This is basically the "you throw like a girl" phenomenon. With a sister who played NCAA Division I varsity softball, I can assure you that girls can learn to "throw like a boy", and then some. And yet, many more girls than boys "throw like a girl" (hence the stereotype). The reason is simple: throwing well takes practice, and boys throw more than girls.
But why do boys throw more? Boys and girls have different preferences, and many of these preferences have biological as well as cultural roots. (Indeed, are there any cultures where athletic prowess is more valued in women than in men?) And so we're right back on the African savannah, where men who liked to throw learned to throw well, and thus killed more game.
It seems that, even with a "cultural" explanation, you can't escape nature.
I saw this topic come up somewhere else, and here are what the most sensible conclusions seemed to be.
The question of male to female biological differences can be answered better when you compare the best male athletes versus those of the female. There are clearly huge differences in physical abilities, and it's not because more men play sports than women.
Girls develop faster than boys in K-12, so a girl who played a sport can definitely get a college scholarship and play better baseball than the average male. However, I don't see how that proves it's in any way cultural. Sounds like genetics to me.
You're absolutely right, though I think we're talking about slightly different things. Continuing with my example, men throw better than women mainly because men throw more than women; men throw faster than women because men are stronger than women. You could say that they are "second-order" and "first-order" biological effects, respectively.
Men throw better (whatever the definition - I'm assuming you mean accurately) and faster than women because our muscles are stronger. You can take a boy and a girl who have never thrown anything and the boy would throw better than the girl.
My contention is that throwing well is a skill, dominated by practice, while throwing fast is an ability, dominated by talent. Girls who practice a lot can throw better than almost any boy, but they can't begin to compete in terms of speed with even moderately well-trained boys.
"That has several implications.... one is that playing violent computer games can have beneficial effects."
I doubt this study demonstrated that the 3D game has to be violent.
Logically, 3D game which involve aiming and tracking mechanisms help raise situational awareness in ways two-dimensional puzzle games cannot--it's very likely that non-violent 3D aiming and moving games, if they existed, would also work.
If males are driven to playing fast twitch games because of their biology, then are the subsequent physiological adaptations considered biological or cultural?
The study mentioned by the article failed to take any biological recordings from the participants. My guess would be that playing the violent video games causes a rise in testosterone. Since women have less, a rise in their testosterone levels would impact them more hence the evening out of the test scores. Just my theory.
But why do boys throw more? Boys and girls have different preferences, and many of these preferences have biological as well as cultural roots. (Indeed, are there any cultures where athletic prowess is more valued in women than in men?) And so we're right back on the African savannah, where men who liked to throw learned to throw well, and thus killed more game.
It seems that, even with a "cultural" explanation, you can't escape nature.