Laboratory Report: Sex Differences in Nanoblock Assembly Performance

This laboratory report investigates sex differences in Nanoblock assembly performance. The study involved 25 participants (14 males, 11 females) divided into groups with and without instructions for assembling Nanoblock models. The experiment measured assembly time and quality, utilizing ANOVA and t-tests for analysis. Results indicated that males generally performed better, completing the task faster and with higher quality, regardless of instruction availability. A significant interaction between gender and instruction was observed, highlighting the influence of both factors on task performance. The report explores the implications of these findings, connecting them to cognitive and spatial abilities, and discusses the observed differences in performance. The study aimed to assess the influence of instructions and gender on the time taken to complete the Nanoblock models. The study also compared the quality of work completed by both genders with and without instructions. The analysis revealed that males performed better than females in terms of time and quality, and the interaction effect between gender and instruction was statistically significant. The report concludes by discussing the observed differences in performance.

Running Head:SEX DIFFERENCES IN NANOBLOCK ASSEMBLY PERFORMANCE
Sex Differences in Nanoblock Assembly Performance
Name
Institutional Affiliation

SEX DIFFERENCES IN NANOBLOCK ASSEMBLY PERFORMANCE 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract 4
Chapter 1: Introduction 5
Chapter 2: Method 7
Chapter 3: Results 9
Chapter 4: Discussion 13
References 15
Appendixes 16

SEX DIFFERENCES IN NANOBLOCK ASSEMBLY PERFORMANCE 3
Abstract
The Nano block assembly is an arduous and complicated task. Particular cognitive, intellectual
abilities and attention span are required from both male and female to accomplish the task. The
literature provides substantial data that depict the significant difference between males and
females’ abilities to perform that task — the current study aimed at investigating the sex
differences in Nano block model performance. The lab experiment was conducted to investigate
the sex difference in a performance test. The 25 participants were selected for the current study
among which 11 were females and 14 males. The participants have been distributed into two
groups, i.e., the group who received the instruction and the group who did not receive the
intervention. The participants were given a Nano block model picture and material to complete
the task. Each member was given 30 minutes to complete the task. Anova and t-test were used to
analyse the results. The results of the analysis suggested that male performed better with and
without instruction in the accomplishing their task as compared to females. Furthermore, the
quality of work was also higher among males as compared to females.
Keywords: sex difference, Nanoblock model, ANOVA

SEX DIFFERENCES IN NANOBLOCK ASSEMBLY PERFORMANCE 4

SEX DIFFERENCES IN NANOBLOCK ASSEMBLY PERFORMANCE 5
Introduction
Furniture assembly is a difficult task which and needs special attention, cognitive and
spatial abilities. Individual differences in cognitive functioning are universal; in particular, male
found to have better cognitive abilities when performing any performance or verbal task. In
contrast, a female was reported to have less cognitive abilities in furniture assembly task as
compared to males. Sex difference in future assembly or Nano block assembly has been studied
widely by the researchers. Winking et al., (2015) conducted a study to investigate the sex
disparities in future assembly task by controlling the availability of instruction. The male and
females were divided into two groups and asked to assemble a kitchen trolley from IKEA.
The instruction was given to one group for assembling the trolley; in contrast, the other
group was only given a diagram of the finished product. Furthermore, the spatial ability of the
participants was assessed using an MRT (mental rotation test). The results of the analysis
indicated that men showed good performance in assembling the furniture faster (d=0.78) as
compared to women (d= 0.65). Also, the participant who was given instructions performed better
than those who haven’t received any instructions (d=0.61). A negative correlation was found
between the time spent on instructions and scores of MRT, r= .428, p=.006. The male was
significantly higher n spatial ability in performing the task as compared to females. The literature
is enriched with the study that highlights the significance of male superiority for furniture
assembly task over female. Similarly, the current study aimed at investigating the difference
between male and female in the Nanoblock Assembly Performance. For achieving the above
aim, the 25 participants (Female, 11 and male 14) have been selected in the study. The
participants were divided into four categories
• Male indulged in building the Nanoblock model with no Instructions
• female indulged in building the Nanoblock model with no instruction

