outcomes). Second, we consider contextual, cognitive, and motivational barriers that may complicate the availability and acceptance of this evidence. We conclude by exploring how the framework might be applied in future research examining people's causal inferences about inequality.

Linking gender differences with gender equality: A systematic-narrative literature review of basic skills and personality

There is controversy regarding whether gender differences are smaller or larger in societies that promote gender equality highlighting the need for an integrated analysis. This review examines literature correlating, on a national level, gender differences in basic skills-mathematics, science (including attitudes and anxiety), and reading-as well as personality, to gender equality indicators. The aim is to assess the cross-national pattern of these differences when linked to measures of gender equality and explore new explanatory variables that can shed light on this linkage. The review was based on quantitative research relating country-level measures of gender differences to gender equality composite indices and specific indicators. The findings show that the mathematics gender gap from the PISA and TIMMS assessments, is not linked to composite indices and specific indicators, but gender differences are larger in gender-equal countries for reading, mathematics attitudes, and personality (Big Five, HEXACO, Basic Human Values, and Vocational Interests). Research on science and overall scores (mathematics, science, and reading considered together) is inconclusive. It is proposed that the paradox in reading results from the interrelation between basic skills and the attempt to increase girls' mathematics abilities both acting simultaneously while the paradox in mathematics attitudes might be explained by girls being less exposed to mathematics than boys. On the other hand, a more nuanced understanding of the gender equality paradox in personality is advanced, in which a gene-environment-cultural interplay accounts for the phenomenon. Challenges for future cross-national research are discussed.

No Evidence of a Gender-Equality Paradox in Gendered Names: Comment on Vishkin, Slepian, and Galinsky (2022)

This article reexamines the results of Vishkin, Slepian, and Galinsky (2022), which found larger gender differences in voiced names with higher gender equality over time and across states. I show that the employed statistical methods and calculations led the authors to draw incorrect conclusions. Using more appropriate methods, I show that there is no evidence of a systematic decrease in the proportion of voiced female names over time nor a corresponding increase for male names in Study 1 and that the gender difference has actually decreased. In Study 2, I show that, contrary to the authors’ hypothesis, both men and women have a higher proportion of voiced names in states with higher female leadership scores and that the increased difference disappears when controlling for a cultural confound—states’ proportion of foreign-born inhabitants. I conclude by discussing some overarching issues and thoughts on best practices.

The Theoretical Model of Decision-Making Behaviour Geospatial Analysis Using Data Obtained from the Games of Chess

The game of chess offers a conducive setting to explore basic cognitive processes, including decision-making. The game exercises analytical cause-and-effect thinking skills regardless of the level of play. Moreover, chess portals provide information on the chess games played and serve as a vast database. The numbers of games played thus have the potential to be analyzed comprehensively, including for purposes other than analyzing chess matches only. The primary objective of this study is to develop a methodology for using information obtained from chess games for geospatial social analysis. The assumption is that the methodology will allow for general geographical variation in personality inference in the future, relying on big data from chess databases. Future large-scale studies of the geographical differentiation of personality traits using the developed methodology may be applicable in a number of ways. The results can be used wherever cross-sectional social analyses are needed in the context of personality traits (decision-making) to better understand their geographical background. In turn, the geographical distribution of these traits is accompanied by a range of important social, educational, health, political and economic implications.