Brad DeLong posts on the SAT math scores of men and women:
In 1992, 2.8% of Asian-American women who took the Math SAT scored 750 or above.
In 1992, 2.1% of white men who took the Math SAT scored 750 or above.
In 1992, 0.4% of white women who took the Math SAT scored 750 or above.
In 1992, 0.2% of African-American men who took the Math SAT scored 750 or above.
What's missing? Why the math scores of Asian-American men of course. Doesn't that explain why Asian-American women scored better than white men? Well, I can tell you that 7.4% of Asian-American men scored 750 or above in the Math SAT.
So White men scored better than white women and Asian men scored better than Asian women. (Scored meaning here performed in higher proportions at the top end of the tail.) Black women did better than black men. So what's the trap?
I'll tell you on the flip.
If Asian women score better than white men, then the argument that men are more apt at math than women seems to require, at the very least, some qualification. You would have to say something like "Within their race, men are more likely to excel in math than women."
And there is the trap. In order to accept that such abilities differences between men and women are innate, you must then accept that they are innate among the races. That is, the differences between Asian, white and black men is due to the differences in innate aptitude among the races. Now, who is prepared to argue that the differences among the races are in part due to innate aptitude? Is it true that Asians perform better in math than whites due to innate differences, not socialization? Is it true that whites perform better than blacks due to innate differences rather than socialization and historic discrimination?
Let's put it this way, there is much more conclusive data on the question of racial differences than gender differences in this area. Now, Charles Murray has argued that there are innate differences among the races in this area, discounting socialization, testing bias, discrimination and other non-genetic factors. Is Summers prepared to argue the same?
How about the rest of you? Ready to adopt that argument? Me, I believe that innate differences are very unlikely to be the cause of this disparity. I am very distrustful of these "objective" tests and don't think they prove much of anything. I believe that the answer lies almost solely in social and cultural factors. So my argument remains the same.
