Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
United Kingdom Education Programming Games

In UK Study, Girls Best Boys At Making Computer Games 312

New submitter Esteanil writes Researchers in the University of Sussex's Informatics department asked pupils at a secondary school to design and program their own computer game using a new visual programming language. The young people, aged 12-13, spent eight weeks developing their own 3D role-playing games. The girls in the classroom wrote more complex programs in their games than the boys and also learnt more about coding. The girls used seven different triggers – almost twice as many as the boys – and were much more successful at creating complex scripts with two or more parts and conditional clauses. Boys nearly always chose to trigger their scripts on when a character says something, which is the first and easiest trigger to learn.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

In UK Study, Girls Best Boys At Making Computer Games

Comments Filter:
  • by Karmashock ( 2415832 ) on Saturday November 29, 2014 @04:25AM (#48483747)

    ... Oh wait.

    • I'm kind of wondering if this story might not necessarily even be applicable to game making. From TFA:

      “Given that girls’ attainment in literacy is higher than boys across all stages of the primary and secondary school curriculum, it may be that explicitly tying programming to an activity that they tend to do well in leads to a commensurate gain in their programming skills," said Dr Good.

      “In other words, if girls’ stories are typically more complex and well developed, then when creating stories in games, their stories will also require more sophisticated programs in order for their games to work.”

      I actually remember that from grade school, the girls were usually more literate and more patient for reading/story time than the boys were. The boys were more looking forward to recess/mischief/etc at those times. Especially the mischief part for me.

      • This gap is only present temporarily. Boys catch up quickly in this area.

        Do we really want to do Male authors VS Female authors match up? Men are at least as good as women at writing. Note... MEN and WOMEN. Girls are probably better then boys. But it doesn't last.

        • Do we really want to do Male authors VS Female authors match up?

          No [nhne.com].

      • by Notabadguy ( 961343 ) on Saturday November 29, 2014 @08:43AM (#48484379)

        In 180ish comments, I didn't see anyone chuckle at "the girls...learnt more about coding."

        So to summarize:

        -30 kiddies make up the sample set.
        -No controls on the experiment.
        -No prevention on collusion.
        -12 year old girls in the sample set develop more complex games than 12 year old boys in the sample set.
        -Arbitrary measure of complexity for measure.
        -12 year old literacy in the summary.

        Yep, this is a scientific study that I'll be referencing.

        • by Kvathe ( 3869749 )
          The sample set was 55 kids, but nowhere in the study does it support the statement that girls learned more about coding. The improvement between the pre- and post-tests was roughly equal for boys and girls.
        • So to summarize:

          -30 kiddies make up the sample set.
          -No controls on the experiment.
          -No prevention on collusion.
          -12 year old girls in the sample set develop more complex games than 12 year old boys in the sample set.
          -Arbitrary measure of complexity for measure.
          -12 year old literacy in the summary.

          You forgot:

          - Had the "study" somehow concluded that boys were better it would have never seen the light of day, rendering all such studies meaningless due to selection bias.

    • Which is why girls dominate game making... Oh wait.

      Well, gaming is now 50:50, I'm sure game development will follow.

      • by JanneM ( 7445 )

        Also, when you look at more interesting and original, less copy-pasty games, female developers and designers seem to be more common than in the industry overall.

        • citation? The only female writers in games I can name off the top of my head... were the writers of the games: King's Quest and the Longest Journey.

          King's quest first off was not well written. It was fun but the stories were predictable and very derivative.

          The Longest Journey was good but you have to remember it was competing in the Adventure Game category which are very much about their stories.

          Now... now is the longest journey the BEST adventure game ever? It is all a matter of opinion, but I'd point at t

          • by narcc ( 412956 ) on Saturday November 29, 2014 @11:55AM (#48485343) Journal

            Wrong. Women and men gravitate to certain career paths. Women choose NOT to sit for hours in front of computers learning to code.

            Anecdote: When I introduced RPG Maker in an after-school program at the urging of one boy, more girls than boys asked if they could also participate. The girls also stuck with it longer than every boy, save the original. (The girls averaged about three weeks vs the boys four days, not counting the first boy, who spent 4 months on his creation.)

