• Hobo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    So this is the link in question:

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263585668_Men_Are_More_Likely_than_Women_to_Slow_in_the_Marathon

    And you don’t see a research paper with citations?

    Here’s a screenshot of the end of the paper that displays the links to the citations and references:

    Here's a screenshot at the end of the paper with links to citations and references.

    Here’s the full abstract as well just for further clarification:

    Unlabelled: Studies on nonelite distance runners suggest that men are more likely than women to slow their pace in a marathon. Purpose: This study determined the reliability of the sex difference in pacing across many marathons and after adjusting women’s performances by 12% to address men’s greater maximal oxygen uptake and also incorporating information on racing experience. Methods: Data were acquired from 14 US marathons in 2011 and encompassed 91,929 performances. For 2929 runners, we obtained experience data from a race-aggregating Web site. We operationalized pace maintenance as the percentage change in pace observed in the second half of the marathon relative to the first half. Pace maintenance was analyzed as a continuous variable and as two categorical variables, as follows: “maintain the pace,” defined as slowing <10%, and “marked slowing,” defined as slowing ≥30%. Results: The mean change in pace was 15.6% and 11.7% for men and women, respectively (P < 0.0001). This sex difference was significant for all 14 marathons. The odds for women were 1.46 (95% confidence interval, 1.41-1.50; P < 0.0001) times higher than men to maintain the pace and 0.36 (95% confidence interval, 0.34-0.38; P < 0.0001) times that of men to exhibit marked slowing. Slower finishing times were associated with greater slowing, especially in men (interaction, P < 0.0001). However, the sex difference in pacing occurred across age and finishing time groups. Making the 12% adjustment to women’s performances lessened the magnitude of the sex difference in pacing but not its occurrence. Although greater experience was associated with less slowing, controlling for the experience variables did not eliminate the sex difference in pacing. Conclusions: The sex difference in pacing is robust. It may reflect sex differences in physiology, decision making, or both.

    • Murvel
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Wtf are you stupid, this isn’t the linked article in this thread? Did you just link some random study?

        • Murvel
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah and I’m talking about the article in this post, you know from the comment thread were are in… 🙄

          • Hobo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            That’s very unclear from your reply above. Do you always act so condescending when people seek clarification? Because even this short conversation with you has been challenging. Perhaps try to be a little less of an asshole. It would be easier to clear simple communication issues especially when you use pronouns and the antecedent isn’t really clear.

            • Murvel
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              Yes, especially when people start lecturing me that I’m wrong when they haven’t even made an effort to understand the issue at hand. All just to prove that I’m so wrong and they’re so right.

              Happens more often than you think and I really don’t like it.

              • Hobo@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Right so change it. People are going to meet hostility with hostility. If you approach every conversation from an advsarial position you’ll get a lot of “I’m right and you’re wrong” and “lecturing” from the other side. If you had simply clarified that your vague statement was about the original article, and not the one linked in the comment you replied to, then we could’ve walked away with a positive interaction…

                • Murvel
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Right, or just make an effort to read up on the conversation.