SEX DIFFERENCES IN NANOBLOCK ASSEMBLY PERFORMANCE 6
• male indulge in building the Nanoblock with instructions
• Female indulged in building the Nanoblock with instructions
Objectives
The current study has the following objectives.
• To investigate the sex difference in Nanoblock Assembly Performance Task, either male
perform well or female.
• To explore the performance of Nanoblock Assembly Performance in two groups, i.e., the
o, one who received the instruction to complete the task and the one who did not receive
it.
• To assess the time differences between male and female, who take less time to complete
their Nanoblock model?
• To explore the quality of task between male and female n score 1 and score two sheets
concerning with and without instructions.
Hypothesis
The current study has the following hypothesis.
• Furniture assembly depends on the individual spatial skills and abilities. Therefore, men
would perform better as compared to women.
• Men secure high scores on MRT, therefore there should be a significant difference when
there is no instructions.

SEX DIFFERENCES IN NANOBLOCK ASSEMBLY PERFORMANCE 7
Methods
The following modes and modalities have been used in the study.
Participants
The 25 males and females were selected for the experiment. The participants were selected
almost with the equal ration where a male was 14 in numbers and females were 11.
Material
In the study, the Nanoblock model, stopwatch, score sheet, a picture of complete
Nanoblock model, and consent form was used. Two experimenters in the laboratory
experimented. The one was observer/participant and the second was experimenter or
manipulator.
Procedure
The experimenter and participant experimented with assessing the sex difference in the
Nanoblock assembly performance task, which was conducted with or without instruction. The
experiment was carried out in the lab between two groups. After taking the informed consent by
the participant the participants who received the instructions and those who did not receive, any
instructions were divided into two groups.
What were participants asked to do? The 30 minutes were given to each participant for
completing his or her assembly task — the group who did not receive the instructions comprised
of 6 females and seven males.
In contrast, the participants who received the instruction were composed of 5 females and
seven males. The male and female were rated on a scores sheet for how much time they took for
completing their task. According to the observer, the females were taking more time in
completing their model.

SEX DIFFERENCES IN NANOBLOCK ASSEMBLY PERFORMANCE 8
Furthermore, females were found to be anxious as compared to males. According to the
observer, the females were having pressure and distractions, which was affecting their
performance.
In contrast, males were more attentive and relaxed and took less time to complete their
Nanoblock model. According to the observer, the mental rotation of females was also found to
be weak as compared to males. On the other hand, men showed a great spatial and cognitive skill
and performed well concerning, quality and times domains of the experiment (Kim, 2015).
According to a scores sheet, the experimenter with and without instruction has assessed the
diversities in the time consumption. The quality of the Nanoblock model was assessed in a 10-
point rating scale. The variation in score one and score two sheets has also been observed. The
gender difference was also assessed by the observer. The data scores were entered into the SPSS
model for further analysis. The following analysis was carried out to assess the output of the
data.
Design and Analysis
Study Design. The experimental study design was used to assess the sex difference in
Nanoblock assembly task.
IV’s and DV’s. The Independent variable of the study was instruction dependent
variables were time and quality of the Nanoblock model.
Data Analysis. The General Linear Model, t-test, ANOVA was used to interpret the
results.

SEX DIFFERENCES IN NANOBLOCK ASSEMBLY PERFORMANCE 9
Results
The results of the experiment are as follow. The general linear model was used to assess the
difference between two groups, the one who received instructions and the one who didn't receive
the instruction. Which group took less time to accomplish their task. Furthermore to investigate
the significant relationship between gender, time and Instructions.
Results of the First Anova
General Liner Model. General Linear Model was used to analyse the difference between
male and female performance in the Nanoblock completing with and without instruction.
General Liner model better explains the result of the data when the data set has more than one
dependent variable (Beard, Magee, Suchard, Lemey, & Scotch 2014).
Table 1
The following table depicts the male and female task completing duration with and without
instructions.
Instruction
Gender Instructions No Instructions Overall Mean
Male (time) 15.71 20.43 18.07
Female (time) 20.80 25.33 23.27
Overall Mean 17.83 22.69 20.36
The results of the analysis indicated that without instructions male took more time (20.43) to
complete the Nanoblock task as compared to the time (15.71) when they were given no
instructions. Similarly, the female took more time to complete their task 25.33 minutes when
they were not given instructions. In short, in both cases with or without instructions male
completed their task earlier as compared to female.

