2D/4D Ratio Analysis

The purpose for this lab is to test what has been suggested by many authors decades ago, if the 2D/4D ratio is in fact a sexually dimorphic trait between men and women. Several studies had been conducted in the past, and had demonstrated that in fact males tend to have lower 2D and 4D ratios than women (Galis et al., 2010, George, 1930). Past studies has suggested this difference in ratio between males and females is observed as early as several months to two years old babies, and is in fact due to the levels of androgens including testosterone and oestrogen in which the baby in its mother womb is exposed to (Austin et al., 2002, Manning et al., 1998). In this lab, Students placed their right hand with palms faced down on top of the paper

The results from this lab were significant with a P value less than .05 meaning there’s enough evidence to demonstrate that the ratios differences were significant, which further indicates that the 2D/4D ratio is a sexually dimorphic trait. However, it is still unclear what exactly causes this difference in ratios between men and women, how this distinction might affect them or can be used to define other traits in men and women. Several studies had suggested that the difference in the ratios is primarily due the levels of androgens the child is exposed to while in the womb (Austin et al., 2002, Manning et al., 1998). However, this lab could not verify the cause since it only focused on illustrating whether the 2D/4D ratio is a sexually dimorphic trait. A study was conducted at the University of Toronto in 1930, to determine if the 2D/4D ratios can be classified as a sexually dimorphic used a finger board with wooden slides in which can be adjusted accordingly to the

The individual is to lay their hands flat on the board with their wrist aligned with the edge of the board and adjust the slides according to their fingertips to attain accurate measures rather than tracing the 2D and 4D digits (George, 1930). The results were as follows; males exhibited longer 4D digit than 2D digit while women exhibited longer 2D digit than 4D digit (George, 1930). The two studies had shown that in fact a difference in the ratio of 2D/4D digits between men and women exists which further answers the question of whether this ratio can be considered a sexually dimorphic trait. However, further studies would need to be conducted in order to examine the causes responsible for this diversity, and how this trait can be used to differentiate males and women in terms of physical, cognitive and intellectual