Sex Differences in Cooperation: A Meta-analytic Review of Social Dilemmas

Although it is commonly believed that women are kinder and more cooperative than men, there is conflicting evidence for this assertion. Current theories of sex differences in social behavior suggest that it may be useful to examine in what situations men and women are likely to differ in cooperation...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: BALLIET, Daniel, LI, Norman P., Macfarlan, Shane J., Van Vugt, Mark
Format: text
Language:English
Published: Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University 2011
Subjects:
Online Access:https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/soss_research/1130
https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/soss_research/article/2386/viewcontent/BallietLiMacfarlanVanVugt2011.pdf
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: Singapore Management University
Language: English
id sg-smu-ink.soss_research-2386
record_format dspace
spelling sg-smu-ink.soss_research-23862019-07-22T07:24:25Z Sex Differences in Cooperation: A Meta-analytic Review of Social Dilemmas BALLIET, Daniel LI, Norman P. Macfarlan, Shane J. Van Vugt, Mark Although it is commonly believed that women are kinder and more cooperative than men, there is conflicting evidence for this assertion. Current theories of sex differences in social behavior suggest that it may be useful to examine in what situations men and women are likely to differ in cooperation. Here, we derive predictions from both sociocultural and evolutionary perspectives on context-specific sex differences in cooperation, and we conduct a unique meta-analytic study of 272 effect sizes—sampled across 50 years of research—on social dilemmas to examine several potential moderators. The overall average effect size is not statistically different from zero (d - 0.05), suggesting that men and women do not differ in their overall amounts of cooperation. However, the association between sex and cooperation is moderated by several key features of the social context: Male–male interactions are more cooperative than female–female interactions (d 0.16), yet women cooperate more than men in mixed-sex interactions (d - 0.22). In repeated interactions, men are more cooperative than women. Women were more cooperative than men in larger groups and in more recent studies, but these differences disappeared after statistically controlling for several study characteristics. We discuss these results in the context of both sociocultural and evolutionary theories of sex differences, stress the need for an integrated biosocial approach, and outline directions for future research. 2011-11-01T07:00:00Z text application/pdf https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/soss_research/1130 info:doi/10.1037/a0025354 https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/soss_research/article/2386/viewcontent/BallietLiMacfarlanVanVugt2011.pdf http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Research Collection School of Social Sciences eng Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University gender sex differences cooperation social dilemmas meta-analysis Social Psychology Theory and Philosophy
institution Singapore Management University
building SMU Libraries
continent Asia
country Singapore
Singapore
content_provider SMU Libraries
collection InK@SMU
language English
topic gender
sex differences
cooperation
social dilemmas
meta-analysis
Social Psychology
Theory and Philosophy
spellingShingle gender
sex differences
cooperation
social dilemmas
meta-analysis
Social Psychology
Theory and Philosophy
BALLIET, Daniel
LI, Norman P.
Macfarlan, Shane J.
Van Vugt, Mark
Sex Differences in Cooperation: A Meta-analytic Review of Social Dilemmas
description Although it is commonly believed that women are kinder and more cooperative than men, there is conflicting evidence for this assertion. Current theories of sex differences in social behavior suggest that it may be useful to examine in what situations men and women are likely to differ in cooperation. Here, we derive predictions from both sociocultural and evolutionary perspectives on context-specific sex differences in cooperation, and we conduct a unique meta-analytic study of 272 effect sizes—sampled across 50 years of research—on social dilemmas to examine several potential moderators. The overall average effect size is not statistically different from zero (d - 0.05), suggesting that men and women do not differ in their overall amounts of cooperation. However, the association between sex and cooperation is moderated by several key features of the social context: Male–male interactions are more cooperative than female–female interactions (d 0.16), yet women cooperate more than men in mixed-sex interactions (d - 0.22). In repeated interactions, men are more cooperative than women. Women were more cooperative than men in larger groups and in more recent studies, but these differences disappeared after statistically controlling for several study characteristics. We discuss these results in the context of both sociocultural and evolutionary theories of sex differences, stress the need for an integrated biosocial approach, and outline directions for future research.
format text
author BALLIET, Daniel
LI, Norman P.
Macfarlan, Shane J.
Van Vugt, Mark
author_facet BALLIET, Daniel
LI, Norman P.
Macfarlan, Shane J.
Van Vugt, Mark
author_sort BALLIET, Daniel
title Sex Differences in Cooperation: A Meta-analytic Review of Social Dilemmas
title_short Sex Differences in Cooperation: A Meta-analytic Review of Social Dilemmas
title_full Sex Differences in Cooperation: A Meta-analytic Review of Social Dilemmas
title_fullStr Sex Differences in Cooperation: A Meta-analytic Review of Social Dilemmas
title_full_unstemmed Sex Differences in Cooperation: A Meta-analytic Review of Social Dilemmas
title_sort sex differences in cooperation: a meta-analytic review of social dilemmas
publisher Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University
publishDate 2011
url https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/soss_research/1130
https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/soss_research/article/2386/viewcontent/BallietLiMacfarlanVanVugt2011.pdf
_version_ 1770571293388701696