Sex differences in social behavior: Are the social role and evolutionary explanations compatible?

Examines the competing claims of 2 explanations of sex differences in social behavior: social role theory, and evolutionary psychology. The origin and scope of research on sex differences in social behavior are outlined, and the application of social role theory is discussed. Research that is based on modern sexual selection theory is described, and whether its findings can be explained by social role theory is considered. Findings associated with social role theory are weighted against evolutionary explanations. It is concluded that evolutionary theory accounts much better for the overall pattern of sex differences and for their origins. A coevolutionary approach is proposed to explain cross-cultural consistency in socialization patterns. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Sex differences in social memory tasks.

College females were superior to college males in memory for 3 tasks—one life situation and 2 names-and-faces tests. A new test, the KW Memory for Names and Faces Test, demonstrated a "same-sex recall" tendency for this sample. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Sex differences in sources of social self-esteem.

Administered R. Ziller's social self-esteem measure, the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability scale, and a scale rating self, mother, and father to 40 female and 37 male undergraduates. As predicted, the relationship of need for approval, grades, and family sibling structure to social self-esteem was different for each sex. Ss high in social self-esteem were: males with high need for approval; females with low need for approval; males with grades of A and B; females with grades of C; and male firstborns when the 2nd-born sibling was female. No relationship with perceived parental identification was found. Results support the hypothesis that males must succeed in culturally masculine roles to maintain self-esteem. (16 ref.) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Toddlers' language development: Sex differences within social risk.

Sex differences in the association between environmental risk and language development were examined in a longitudinal study of 54 high-social-risk families. Measures of the environment included information about family stress and coping, opportunities for cognitive and linguistic stimulation, the nature of learning experiences, and the affective quality of the infant–mother relationship. Despite apparently similar family conditions and early experiences, there were significant sex differences favoring girls on observational measures of spontaneous language production at 20 and 30 mo of age. For the group as a whole, sex differences on standardized tests at 24 and 36 mo of age were nonsignificant. In addition, relations between aspects of the learning environment and children's language performance differed for boys and girls, supporting a moderator interpretation of the findings. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

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. 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. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Possible explanations for social class differences in cancer patient survival

Social class differences in cancer patient survival have been reported for most cancer types and for a number of countries. The etiology of these differences has been studied less thoroughly and less systematically than social class differences in cancer occurrence. Stage of disease at diagnosis appears to be the most important factor contributing to the social class differences in cancer patient survival. This has been observed most clearly for gastrointestinal and gynaecological cancers. Social class differences in survival are generally wider for patients diagnosed with cancer at local stages than for those diagnosed with cancer at advanced stages. The reasons why cancers are more frequently diagnosed at a local stage in high than in low social classes in not properly understood at the moment. Of other potential contributing factors, the role of treatment and psychosocial factors has scarcely been studied. Biological indicators of tumour aggressiveness have failed to explain the social class differences.     

Sex and generation differences and similarities in social attitudes.

79 male and 89 female college students and their parents (108 fathers and 138 mothers) responded to items dealing with social issues. Parents were more conservative on 21 of the 24 items, significantly so on 13. Sex differences were significant for 7 items and were interpreted in terms of self-serving attitudes and the tender-tough dimension. The generation gap was greatest for items closest to the daily lives of the respondents and may be both an expression of and a contributor to social change. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Sex differences in intensity of emotional experience: A social role interpretation.

According to gender role theory, women's greater emotional intensity than men's stems from normative expectations for sex differences that arise as a result of men's and women's social roles. In Exp 1, endorsement of normative expectations for sex differences was associated with sex differences in Ss' own emotions: To the extent that they endorsed stereotypical differences between men and women, female Ss reported personally experiencing emotions of greater intensity and male Ss reported experiencing emotions of lesser intensity. The 2nd study manipulated expectations for responsiveness while Ss viewed a series of emotion-inducing slides. When instructions rendered normative expectations comparable for men and women, no sex differences were obtained in emotion self-reports. Furthermore, women evidenced more extreme electromyograph physiological responding than men, suggesting general sex differences in emotion that are not limited to self-report. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Sex differences in interaction and achievement in cooperative small groups.

44 male and female 7th–8th graders in 2 mathematics classes worked for 2 wks in male- or female-majority groups or groups with equal numbers of males and females. Same-sex and cross-sex interactions were analyzed for giving, requesting, and receiving explanations and procedural information. Achievement and interaction results were related to the ratio of females to males in a group. Females and males showed equal achievement and similar interaction patterns in groups with equal numbers of females and males. In majority-female groups, females directed most of their interaction to males and showed lower achievement than males. In majority-male groups, males tended to ignore females and showed somewhat higher achievement than did females. Explanations for these results are considered in terms of status characteristics and expectations states, and consequences for group composition in the classroom are discussed. (34 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Sex differences in social behavior: comparing social role theory and evolutionary psychology

