Orienteering performance and sexuality

[Oldman]

An article in today's Telegraph may be of interest to some:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.j ... idir24.xml

A study at Warwick has showed that in a task akin to reading a map, heterosexual men outperform gay men, who outperform lesbian women, who outperform heterosexual women.

That may explain some recent runs for some people

The same study showed that ability declines with age, but faster for men than for women (which may explain some of my recent runs)

[greywolf]

... in a task akin to reading a map, heterosexual men outperform gay men, who outperform lesbian women, who outperform heterosexual women ...

well it's about time they found a use for heterosexual men...

[Blanka]

Actually it is not that illogical a conclusion if you work with averages. If you are interested in this, have a read of Simon Baron Cohen's book 'The Essential Difference', which is very accessible to non-psychologists and you should find it in the popular science sections in most bookshops.

In it, Baron Cohen argues that the female brain (on average) is more primed for empathising, whereas the male brain (on average) is more primed for systemising. Having said that, the 'on average' is a very important qualification - everyone will lie somewhere along the spectrum and have their own empathising and systemising quotients. (Baron Cohen then goes on to argue that autism is actually an extreme of the 'male brain' in being an extremely high systemiser and extremely low emphatiser, but that's a bit of a side argument for the issue in question).

Systemising is obviuously good if map reading is involved. I would argue that you can extend the argument to the following:
- straight male ==> very systemising
- gay male ==> slightly more feminine, having better empathising ability but worse systemising ability than straight male
- lesbian female ==> probably less emphatising than a straight female, having more male characteristics
- straight female ==> highest emphatising, but lowest systemising quotient

It is the systemising that helps with map reading. Whilst the above generalisation might apply to the population as a whole I don't actually think it will necessarily apply to the orienteering population because...

...we are talking about averages when describing the 'male brain' and 'female brain'. A lot of females have a 'male brain' and vice versa (at the end of Baron Cohen's book are questionnaires and you can test yourself - I bet many female orienteers will come up higher on the systemising quotient than average). Within the orienteering population, a lot of people are scientists and mathematicians (at least that's what seems to be the case in many Uni O clubs, and probably other clubs too). So many of female orienteers will have a higher systemising ability than the general female population. Hence we can't easily make conclusions about sexuality of the orienteers as they probably all lie towards the top of the systemising spectrum and the population is skewed.

[Oldman]

Blanka, what an excellent contribution!

[Mrs H]

Speaking as someone who failed her maths O level 3 times and obviously not being a very good orienteer I'll pose a half serious question:
Do you think this slewing of the orienteering population towards the systemising brian is one of the reasons we are not very good at promoting our sport to others> do you think if our general mind set was more empathising that we might be better at it?

[DIDSCO]

....so thats why Ben Dovers always had trouble reading the map.

[LostAgain]

systemising brian is one of the reasons we are not very good at promoting our sport to others:?

I am not a huge fan of Brian, but I don't think we can blame him for the inadequate promotion of our sport

[redkite]

As my wife says, and she is not an orienteer, we are a fairly predictable bunch. Most orienteers tend to do well at the science subjects at school, study maths, computer science or medicine at uni and end up in well paid techno type jobs. We are all great organisers and can spend years mapping a new area.

She is dead right. There are few orienteers who are good at selling. It is too soft a skill for most of us. We feel uncomfortable when in sell mode.

We put little tiny signs up to give directions. At most events passers by have to ask what is going-on. It is as if we are embarressed about our sport. We are not, it is just that we do not recognise the importance of constantly needing to sell. Or recognise the fact that each time we hold an event or hold a committee meeting down the pub, we should be in sell mode.

We have no proper, sound bites to explain what the sport is. We mummble to mates down the gym or at work that we run with a compass.

DEscribing the sport as 'an adventure sport' or 'off-trail adventure running' is better. It is not 'running with a map and compass'.

I am a typical orienteer, in my job I am great at devising financial schemes(techno)but am not good at selling those schemes. Mrs H is an exception in our sport and has proved what can be done on a small scale.

