Bostonia is published in print three times a year and updated weekly on the web.
Here’s an old riddle. If you haven’t heard it, give yourself time to answer before reading past this paragraph: a father and son are in a horrible car crash that kills the dad. The son is rushed to the hospital; just as he’s about to go under the knife, the surgeon says, “I can’t operate—that boy is my son!” Explain. (Cue the final Jeopardy! music.)
If you guessed that the surgeon is the boy’s gay, second father, you get a point for enlightenment, at least outside the Bible Belt. But did you also guess the surgeon could be the boy’s mother? If not, you’re part of a surprising majority.
In research conducted by Mikaela Wapman (CAS’14) and Deborah Belle, a College of Arts & Sciences psychology professor, even young people and self-described feminists tended to overlook the possibility that the surgeon in the riddle is female. The researchers ran the riddle by two groups: 197 BU psychology students and 103 children, ages 7 to 17, from Brookline summer camps. (They did the latter study through the Undergraduate Research Opportunities Program (UROP).)
In both groups, only a small minority of subjects—15 percent of the children and 14 percent of the BU students—came up with the mom’s-the-surgeon answer. Curiously, life experiences that might suggest the mom answer “had no association with how one performed on the riddle,” Wapman says. For example, the BU student cohort, where women outnumbered men two-to-one, typically had mothers who were employed or were doctors—“and yet they had so much difficulty with this riddle,” says Belle. Self-described feminists did better, she says, but even so, 78 percent did not say the surgeon was the mother. (The results were no different for an alternate version of the riddle: a mother is killed, her daughter sent to the hospital, and a nurse declines to attend to the patient because “that girl is my daughter”; few people guessed that the nurse might be the child’s father.)
The genesis of the research was Belle’s 10-year-old granddaughter, who was given the riddle by her mom. “She thought for a moment,” Belle says, “and she said, ‘How could this be? Well, he could have two fathers.’” The child couldn’t muster any other explanation. Nor could several of her friends. “This piqued our interest,” Belle says. When she and Wapman posed the riddle to kids in the UROP study, some of the answers stretched the bounds of inventiveness: the surgeon was a robot, or a ghost, or “the dad laid down and officials thought he was dead, but he was alive.”
The results are all the more surprising considering that college students and participants in tony Brookline’s summer programs likely hail from higher income and educational backgrounds than the general population. “These are two populations that we would expect, if anything, would be in the avant-garde,” Belle says. Yet, for example, BU students theorized the “father” in the car referred to a priest, or the surgeon was “horribly confused,” or, à la the old Dallas TV show, the whole scenario was a dream.
What made imagining a surgeon mom so difficult? Gender schemas—generalizations that help us explain our complex world and “don’t reflect personal values or life experience,” says Wapman. (So having a surgeon mother doesn’t necessarily mean you’ll propose that as the riddle’s solution.) “Schemas are very, very powerful,” Belle says, adding that the studies’ results and the endurance of gender stereotypes would not surprise Virginia Valian, a Hunter College psychologist who has noted how people presented with the same CV for a man and a woman typically assume the man is more competent.
Valian “argues that schemas are formed very early in life,” says Belle, “and that when it comes to gender, we fixate on women’s reproductive functioning, and we sort of allot competence to men. Experience can have some effect in our schemas, but much less than we might anticipate.” Valian has also noted that schemas are identical in our culture for men and for women—which is exactly what the BU survey found.
That bias against women, Wapman believes, shows the significance of schemas, “this silly riddle” notwithstanding. Stephanie Coontz, who teaches history and family studies at Evergreen State College in Washington state, cited the BU duo’s work in a New York Times column on the problems facing mothers in the workplace.
The solution? “Having people understand that they hold this bias,” says Wapman, “and when you look at job applicants, keep that in mind.”
“Eternal vigilance, I think, is the only solution,” says Belle. “These schemas do change over time”—she points to other countries with greater gender equity—“but the pace is glacial.”
I remember taking this survey – and, in truth, they weren’t looking for gender bias, but you’d have to look at the full study. Furthermore, Professor Belle would agree with many of you that gender equity should go both ways – this is just a small snapshot and not the whole story.
That said, I love this article and it’s really cool to see the results after taking a class on gender studies, etc. with Prof. Belle. She is a wonderful professor!!
I was delighted to see how many comments derided the elitist snottiness of the article and the lack of scientific rigor of the experiment. My degree is in journalism, not “science,” and I saw these flaws right away.
This is the most idiotic thing I have ever read.
Doesn’t it feel GOOD to be PROGRESSIVE and ENLIGHTENED? Sorry to rain on your parade, BUT here is a pertinent question:
What percentage of SURGEONS in the U.S. are WOMEN?
