This is a perfect example of everything that is wrong with modern sociology.<p>Any aspect of good experiment design that is involved will go into the first half here: and so it shows women not being exactly equal or superior to men at some very specific task. Fine, that might be true; it might not; further experiments could probably get more conclusive about it, but you'd need a much wider number of people and a wider array of different situations and contexts to ensure it's a fair study.<p>The problem is the the interpretation of the data out the other end. "Suggestive evidence" that this is driven by "stereotype threat"; this belies an implicit assumption that there's no reasonable biological explanation for this situation. This assertion is borne out by no actual evidence; but this paper itself becomes yet another piece of "evidence" supporting the idea, because it can and will be cited as such despite not proving it at all. Slowly, a mountain of these papers develops, and consensus builds, but there's no there there.<p>There's no attempt here (or really anywhere, anymore) to find an evolutionary-psychological reason for why this observed behaviour occurs.