SEX DIFFERENCES IN NANOBLOCK ASSEMBLY PERFORMANCE 10
Test Between-Subjects Effects
Table 2
The following table depicts the results of the Dependent Variable Time
Source Type III
Sum of
Square
df Mean
Square
F Sig. Partial Eta
Squared
Corrected
Model
300.484a 3 100.161 53.554 .000 .884
Intercept 10376.409 1 10376.409 5.548E3 .000 .996
Instructions 131.087 1 131.087 70.089 .000 .769
Gender 152.993 1 152.993 81.801 .000 .796
Instructions
* Gender
.050 1 .050 .027 0.05 .001
Error 39.276 21 1.870
Total 10703.000 25
Corrected
Total
339.760 24
a. R Squared = .884(Adjusted R Squared = .868)
Is there a significant effect of ‘’Instructions’’? According to the above table, a
significant effect of instruction among both gender p< 000 was found.
Report the results of analysis using the correct values for F, df and p. The above
table indicated that the gender, instruction and gender* instructions have a statistically
significant interactions p = 0.05 with the degree of freedom 1 and F 0.27.
What does this mean regarding the time that was taken to complete the model when
instruction is used? Clue, look at the descriptive statistics. The male and female took less
time (M= 15.71, F= 20.80) to build the Nanoblock model with instructions.
Is there a significant effect of Gender? Yes, Male took less time with and without
instructions to complete the Nanoblock model with a significant difference of p>000.
Report the results of the analysis using the correct values for F, df and P? There was
a significant difference between male and female task completion with the F= 81.801, df 1 and
p> 0.05.

SEX DIFFERENCES IN NANOBLOCK ASSEMBLY PERFORMANCE 11
What does this main effect means regarding the how much time was taken to build
the Nanoblock model when male and females are compared? Male and female took less time
to complete the task after they revved the instructions, but males took the least time as compared
to female.
Is there a significant (Instructions * Gender) interaction. Yes, there was a significant
(Instructions * Gender) interaction with the significance level of 0.05.
Report the results of the analysis using the correct value for F, df and p. The
instruction and gender* instructions have statistically significant interactions p = 0.05 with the
degree of freedom 1 and F 0.27. Interpret the interaction based on what you can see in the post.
Independent Sample t-test
To investigate the difference between male and female task performance prior and after
the implementation of instruction was assessed through t-test.
Table 3
The following table depicts the results of the t-test
Factor Gender M SD t p
Without
Instruction
(time)
Male 20.43 .976 -8.588 .002
Female 25.33 2.160
With
Instructions
(time)
Male 15.71 1.113 -5.425 .000
Female 20.80 .837
Is there a significant difference between males and females in terms of their time
taken to build the Nanobkock model when an instruction is used. Yes, a significant
difference p< .000 was found among both sexes in terms of their time taken to complete the task
when instruction are used.

SEX DIFFERENCES IN NANOBLOCK ASSEMBLY PERFORMANCE 12
Report the results of the analysis using the correct values for t, df, and p. A
significant difference was found between male and female before and after reviving the
instruction and Nano model completion with the df =1, level of a sig. 000 and t-8.588.
Now that you have performed the post hoc test, formally write up the results of the two-
way between subjects ANOVA.
Inter-rater Reliability of the Second DV
Table 4
The following table shows the correlation between variables
Factors Score 1 Score 2
Group 1 .591 .591
Group 2 .775 .775
The above table depicted the correlation between score 1 and score 2. Therefore the
Average scores were computed for Mean Rater Scores for further analysis. The mean rater scores
depicted how much average time each group took in accomplishing their task and what was the
quality of their task using score 1 and score two sheets.
Results of the Second Anova
Table 5
The following table represents the results of the mean rater scores, gender, instructions and
time.
Instruction
Gender Instructions No Instructions Overall Mean
Male 6.57 6.07 6.32
Female 6.70 5.67 6.13
Overall Mean 6.62 5.88 6.24

