Commenter questions the size and source of the effect
2Sep 21 9:24 PM · 2d ago · 1 comment · 1 source · development 2 of 4
A Reddit comment analyzing the paper's figures argues the reported effect size is small (Cohen's d=0.4, roughly 51% vs 59%) and that the apparent sex difference may stem from females looking less at objects overall rather than a stronger inherent preference for faces.
cam.ac.uk
“Effect size is d =0.4 (small, 51% v 59%). ... the effect is driven by females spending less time overall looking at objects rather than them spending more time looking at faces or males spending more time on objects over faces.”
Effect size is d =0.4 (small, 51% v 59%). The follow-up ( Fig 4B: Looking time by sex and stimulus ) suggests that the effect is driven by females spending less time overall looking at objects rather than them spending more time looking at faces or males spending more time on objects over faces.
Simon Baron-Cohen Director, Autism Research Centre, University of CambridgeUniversity of Cambridge Research institution