            Children, regardless of gender, enjoy creative activities. Moving on...

            The only female writers in games I can name off the top of my head

            You'd be amazed at how many games were written and designed by women, even in the old days. Sticking with just well-known titles: River Raid (Carol Shaw), Centipede (Dona Bailey, later driven from the industry by male co-workers), Archon (Anne Westfall), [bunch of Sierra games] (Jane Jensen), Laser Surgeon [okay, not as well known, but the name you'll recognize] (Brenda Laurel), Plundered Hearts, Zork Zero (Amy Briggs), I could go on all day, it seems.

            That doesn't even begin to touch on the countless influential women in game design, who bring talents aside from programming to the table like Lucy Bradshaw, Robin Hunicke [gamasutra.com] (who you dismissed without naming earlier), Brenda Brathwaite, Alyssa Finley, Linda Currie ... like the earlier list, this just doesn't end.

            The point of all this? That you're not aware of many famous women in games does not mean that there aren't many famous women in games.

            Do you know what keeps women out of game development? Attitudes like yours, as illustrated by the aforementioned Dona Bailey.

            And before you give me some presto intellectual argument about how they're just conditioned to not want to do these things... Wrong. Women and men gravitate to certain career paths. Women choose NOT to sit for hours in front of computers learning to code.

            Back in the early 80's something like 40% of CS graduates were women. Why do you think they seem to have collectively chosen to avoid it and related fields? It clearly wasn't a problem earlier, after all.

            I think that you know why. You just don't like the answer.

            • Centipede (Dona Bailey, later driven from the industry by male co-workers)

              Really? That's not what she said. She specifically said she was NOT intimidated out of the industry.

              BTW, why didn't you mention one of the most well-known women in gaming: Roberta Williams?

              Back in the early 80's something like 40% of CS graduates were women. Why do you think they seem to have collectively chosen to avoid it and related fields? It clearly wasn't a problem earlier, after all.

              You're looking at it backwards. In the l

      • It isn't actually unless you want to count facebook games which is the only way you're going to get numbers like that.

        And as to girls being developers... sure... just like they're 50 percent of programmers, right?... Oh wait.

      • If you look at any of those studies, they always involve mobile gaming, FB games, and Pop Cap games. Hardly the "core gamer" section that makes majority of the money.
    • Nothing more than the same rehashed formulas over and over. Nothing much has changed, the same old tired FPS. Or adventure quests which are FPS with elves. No creativity or imagination. Sort of like fast food or the mega beer brewers or the soda manufacturers. The same old formula.

  • by popo ( 107611 ) on Saturday November 29, 2014 @04:34AM (#48483761) Homepage

    "Complex stories"? "Two or more parts or conditional clauses"? Two???

    "Trigger their scripts on when a character says something?"

    I am a game developer. I have no idea what they are talking about.

    More fundamentally: is "complexity" good?

    • by Anonymous Coward

      I can't understand your post at all and I'm a physics student creating software for a bank and am quite fluent when it comes to problems of simulation and such, even though I've never created more complex games.

      Have you tried reading the study? No one said complexity is better, just that girls are able to create more complex games at that age.

      • by popo ( 107611 )

        > "Just that girls are able to create more complex games"

        Actually, that's nice that you added your own personal take-away, but that's not what the study showed. You are turning preference into capacity.

        It's also not how the study is described here on Slashdot:

        "I'm a UK Study, Girls Best Boys at Making Computer Games"

        That is very different from "just" saying anything about complexity.

        And why is performance at a particular age relevant anyway? Is this a study of childhood developmental capacity? Because

      • by Kvathe ( 3869749 )

        I actually was able to read the study through my university. The story claims that girls are better at making games because they use more triggers than boys--except the other 95% of the time when they use the same triggers, at close to the same frequency as the boys. Of the 108 scripts produced by girls, five of them used triggers that boys did not use, with one extra trigger used three times and the other two used once each. The majority of girls also used the 'when someone says a line' trigger, not just b

    • by Maxo-Texas ( 864189 ) on Saturday November 29, 2014 @05:14AM (#48483857)

      I'm guessing they had things like...