SEX DIFFERENCES IN NANOBLOCK ASSEMBLY PERFORMANCE 13
The above table indicated the male and female who received instructions were higher on mean
scores. The overall results also indicated that the group who received instructed showed high
scores on the mean.
Table 6
The following table represents the results
Sources Type III
sum of
square
df Mean
Square
F Sig. Partial Eta
Squared
Correct
Model
3.998a 3 1.333 2.650 0.75 .275
Intercept 958.759 1 958.759 1.906E3 .000 .989
Gender .117 1 .117 .232 .635 .011
Instruction
s
3.604 1 3.604 7.166 .014 .05
Gender*In
structions
.436 1 .436 .867 .362 .040
Error 10.562 21 .503
Total 988.000 25
Corrected 14.560 24
a. R Squared =.275 (Adjusted Squared =.171)
According to the above table, there was a significant effect of instruction among both gender p=
0.05. The above table indicated that the gender, instruction and gender* instructions have a
statistically significant interactions p = 0.40 with the degree of freedom 1 and F .867. There was
a significant difference between male and females in terms of completing their Nanoblock model
with a significance level of 0.11. There was a significant difference between male and female
task completion with the F= 7.166, df 1 and p> 0.05. There was a significant (Instructions *
Gender) interaction with the significance level of 0.05.

SEX DIFFERENCES IN NANOBLOCK ASSEMBLY PERFORMANCE 14
Discussion
The experiment was carried out to assess the sex differences in Nanoblock assembly
performance. The participants were divided in two-group, i.e., the one who received the
instructions and those who did not receive. The Nanoblock model picture, Nanoblock model,
stopwatch, and scoring sheet was used in the experiment. Each participant was given 30 minutes
to complete the task, and the scores were recorded into SPSS version 21. The analysis was
carried out such as General Liner Model, which depicted the significant statistical difference
between gender, time and instruction. The male took more time to complete the Nanoblock
model as compared to females.
Similarly, those male and female who received the instruction took less time to complete
their task as compared to those who did not receive any instructions. Literature supported the
findings of the current study as according to Winking et al., (2015) the males perform better in
the furniture assembly task with instructions as compared to females. The t-test results analysis
indicated that male was significantly higher on scores in completing their task within the
minimum time as compared to females. Substantial studies indicated that the females take more
time in completing their tasks and secure fewer scores in MRT as compared to males (Suzuki
Imashiro Sakata Yamamoto, 2017).
General Liner Model was carried out to assess the effect of Mean rator scores on the
gender and instruction to complete the Nanoblock assembly task. The results indicated that the
males were significantly higher in completing the Nanoblock model as compared to girls.
Overall the findings of the current experiment indicated that the male was better than female
concerning time, and instructions. Male completed their task within less amount of time as
compared to female. With and without instructions male were significantly higher on scores than
men. The results of the current study support the literature, as the literature is enriched with

SEX DIFFERENCES IN NANOBLOCK ASSEMBLY PERFORMANCE 15
similar studies(Winking et al., 2015: Suzuki Imashiro Sakata Yamamoto, 2017). Further studies
would be carried out to assess the gender learning ability in furniture assembly tasks.

SEX DIFFERENCES IN NANOBLOCK ASSEMBLY PERFORMANCE 16
References
Beard, R., Magee, D., Suchard, M. A., Lemey, P., & Scotch, M. (2014). Generalised linear
models for identifying predictors of the evolutionary diffusion of viruses. AMIA Joint
Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational
Science, 2014, 23-8.
Kim T. K. (2015). T-test as a parametric statistic. Korean journal of Anesthesiology, 68(6), 540-
6.
Suzuki N., Imashiro M., Sakata M., Yamamoto M. (2017) The Effects of Group Size in the
Furniture Assembly Task. In: Yamamoto S. (eds) Human Interface and the Management of
Information: Supporting Learning, Decision-Making and Collaboration. HIMI 2017.
Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 10274. Springer, Cham
Wiking, S., Brattfjell, M. L., Iverson, E. E., Malinowsaka, K., Mikkelsen, R. L., Roed, L. P.,
Westgren J.E. (2016). Sex differences in furniture assembly performance: an experimental
study. Applied and Cognitive psychology, 30(2), 226-233.

SEX DIFFERENCES IN NANOBLOCK ASSEMBLY PERFORMANCE 17
Appendices

SEX DIFFERENCES IN NANOBLOCK ASSEMBLY PERFORMANCE 18

SEX DIFFERENCES IN NANOBLOCK ASSEMBLY PERFORMANCE 19