The answer is: less than one in six. (See p. 13 of this document: https://www.aamc.org/download/313228/data/2012physicianspecialtydatabook.pdf)
So people who instinctively think of “surgeon” as being a man are simply REFLECTING REALITY. Put differently, this mental shortcut – unfair though it is to female surgeons – is correct five times out of six.
There is an interesting corollary in today’s society: female surgeons are MORE LIKELY TO BE UNDERQUALIFIED since there is is obviously strong political pressure to advance women and to different job preferences among the sexes. (Does the term “welder” evoke a woman?)
So, did no one on the research team think to change the genders of the victims to female and see how the responses changed? Because that’s what a real scientist would do.
I see that this actually is addressed in the article. Either I missed it on my first pass or perhaps it was added later.
Anyway, the article says that when the genders of the victims were reversed, respondents had trouble identifying the surgeon as being the victim’s father. So that means in that version most people assumed the surgeon was female? Doesn’t that DIRECTLY contradict the findings of the study that this is evidence of gender bias? And doesn’t it directly support the finding that the responses are an indication of the effectiveness of the riddle at confusing people?
I find it very troubling that someone would conduct research of this nature and then present deliberately misleading and demonstrably false conclusions that one can only assume were motivated by a preconceived bias rather than a true commitment to scientific inquiry. I sincerely hope that the researchers are asked to account for the obvious inconsistencies between their findings and the actual results of their study.
This study says far more about the bias of the researchers than the subjects or society. As I expected, a web search brought up a dozen variations on this riddle, but not one with a deliberately misleading and grammatically contorted final sentence. The use of the masculine pronoun “he” in this subject /object switching is an obvious trick designed to make the reader assign a masculine gender to the surgeon rather than the son who is being cut.
If you have to stack the deck, it is no longer science. Try again without the psychological games and just a neutral presentation of the surgeon. You can find several versions easily:
A father and his son are in a car accident. The father dies at the scene and the son is rushed to the hospital. At the hospital the surgeon looks at the boy and says, “I can’t operate on this boy, he is my son.” How can this be??
Here’s an article that exemplifies the narrow-mindedness of intellectuals. Did you know that Christians are hateful, bigoted, and backwards? Were you aware of that? If not, then you’re not of the grandiose and clever enlightened sect. I wonder if the failure to solve the riddle might have something to do with the obscene and near absolute tyranny of the “progressive” national education system, seemingly both in the public and private spheres (if this article is any example), and their adamant resistance to teaching children how to think logically, clearly, classically. They don’t know what to eliminate as possibilities, they don’t know how to focus and narrow the scope to find the answer, because they are taught that nothing can be eliminated without bias, and the effect (of course) is not a more “enlightened” society but instead a society that cannot reason and cannot think of the most obvious, logical conclusions. If “gender bias” were a factor in solving this riddle in the past, this article provides no distinct evidence that it is still a factor today. It can just as easily be guessed (which is what the writer is doing: guessing) that today’s problem is far more corrosive. It is a problem of thought, it is a problem of how these ridiculous schemas, a plague designed by psychobabble-obsessed liberal elites to replace independent thought, permeate our society today, instead of rational, insightful, open debate and dialogue.
Liberal smugness knows no bounds. According to our author, one is only “enlightened” if he looks favorably upon same-sex marriage. And, of course, there is absolutely no hope for the religious (those benighted denizens of “Bible belt”).
Regarding the validity of this “research,” I wonder if anyone gave a moment’s thought to the possibility that people might initially assume a surgeon to be male because — get ready for this — more than 85% of surgeons are, in fact, men.
I enjoyed this riddle in the movie Tin Cup (1996).
The gender bias may not be in the person answering the riddle. The riddle is a play on the ambiguity of the English language. The same riddle wouldn’t work in Spanish, due to titles such as “el” for male or “la” for female. Maybe this hints that gender schemas are taught with the English language.
Also, consider the inconsistency in words like actor, governor, officer, collector, etc. Some such “actress,” “executrix” distinguish genders. Others like “governor” has no such distinction, however the “-or” ending implies the male gender. Which is the same case for the word “doctor.”
-Justice, ENG’02
Unbelievable. I am reading an article on gender bias and get a nice dose of regional bias thrown in. Speaking as a female with a doctorate from your fine institution who was raised in the very buckle of the Bible Belt, you may want to check your own biases.
Additionally, I am the single income earner in my family, in a C-Suite level position, with a mother who worked…and I failed the riddle. What? Am I a victim of my own “schema”? This means nothing. Move on.
As a Bible Belt dweller, the bias against religionists just oozes in the text here. Also, I have been a male nurse since 1976 and the same riddle with nursing would also be very telling.
We are all biased in many different ways and don’t need this “research” to show that. And, so what? Only silly utopians think that we can rid the world of racism, sexism, antisemitism, etc.
Grow up, get real and get on with your lives.