Not sure where this thought process is leading me to as I started off wanting to comment on Blanka's post. I think it is leading me to suggest that if we do not have the necessary skills to sell the sport, and it is a sport worth selling, we need to 'hire ' someone with the relevant, softer, skill sets.

Do our BO committees in Derbyshire recognise what skills we lack. Do we need fresh blood to (and I do not like to use jargon) think outside the box to effectivley devise a rebranding excercise.

There is a young generation out there waiting for the right triggers and messages to buy. We just have to hit those triggers with the right message.

I normally only post one word responses on this forum, must be because it is Friday afternoon and looking forward to SINS

Finally, any good ideas for the sound bites. Best one will get a pint at the next event I am at with a beer tent. Perhaps we can have a poll for our favourite sound bite

[Guest88]

>redkite

I think you should think about the fact that the target audience of people who will be really enthusiastic and keep the sport going are systemisers like ourselves....and likely to be the last people to be impressed by fluffy duffy sales people who don't know what they are talking about in any depth and soundbites.

We all actually have sales skills, just need a bit of guidance and training - I would argue that the best people to sell the sport are systemisers who can identify closely with the target audience and really get to the heart of what the appeal of the sport is about in a factual / systemising discussion (i.e. us) - doesn't need fluffy sales spin - the sport will just sell itself like hot cakes as long as we can bother ourselves to target the right people and explain it to them properly and try to be friendly to people at events.

What I would suggest based on the analysis of who the sport appeals to is to target more at groups likely to contain people with systemising brains...i.e. science-y universities (and chess clubs???) very important...blanket targeting of primary schools likely to have low-ish percentages of long term take-up

[graeme]

Actually it is not that illogical a conclusion if you work with averages.

You mean like the average orienteer being mainly male and just a little bit pregnant?
(or me being median as fully male and M45).

Graeme

Given that most people earn more than average (mode) and most people earn less than average (mean), it seems to me that nothing is illogical if you work with averages .

[awk]

blanket targeting of primary schools likely to have low-ish percentages of long term take-up

Agreed - but targetting the stronger mathematicians/scientists/systemisers at primary school is a good time to do it.

It's one reason why I don't run the school orienteering club on a Tuesday - Chess Club had already got there!

[RJ]

...blanket targeting of primary schools likely to have low-ish percentages of long term take-up

Firstly.... we are likely to have a low-ish take up regardless of where we aim our publicity etc. We are a minority sport.... we don't appeal to the masses, otherwise we would be HUGE!!

Secondly.... and it isn't an invitation to open up the old debate again about schools' orienteering!.... but blanket targetting of Primary Schools does have its place. If you have the chance to influence the young mind... go fot it. In Cumbria, with the various schools' leagues run by the clubs we must be involving close on a thousand kids during the course of each year. And yes, some of those kids end up in the clubs as regular attendees.... and yes, a low-ish percentage take up.

But it is working... last year Cumbria provided almost a fifth of those attending BSOC. The important second step is to create the club-school link so that the 'hooked' kids can learn the skills to develop their talents.

[awk]

The important second step is to create the club-school link so that the 'hooked' kids can learn the skills to develop their talents.

And that's the real challenge: historically there has been considerable success in getting school children orienteering. Getting them into club sport though has been, by and large, a different story. Where there has been success, it has usually been at secondary level. I'm sure there are exceptions from whom we can learn though. The crunch I think will come with transport.

[Guest88]

To be honest, I haven't a huge amount of experience in orienteering development so don't take this as any more than ideas to either take or leave, but I do know that some companies make a lot of effort when targeting their target market.

Noting that I can see that there are good benefits of the primary school initiatives, there is a not insignificant time and monetary cost for a low-ish take up rate. The original post in the thread does make me wonder (with my business head on) if you would get a better return on the time and money by providing an affordable minibus, lift and support/liaison service to universities who are likely to host a large number of science-y type people but struggling or not currently running a uni orienteering club.

[Kitch]

just don't expect any sympathy from me