The 'findings' of this study happen to coincide with my own experiences,,,


There tend to be two different ways that people respond to stressful situations. Stressed people can become more self-centered in order to conserve mental resources by not responding to other people, or they can become more open to others and empathic as a means of coping, by reaching out for social support.

Women, tend to do the latter, according to a new study published in in the journal Psychoneuroendocrinology. In the study, the researchers had 40 men and 40 women undergo a stress test, which consisted of giving a speech and completing math problems in front of an audience. After that, the participants went through another series of tests that measured their ability to differentiate between their feelings and what other people wanted. For example, the participants were directed to move objects on a shelf based. If they did it correctly, it implied that they were able to understand the other person’s perspective, and a certain level of empathy.

Women under stress performed the task better than the control women, who did not have to perform stressful activities beforehand. However, the opposite was true for men; stressed men performed worse than the relaxed men. The findings suggest that women become more understanding under stress, while men do not.

The reasons behind this aren’t fully understood. According to the researchers, it’s possible that this speaks to women’s overall greater propensity to seek social support. It’s also possible that there are hormonal differences that occur between genders under stressful situations

http://time.com/30341/women-men-stress/

A single study does not a fact make.

of course

words like 'tend to' and 'aren't fully understood' ad 'its possible'

all imply that this is not an absolute

but it is still something that 'tends' to be my experience regarding the difference between men and women,,,

.hmm.. harmony where do you find all this stuff.lol
. I know I'm leaving...

Well, I do both but I've been finding lately that talking to my mother about my problems can just get us both more stressed out.

lol, some of it on the yahoo news page when I'm checking email

other bits on google news when I'm studying or looking up other stuff

awww. that's a tough one too,, at least you try

I believe this study shows what people already know:

Nag a man and he won't do anything and a PO'd woman will just give up and do it herself!

Social sciences are referred to as "stamp collecting" by hard sciences (sciences based in math) because they're completely comprised of utter speculation. The more that coincide with the speculation, the more accepted the theory, even if it's so clinically incorrect it's actually unlawful in practise.

Women do not have a collective intelligence.

That means "women think like this" is exactly the same thing as saying "black people think like this." It's beyond retarded and all the way into bigoted ignorance.

But people once thought black people think a certain way.
Some people even today think women think a certain way.

Both are bigots.



ie. both assertions serve no greater purpose than to dismiss the opinions of either when individually encountered, in favour of the generalization you've decided upon, which suits your personal agenda, hence, bigotry.



just a bit of background nomenclature, stamp collecting actually refers to chemists, who generally go from there into social sciences, chemistry as opposed to physics is the general departure, the table of elements looks like a stamp book, hence the term stamp collecting.


last point, the opposite of self centred is humility, not empathy. Empathy is a given, sociopathy has replaced psychopathy in all medical science (but not criminology who lags behind as stamp collectors), specifically because empathy is a given, and there is no such thing as a living creature which does not experience empathy.
Some simply justify the need to detest it within themselves by blaming others for it (sociopathy). Criminologists (breed of psychologist without medical qualification), still refer to serial killers as psychopathic, but all medical science now refers to them as socipaths instead, because of this particular point.

People who don't know what they're talking about say serial killers are an example of humans who can't feel empathy. Medical science says they used to think that, but were wrong. They self justify, they don't lack. So if even serial killers aren't in any way lacking in human empathy, how the hell is anybody else ever?