Stuart,
That “Bible Belt” crack was really a very clever post-deconstructionist ironic illustration of how people who think themselves well-educated and progressive can overlook even the most obnoxious and obvious expressions of bias, so long as they share it.
Either that, or the writer is an idiot (and assumes most readers are, too).
Your choice.
When you go looking for bias, and are biased, you will find bias. This experiment demonstrates why psychology has such a bad reputation. Hopefully there was more to this research than a biased riddle. Not sure how this moves the needle on gender bias in any meaningful way.
In a discussion about gender equality, the arts, and religion at BU’s then School of Fine Arts back in the mid-90s, I shared this riddle with a small group a self-described feminists in the acting program. They all failed, too.
I was in a family group when this was asked dozens of years ago. A few adults guessed “stepfather” right away. My ten-year-old son said without hesitation: “The surgeon was probably his mother.”
JJ
add an a before son and it makes sense to me Not an English Major
I thought it was absurd when they published this in BU Today, and I’m appalled that it actually got into Bostonia. This “riddle” doesn’t reveal gender bias at all. The whole point of a riddle is that it’s intentionally designed to lead your mind away from the obvious answer. The researchers even admit that women performed roughly the same as men on this riddle, and that even people who had mothers who are doctors weren’t more likely to get it right.
This is a childish and pointless way to “measure” gender bias. It doesn’t reveal anything useful at all, except that it’s a very good riddle. This is what UROP funds are being spent on? You’re paying undergrads to go around giving this riddle to people and calling it research? What an appalling waste of resources.
This is really unbelievable — this riddle is older than I am (40+ years) yet only 15% of today’s kids and college students can get the right answer? How ingrained gender schemas really are.
This sort of thing makes me think twice when people say racism or sexism are things of the past, just because some legislation has been passed in the last 50 years to address them. Ingrained attitudes/perceptions are set early and last and last and last.
Thanks for writing. You guys need a “Share via Twitter/Facebook” link here.
I’m with you, Phil. I’m 60 years old, and I first heard this old chestnut many MANY decades ago. (Yes, I got it wrong back then, but it taught me to stop and think when asked riddles like this in future.) Results might have been different were old fogies like me included in a subject group — or, sadly, maybe not. While I find it discouraging that the results were what they were, I think that the “riddle factor” should be considered as a slightly mitigating factor, as some other commenters have said more forcefully than I would. That having been said, I suspect the sleight of mind caused by the question being a riddle only slightly diminishes the evidence of gender bias.
How sad that we haven’t come farther. The GOP presidential primary race a few years ago was a dramatic wake-up call to how easily this country slips back into gender bias with implications far more threatening than the assumption of the sex of a surgeon. Women’s lives are still at risk, and women’s physical autonomy is not the assumption for all. It is important to keep awareness active. I thank Ms. Wapman and Professor Belle for their work and “Bostonia” for bringing it to the public eye.
The riddle is not new, but the results are admittedly telling. What is disturbing and unfortunate, however, is Mr. Barlow’s gratuitous, bigoted, and parochial jab at the Bible Belt.
Amen, Brother.
Makes me glad I chose to go to a different school.
It really aggravates me to see garbage passed off as science, too.
To avoid false advertising, will they change the name to BS or FU? Here, they amazingly made both apply!
Although I consider myself a feminist and agree that there still is significant bias against women and minorities, I think you may have overlooked the simple wording of the riddle. The words father, son, boy, and dad are all repeated. Those words simply lead the brain to think that a male relative must be the answer.
This is a really good point – it would be interesting to repeat the study again, only this time, change the scenario:
A father and daughter are in a horrible car crash that kills the dad. The daughter is rushed to the hospital; just as she’s about to go under the knife, the surgeon says, “I can’t operate—that girl is my daughter!”
I wonder if the results would be different…
“you get a point for enlightenment, at least outside the Bible Belt”
Hmm… how do we avoid bias against people of faith? Perhaps it’s understanding you hold this bias, and are eternally vigilant in addressing it — but I understand the pace at which you do so may be glacial.
The use of this riddle cleverly assumes ignorance on the part of the reader; but just as cleverly avoids its own bias. “Gender equity” I would think encompasses both genders, and at this point we should be equally concerned with the educational system’s discrimination against boys. See, for instance, Christina Hoff Sommer’s “The War Against Boys.”
I’m sorry, but *this* qualifies as research?
Well intentioned, maybe. But this is not science.
IN YOUR RESEARCH THE AGE OF THE RESPONDENT
SHOULD BE GIVEN CONSIDERATION AND WEIGHT.
AS A BU ALUM, AGE 82,THERE WERE FEW FEMALE MEDICAL
DOCTORS IN THE 1930S, ONLY A FEW MORE IN THE 1940S.
MY SISTER, RETIRED FROM MEDICINE, MADE MY GUESS,
FEMALE DOCTOR.
GEORGE OLSON