      Trigger
      Character says "Xxxxx".
      Character attacks.
      Character is damaged.
      Character places objects on table.
      Character gives objects to NPC.
      Character is hungry.
      Character is wielding X when close to a spot.

      For some reason, the boys only used the 1st trigger and the result was a stereotypical "prompt/respond" roleplaying game.

      Using the other triggers would provide a less stereotypical experience.

      Not sure why all the girls did well and all the boys did badly. That seems off.

      Perhaps there was a particular girl who "got it" and showed the other girls how to use the other triggers or shared code and made it easier for them to figure it out. Perhaps the teacher prompted the girls in some way.

      In any case, the girls did better in this case-- perhaps some will turn out to be major names and the experience has to bolster their confidence.

      • > Not sure why all the girls did well and all the boys did badly. That seems off.
        If the girls study more, on average, then when the matter of study is a videogame, they will emerge with a better one.

        Now, for stuff who requires actual genius like 2d arcade style gameplay (it requires genius because most kind of dynamics have already been explored and the play experience has no guidelines, while in 3d one can use realism as a primary guideline) then both genders would have probably failed and we would have

      • Yeah I was wondering if the kids were allowed to share and over what timespan the project ran. If there was downtime between sessions, the girls are more likely to collaborate and text and share good stuff. The boys are more likely to guard a good secret, because they want to 'win'.

        A group of girls is always going to be less competitive with each other than a group of boys, unless, of course, they are competing for boys...

      • You know, something else just occurred to me. This was an already existing computer class, that I bet is an elective course.

        In that case, girls that choose to enter a more advanced computer class are more likely to be hotshots than the more common boys. Skewed sample?

        • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) *

          This was a UK school so chances are the class was mandatory. Children don't get to choose what they study until the last two years of school in most cases.

          More over, girls do better than boys in general at school. These results are not that surprising.

      • by s.petry ( 762400 )

        As GP stated, "better" is a relative term and without context I can't provide an opinion on who's game I would like better. Complexity on it's own is not a measure. I have a few points of disagreement with your statements.

        For some reason, the boys only used the 1st trigger and the result was a stereotypical "prompt/respond" roleplaying game.

        Stereotypical RPG isn't bad on it's own. What experience did the kids have with RPGs and were they told to design like their favorite?

        Using the other triggers would provide a less stereotypical experience.

        It could also make for a boring game. Context is critical, because puzzles are not the same as nagging dialogue (and we have all seen both).

        Not sure why all the girls did well and all the boys did badly. That seems off.

        The whole ar

      • In any case, the girls did better in this case

        In what sense? Whether X is better than Y is subjective. Complexity is subjective. Those requirements are arbitrary.

        How can people take such subjective studies seriously (at least assuming it's anything like the Slashdot title and summary say).

    • by AHuxley ( 892839 )
      Hypercard like? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
    • by x0ra ( 1249540 )
      Just reminded me of this... http://www.tickld.com/x/proof-... [tickld.com]
    • "Complex stories"? "Two or more parts or conditional clauses"? Two???

      "Trigger their scripts on when a character says something?"

      I am a game developer. I have no idea what they are talking about.

      Ah. So how's Ubisoft treating you?

  • Interesting result.

    It will be interesting to see if any of the girls in the class go on to be the next Caitlin Colgrove, Adele Goldberg or Barbara Liskov.

    However, I'd expect more of a bell curve in both genders with the average for girls being better than the average for boys. If the girls uniformly did better and the boys uniformly did worse, that sounds strange.

    • by JanneM ( 7445 )

      I can't get to the paper, but it doesn't actually say anywhere that the girls were uniformly better. All subjects improved their understanding of computation, but the girls as a group did significantly better.

  • by Squapper ( 787068 ) on Saturday November 29, 2014 @04:36AM (#48483771)
    ...while the boys are focused on learning how to be seen and how to claim territory and space. Are we really surprised when the tables are turned later?
  • by Hognoxious ( 631665 ) on Saturday November 29, 2014 @04:57AM (#48483827) Homepage Journal

    How about key grips & focus pullers?

