Tracking top STEM PhDs and the profoundly gifted to age 50, Lubinski and colleagues find systematic sex differences in work preferences and life values (e.g., men prioritize long hours, status, and salary more; women prioritize people‑oriented work and life balance more). Among those most able to choose their careers, these differences plausibly channel men and women into different fields and senior roles.
— This evidence complicates bias‑only narratives about gender disparities in STEM and leadership and should inform how DEI, education, and workplace policy weigh interests versus barriers.
Steve Stewart-Williams
2025.12.03
90% relevant
The article advances the same explanatory move as the existing idea: sex differences often reflect stable preference patterns rather than solely discrimination. Steve Stewart‑Williams argues for removing barriers and allowing individual choice — directly linking scientific findings about preference‑driven gender differences to policy, which is the core claim of the matched idea.
Tyler Cowen
2025.11.29
50% relevant
Both pieces emphasize selection effects that produce observed labor‑market patterns rather than pure discrimination: the Cowen‑summarized model shows high‑ability workers self‑sort into industries where employers learn fast (a selection mechanism), which parallels the existing idea’s claim that differences in preferences and selection explain elite career sorting across fields.
Steve Stewart-Williams
2025.10.10
100% relevant
The paper 'Composing Meaningful Lives: Exceptional Women and Men at Age 50' (Gifted Child Quarterly) summarized in the article reports significant sex differences in stated work preferences across elite cohorts.
← Back to All Ideas