Discussion (Freudian E-slip: Communicating Sex Online)
Results
Discussion:
Based on the results, the hypothesis cannot be supported. In order for the hypothesis to be sustained, individuals presenting sex using stereotypical behaviors would need to show a significantly lower rate of being identified as the sex presented than those engaged in using sex typical behaviors. However, those using sex stereotypical language were identified as being of the sex presented 74% of the time. Those using typical behaviors were identified as being the presented sex 83% percent of the time, a difference of only 9%. This difference is too small to be significant given the high percentage of people being identified as the presented sex regardless of behavioral and linguistic patterns.
When broken down between false presenters and true presenters, the use of behavioral and linguistic patterns still fails to show any significant differences. Only those using sex typical behaviors to present their true sex stood out, with 92% of votes identifying their sex as being that presented. Those presenting false using typical behaviors, those presenting false using stereotypical behaviors, and those presenting true using stereotypical behaviors (75%, 73%, and 75% respectively) all fell within 2% of one another. The use of sex typical behaviors to present false did not elevate their identification rate above those using sex stereotypical behaviors. The presentation of true gender also did not elevate those presenting their true gender using sex typical behaviors. This eliminates both of those as factors individually to account for the 92% identification rate for those presenting true using typical behaviors.
When looking at the numbers the most significant percentages appear to be related to the sex presented. While 55% of people were identified correctly according to their true gender, 79% were identified by their presented gender. When looking at the difference between sex stereotypical and sex stereotypical behavior the difference was only 9%. However, the difference between those identified as being of the sex presented and those identified as being of the opposite sex from that presented is 58%. Of these votes, 20 (54%) were for individuals presenting their own sex, while 17 (46%) were presenting falsely, a difference of only 8%.
Ultimately, the hypothesis that the use of sex typical language and behaviors would prove convincing, while sex stereotypical language and behaviors created a sense of suspicion proved to be unsupported. Instead, people appeared to hold a mild but demonstrable inclination to trust people to be truthful about the sex they are professing to possess.
Several issues cast doubt on the significance of this study. With only eight confederates tested the statistical sample size available to the judges allows the possibility that individual quirks of the confederates could have outweighed the sex based behaviors being studied. Additionally, a low number of judges also leads to a risk that the individual views of individual judges to significantly impact the results. In order for these results to be conclusive, this study needs to be repeated on a much larger scale. Additionally, the use of members of the role-playing community could have introduced unintentional and unrealized bias owing to the frequency with which people within that community present a false sex.
References
Discussion:
Based on the results, the hypothesis cannot be supported. In order for the hypothesis to be sustained, individuals presenting sex using stereotypical behaviors would need to show a significantly lower rate of being identified as the sex presented than those engaged in using sex typical behaviors. However, those using sex stereotypical language were identified as being of the sex presented 74% of the time. Those using typical behaviors were identified as being the presented sex 83% percent of the time, a difference of only 9%. This difference is too small to be significant given the high percentage of people being identified as the presented sex regardless of behavioral and linguistic patterns.
When broken down between false presenters and true presenters, the use of behavioral and linguistic patterns still fails to show any significant differences. Only those using sex typical behaviors to present their true sex stood out, with 92% of votes identifying their sex as being that presented. Those presenting false using typical behaviors, those presenting false using stereotypical behaviors, and those presenting true using stereotypical behaviors (75%, 73%, and 75% respectively) all fell within 2% of one another. The use of sex typical behaviors to present false did not elevate their identification rate above those using sex stereotypical behaviors. The presentation of true gender also did not elevate those presenting their true gender using sex typical behaviors. This eliminates both of those as factors individually to account for the 92% identification rate for those presenting true using typical behaviors.
When looking at the numbers the most significant percentages appear to be related to the sex presented. While 55% of people were identified correctly according to their true gender, 79% were identified by their presented gender. When looking at the difference between sex stereotypical and sex stereotypical behavior the difference was only 9%. However, the difference between those identified as being of the sex presented and those identified as being of the opposite sex from that presented is 58%. Of these votes, 20 (54%) were for individuals presenting their own sex, while 17 (46%) were presenting falsely, a difference of only 8%.
Ultimately, the hypothesis that the use of sex typical language and behaviors would prove convincing, while sex stereotypical language and behaviors created a sense of suspicion proved to be unsupported. Instead, people appeared to hold a mild but demonstrable inclination to trust people to be truthful about the sex they are professing to possess.
Several issues cast doubt on the significance of this study. With only eight confederates tested the statistical sample size available to the judges allows the possibility that individual quirks of the confederates could have outweighed the sex based behaviors being studied. Additionally, a low number of judges also leads to a risk that the individual views of individual judges to significantly impact the results. In order for these results to be conclusive, this study needs to be repeated on a much larger scale. Additionally, the use of members of the role-playing community could have introduced unintentional and unrealized bias owing to the frequency with which people within that community present a false sex.
References