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Saturday November 29, 2014 @05:02AM (#48483845)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      I've been 12. From experience, no, girls are not more developed at that age. That's the age where girls and boys take off in different directions. Girls imitate more, which makes them look more developed (and more well behaved), because doing your own stuff isn't quite as impressive when you can hardly do anything yet. They're just different, not further along the development axis.

  • by SeaFox ( 739806 ) on Saturday November 29, 2014 @05:04AM (#48483847)

    I like how it's been less than 10 days and already the editors did not think to link to the Barbie: Computer Engineer [slashdot.org] story, where she only thinks up a design and then has to go to the boys to get the coding done.

    Ironic the fictional land of Barbie, with a supposedly positive message for girls about careers in tech, is more misogynistic than the reality it seeks to change.

    • by TheReaperD ( 937405 ) on Saturday November 29, 2014 @06:08AM (#48483997)

      Ironic the fictional land of Barbie, with a supposedly positive message for girls about careers in tech, is more misogynistic than the reality it seeks to change.

      I'm pessimistic enough to believe that it didn't seek to change anything. I'm male so I'm not really an expert on Barbie but, everything I have ever seen and heard about "her" indicates that she's an unrealistic rich girl (or gold digger) that is obsessed about her body and possessing things and that the only thing she really encourages young girls to be is trophy wives with maybe an interesting side job for fun. I've never heard of anything that indicates that Mattel has ever truly marketed Barbie as a positive role model for girls to be body positive and self-determining of their own futures. They just give in when popular news pays a little more attention to what Barbie really sells than they are comfortable with because too much focus might actually bring about change.

      Since I stuck my neck into this issue I just want to state, for the record, that women and men should have the same opportunities to become whatever they want to be, whether that be house(wife|husband), coder, combat infantry, CEO or President or anything else.

  • My experience is that girls are more commonly better programmers than boys (I've worked with programming for 30+ years). The solutions are more thorough and well-thought in general, and they tend to be better at teamwork, and better at seeking help when they are stuck (instead of being stuck for four weeks until someone pokes them about it).

    I've always been sad there are so few girls in programming, since they would do an excellent job.

    And, for that matter, engineering in general.

    That said, not sure what th

    • Same amount of experience and I've found that there are a few good ones in both sexes and the rest are dreck. Ratios about the same.
  • That girls end up better at game design won't surprise me. They typically have a better understanding of human psychology and I believe that as tools become better, it will become more important than technical skills. 1
    But this study say nothing about what will happen when these kids reach adulthood, or even high school. Girls start puberty about 1 year earlier than boys, with all the associated physical and mental changes. At 12-13, the difference in maturity between boys and girls is huge. Boys start to c

    • by x0ra ( 1249540 ) on Saturday November 29, 2014 @06:15AM (#48484023)
      Boys' games are easy: If someone/something attack, shoot; if someone/something doesn't attack, still shoot. If you encounter a difficulty, blow it up. Boys are more keen to lean toward Scott Adams quote "There are very few personal problems that cannot be solved through a suitable application of high explosives".
    • I started puberty earlier than my schoolmates but I still didn't develop socially as rapidly as the girls, probably because boys don't have to deal with creepers following them home from school asking them inappropriate questions as often and so on. I don't think it has as much to do with the hormones as with the way they're treated.

  • More Information (Score:5, Informative)

    by Kvathe ( 3869749 ) on Saturday November 29, 2014 @07:36AM (#48484205)

    Fortunately my university provides me with access to the original study, so for those who are interested:

    The study was performed on three elementary school classes with a total of 55 students (29 girls, 26 boys). Despite the small sample size, they did perform a statistical analysis and found the results to be significant (p < 0.001), the results being that girls on average scored higher on a computational thinking test before and after the course. The differences in improvement between genders was not significant and it is worth noting that despite having lower average scores before and after the course, the range of scores for boys in post-testing extended higher and lower than those of girls. I wish I could link the boxplot for the data but I'm not sure that's legal.

    It is also important to note that the study was not performed in order to measure the difference between boys and girls in programming, but to measure the benefits of using their special programming software over an eight-week course. The software itself is indeed very visual, and the 'programming' is done by dragging around boxes with partial statements and filling in the blanks with object boxes. The software then constructs a text interpretation of the code in a lower box, which is what the computational thinking problems related to.

