On Tue, 12 May 2015 09:48:08 -0700, Christopher Green wrote:
And, since ANOVA is merely a constrained special case of the
General Linear Model, there is not even really a practical limit
on the number of values a continuous "gender" variable might
assume.
Okay, this is getting a little bit silly. Not the General Linear Model
or how many levels ANOVA can handle (Advice: use few independent
levels with few levels; you don't know what a headache is until you
try to explain a five-way interaction) but the more fundamental issue
of "what is the question that one wants to get answer to?" Michael
Scoles below clearly points in this direction and Jim Clark adds
to it with the concept of asexuality but is one concerned with:
(1) Traditional gender role self-identification (i.e., male or female
or some mixture of the two). Note: this is primarily a psychological
variable created through a developmental history within certain
cultural environments. That is, a personally defined gender
role consistent with one's experience with one's body and
with the cultural strictures concerning sex.
(2) Genetically based sex differences (XX vs XY vs variations).
Do genes have an influence on sexual orientation and behavior?
Maybe, maybe not, see:
http://www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.org/ViewPage.aspx?pageId=66
(3) Sexual behavior (Males having Sex with Females or MSF,
Males having Sex with Males or MSM, Females having Sex
with Females or FSF, Sex with both Same Sex and Opposite
Sex, Sorry No Sex -- We're British, etc.).
Note: Sexual behavior does not have to reflect sexual orientation
as AIDS/HIV research have shown: males who define themselves
as traditional heterosexuals may engage in sex with other
males ["on the down low"] and deny any homosexual interests or
attractions
Note #2: Given the adaptability of human behavior, including
sexual behavior, it should come as no surprise that males and
females may define themselves one way ("straight","gay/lesbian",
etc.) but still behave in ways that are inconsistent with that
definition. For example, "straight" males and females when put
into situations where access to the opposite sex is limited, may
engage in homosexual behavior without changing their sexual
orientation. While in prison, some people become "gay for
the stay", that is, will engaged in homosexual behavior while in
prison but return to heterosexual behavior when released.
There is "gay for pay", that is, one engages in same sex acts
to earn money but engages in heterosexual personal relationships.
See also paragraph #3 in the CRG article I link to above:
During one phase of one's life one is one way but during a
later phase they're another.
So, which is it:
(a) Self-definition/cultural definition of sexual role and identity
(b) Genetic definition of sexual role and identity
(c) Behavioral definition of sexual role and identity
Or are all three involved but, as is the human tendency, we tend
to oversimplify things just to be able to get through the day because
we have too many other things to consider and do as well.
By the way, I've taken to saying in my research methods and statistics
classes "Let's use 'Sex/Gender' as a grouping variable and, for
purposes of simplification, let's just assume there are two levels.
We can complicate things after we get through the basics."
-Mike Palij
New York University
m...@nyu.edu
P.S. I'll leave the category of "bi-curious" to someone else.
I'm tuckered out from thinking so much about sex. ;-)
On May 12, 2015, at 10:11 AM, Jim Clark wrote:
Hi
Since ANOVA handles any number of levels of a factor (2, 3, 7, 24? .),
ANOVA
need make no adjustment to accommodate more complex models of human
sexual
orientation. It is the researcher who must decide what is the
appropriate
number of levels and expected pattern of results, all of which is
happily
handled by ANOVA.
To further complicate matters, there is a growing literature on
Asexuality
that might be relevant here, depending on how one is defining the
different
levels of the sexual orientation factor. That is, if it is defined by
the
targets of people's sexual attraction, then clearly Asexuality needs
to be
accommodated. Here's a link to Tony Bogaert's book:
http://www.amazon.com/Anthony-F.-Bogaert/e/B007LU54TY
On Tuesday, May 12, 2015 9:03 AM, Michael Scoles wrote:
Dear Sir or Madam:
You raise an interesting question, but in order to answer it, more
information is needed.
(1) What is the dependent variable and what is the reason for
investigating
its association with gender?
(2) From your description, it appears that there is a second
independent
variable, with two levels. What is this variable and what are the
levels?
(3) LGBT is an acronym with four letters (some would add Q), but you
only
include 3 levels for gender in your proposed design. Which group are
you
choosing to offend?
Thank you for any clarification you can provide.
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 3:46 AM, michael sylvester wrote:
With Bruce Jenner in mind.ANOVA may have to make some adjustmes to
accommodate
LGBT subjects. Currently the gender variable N2 male/female but with
LGBT
subjects coming into the subject pool we may be lookimg not at a 2x2
design
but a 3x2 design.Of course ANOVA
measures simple,main,and interaction effects.Those analyses would be
very
interestingWith LGBT a subset of the gender paradigm,when does the he
or the
she kicks in.
michael
daytona beach.florida
'going beyond where no tipster has gone before.'
---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@mail-archive.com.
To unsubscribe click here:
http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=44735
or send a blank email to
leave-44735-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
