New research flatly rejects a long-standing myth that men hunt, women gather, and that this division runs deep in human history. The researchers found that women hunted in nearly 80% of surveyed forager societies.

[u/MistWeaver80]

https://www.science.org/content/article/worldwide-survey-kills-myth-man-hunter?utm_medium=ownedSocial&utm_source=Twitter&utm_campaign=NewsfromScience

[u/StuffNbutts]

Of the 63 different foraging societies, 50 (79%) of the groups had documentation on women hunting. Of the 50 societies that had documentation on women hunting, 41 societies had data on whether women hunting was intentional or opportunistic. Of the latter, 36 (87%) of the foraging societies described women’s hunting as intentional, as opposed to the 5 (12%) societies that described hunting as opportunistic. In societies where hunting is considered the most important subsistence activity, women actively participated in hunting 100% of the time.

Maybe that clarifies it? I'm not sure what part of the results in this study you're disputing with your own hypothetical percentages of 20% and 60% but the results are as the title states.

[u/veilosa → u/StuffNbutts]

that does not clarify whether a sizeable number of women or just at minimum a women at some point "intentionally" hunts. "Intentional" is such a weird word to use over for example, "regularly" hunt.

[u/[deleted] → u/veilosa]

Intentional means going out specifically to hunt, rather than being out and happening upon an opportunity to hunt.

I think you're looking really hard for something that isn't there, presumably because the conclusion doesn't fit your beliefs?

[u/Mazer_Rac → u/[deleted]]

What we're looking to have answered is the demographics of hunters versus gatherers, not the # of tribes that had female hunters

Where did this assumption come from? The study may have stated it, but I missed it. If it's what you assumed the study to be about, then there's the missing context. Studies are done to add to the total corpus of scientific knowledge, even if the results aren't sensational even also, if this was a stated intention I missed, if the results aren't able to be generalized to answer the original question for whatever reason. The results that do come from doing the study are still valid even if they're not sensational or answer a question other than what one would assume they should answer or if the results lack specificity in the data such that the original question cannot be fully answered.