  • by skovnymfe ( 1671822 ) on Saturday November 29, 2014 @07:53AM (#48484255)
    School forces children to do an activity. Boys cheapskate the task, girls dive into it. What's new here? That's how it was when I went to school.
  • - Calling Flip [flipproject.org.uk] a "programming language" is quite a stretch. It is not. That's the whole point in it, in fact.

    - The metric to determine how good a game is is not how "complex" it is, but how much fun it is.

  • Of Course they are (Score:4, Insightful)

    by wisnoskij ( 1206448 ) on Saturday November 29, 2014 @09:31AM (#48484553) Homepage
    Girls excel at everything in school. Since the feminisation of the school system their is not a single subject that boys do not lag behind in. It is impossible to compete when the entire system is against you.
    • Girls excel at everything in school. Since the feminisation of the school system their is not a single subject that boys do not lag behind in.

      Leik speeling or grammatical?

    • Girls excel at everything in school. Since the feminisation of the school system their is not a single subject that boys do not lag behind in. It is impossible to compete when the entire system is against you.

      Try making the critique in a way which doesn't put half of everybody down. What specifically would have been a better system for you and why?

      The system isn't "against you." It just evolved not understanding you. So make it better.

  • by tomhath ( 637240 ) on Saturday November 29, 2014 @09:35AM (#48484563)
    Maybe this is the future of programming; drag blocks and symbols around the screen so they snap together into a working program. It doesn't surprise me though, visual WYSIWYG editors like Dreamweaver aren't really programming anyway.
  • Give me a break (Score:4, Insightful)

    by cfalcon ( 779563 ) on Saturday November 29, 2014 @05:28PM (#48487543)

    If the study found the opposite:

    1)- Would it make slashdot?
    2)- Would there be some social reason given?

    So seriously, why? Choosing 12 years old for the study- instead of 9, say, when boys and girls are basically the same thing- is a very odd choice, given the later development of boys. Choosing 15 would also give very different results. Generalizing the one point of human development when girls are ahead of boys is very odd, but why doesn't the article spend a million words saying that we need to help the boys get on the same level as the girls?

    Almost every sex article- and CERTAINLY every gender one- is so political it's fucking insane.

    There was an anecdote in a recentish book (sorry, blanking on the book) where a teacher noticed that the girls were doing better in language, and the boys in math. This bothered her- after all, boys shouldn't do better in math. Bothered her a lot, because, after all, she "knew" that boys and girls have similar math skills. Her solution was to segregate the boys and the girls math studies, based on the assumption that the girls were being intimidated by the boys, who held up their hands faster, etc. Eventually after doing this, the scores evened out or something, and she was happy that the world was exactly as she thought it was (after a lot of manipulation on her part). But, of course...
    1)- Were the classes taught the same? If you care enough to teach math twice because the girls being behind enrages you, you are unlikely to be the most impartial teacher, right?
    2)- If the girls being ahead in language and the boys being ahead in math enrages you because the boys are ahead, what happened when they split the language classes? They didn't do this part, of course- it was fine that the boys were behind in language. Not even the author relaying the ancedote seemed to consider this point.
    3)- If there really is a better way to teach girls, then it stands to reason that there's a better way to teach boys. There's some gender zealots searching for the first, but shouldn't we be all about the second?

    Anyway, back on topic, the program in question has nothing to do with anything, or real games. This study was likely designed from the start to show this, or spun that way for attention, and the metric for what "better" is seems entirely related to the "types of triggers" used. But I'm sure the rest of slashdot will poke holes in that obvious attention grab metric, and likely point out some more details with the NWN engine.

    What would be interesting would be to take the scripted things and have them rated blindly by another group of 12-13 year olds.

    Anyway, gender politics are so fucking all over the internet, and every side so zealous, that it's ludicrous to see slashdot dip their toe in it. I come here to read about tech, not read about some loopy gender warrior finding a way to spin their point of view (which is one of: sex A is worse at X, and that's society's fault, OR, sex A is worse at X, and that's because gender B is shining and perfect and obviously superior at X).

Some people manage by the book, even though they don't know who wrote the book or even what book.

Working...