while there are differences, the results do not lend strong support to the idea that recent events have a simple explanation in terms of differences in deep attitudes toward free markets or authoritarianism. It’s wrong to write Russia off as fundamentally different from the West. In 1991, we concluded that the Russian national character was not an obstacle to creating a market economy in Russia – and were proven right. We hope we are right again, and that national character will not prevent Russia from becoming a truly democratic society someday.
So, Gary Kasparov may have a point. Russians are inherently neither anti-market nor anti-democratic.
In Russia's case, the long time sustenance of communism in Russia is falsely attributed to character of people ignoring the other external factors. As Shiller shows, Russia had authoritarian governments not because people have authoritarian inclinations, but because of external factors (it's forced on people etc.).
Similarly in case of 'girls in chess', it's a fact that there's an observed difference in players' rankings. But, it doesn't follow from this fact that it's due to some inherent traits of girls. It could also be due to external factors like low number of players, vulnerability to stereotype threat etc.
We should hence be careful of such line of reasoning that attributes "observed differences" (a fact) to inherent traits ignoring external factors.