https://replicationindex.wordpress.com/2017/04/07/hidden-fig...
Money quote:
"Research on stereotype threat and women’s performance on math tests is one example where publication bias undermines the findings in a seminal study that produced a large literature of studies on gender differences in math performance. After correcting for publication bias, this literature shows very little evidence that stereotype threat has a notable and practically significant effect on women’s math performance (Flore & Wicherts, 2014)."
I think we need some meta-analyses here.
If an individual scientist cherry-picked interesting data the way publications cherry-pick results to publish, it would be called fraud.
https://replicationindex.wordpress.com/tag/does-stereotype-t...
3d rotation sex differences present themselves as early as infancy. https://www.google.com/search?q=infants+3d+rotation+sex+diff...
"Men, on average, can more easily juggle items in working memory. They have superior visuospatial skills: They’re better at visualizing what happens when a complicated two- or three-dimensional shape is rotated in space, at correctly determining angles from the horizontal, at tracking moving objects and at aiming projectiles."
From this article: http://mitadmissions.org/blogs/entry/picture-yourself-as-a-s...
"As it turns out, there is zero statistically significant gender difference in mental rotation ability after test-takers are asked to imagine themselves as stereotypical men for a few minutes. None. An entire standard deviation of female underperformance is negated on this condition, just as a man’s performance is slightly hindered if he instead imagines himself as a woman."
What gives?