In rats, copper deficiency leads to low copper metalloenzyme activity, high serum cholesterol, and cardiovascular lesions. In humans, moderately low copper intake may be common, but the consequences remain largely uncertain. The present study examined the effects of copper supplementation (2 mg/d for 4 weeks in a copper/placebo crossover design) in 20 adult men with moderately high plasma cholesterol. End-point measurements were three copper enzyme activities, erythrocyte superoxide dismutase (SOD), plasma ceruloplasmin (Cp), and plasma diamine oxidase (DAO), and three parameters related to the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD), plasma cholesterol, plasma lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)], and lag times for very-low-density lipoprotein (VLDL) and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) oxidation in vitro. Although copper had no significant effects on any parameter for the entire study group, it did significantly increase two enzyme activities (SOD and DAO), as well as lipoprotein oxidation lag times, in 10 subjects in the lower half of a median split for precopper values. Thus, copper supplementation appeared to influence some types of measurements in subjects beginning with less than median values.     

Sex differences in interaction style as a product of perceived sex differences in competence.

Observed the interaction styles of 72 male and 72 female university students while they worked in 4-person, mixed-sex groups on a discussion task. In some groups, Ss were only given information about each other's names and gender. In this circumstance, males were perceived by themselves and other group members to be higher in competence than females. Males also engaged in a greater amount of active task behavior than females, who exhibited a greater amount of positive social behavior than males. In other groups, Ss' competency-based status was manipulated by providing false feedback that they were high or low relative to their group in intellectual and moral aptitude. High-status Ss were then perceived to be more competent and engaged in more active task and less positive social behavior than low status ones. In this condition, no sex differences were obtained on perceived competence or on active task or positive social behavior. Findings support the idea that the gender differences obtained in interaction when status was not specified were partially a function of Ss' belief that the sexes differ in competence. (43 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The effects of social category norms and stereotypes on explanations for intergroup differences.

A 2-stage model of the construction of explanations for differences between groups is presented. Category norms affect which of 2 groups becomes "the effect to be explained," and stereotypes shape attributions about that group. In 3 experiments, 288 participants wrote explanations for differences between gay and straight men. Explanations focused on gay men who were also judged to have more mutable attributes. However, these effects were not correlated. Participants focused explanations on straight men when explicitly instructed to do so (Experiment 1). Explanations focused on both groups equally when the gay men constituted the numerically larger sample, when gay men were more typical of the overarching category (i.e., people with AMS) than straight men, or when more straight men were described as performing the behavior (Experiment 2). Stereotype-consistent information prompted more essentialist references and fewer reconstructive references to gay men than did stereotype-inconsistent information (Experiment 3). The relevance of this model for theories of norms, stereotypes, and for the conduct of social science is discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Sex differences in effects of social and value similarity in same-sex friendship.

Explored sex differences in effects of social and value similarity in a longitudinal study of 146 same-sex college roommate pairs (62 male and 84 female). The clearest findings concerned actual value similarity among women; those who chose each other as roommates were more similar than those who had been assigned to be roommates. Actual value similarity (measured in the fall quarter) was correlated with liking in the fall and liking in the spring among female chosen pairs; it also predicted which female assigned pairs would remain roommates. None of the analyses of actual value similarity was significant for men, although tests of sex differences in effects yielded mixed results. Few effects were obtained for similarity on social characteristics, except for similarity on year in college. Results are discussed in terms of prior roommate studies, and issues are raised concerning the use of roommates in research on friendship development. (28 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Sex differences in the use of demand and withdraw behavior in marriage: Examining the social structure hypothesis.

Studies consistently show sex differences in married couples' use of demand and withdraw behavior. The social structure hypothesis proposes that these differences are the result of power differentials between spouses. This study examined the link between 3 aspects of marital power and demanding and withdrawal behavior. Contrary to social structure predictions, results showed that wives did not possess less decision-making ability or access to resources and appeared to exhibit greater situational power (i.e., domineering and dominant behaviors) than did their husbands during problem-solving discussions. Furthermore, the spouse who exhibited the most demands also exhibited the most domineering and dominant behaviors, whereas the spouse who exhibited the most withdrawal exhibited the least domineering and dominant behaviors during problem-solving discussions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Sex typing and androgyny in dyadic interaction: Individual differences in responsiveness to physical attractiveness.

In an expansion of the "behavioral confirmation" paradigm developed by M. Snyder et al (see record 1979-26014-001), 12 sex-typed and 12 androgynous (Bem Sex-Role Inventory) undergraduates of each sex engaged in getting-acquainted telephone conversations with allegedly attractive and unattractive members of their own and the opposite sex. Although females were more socially responsive than males, the sexes neither differed in their responsiveness to physical attractiveness nor in their responsiveness to cross-sex and same-sex interaction. As hypothesized, sex-typed individuals were rated by blind judges as being significantly more responsive toward allegedly attractive than unattractive partners. In contrast, androgynous men did not differentiate on the basis of physical attractiveness, and androgynous women actually led allegedly unattractive targets to be rated as more socially attractive than allegedly attractive targets, thereby disconfirming the physical attractiveness stereotype. Because cultural definitions of physical attractiveness are different for men and women, results are discussed in the context of recent evidence that sex-typed individuals have a particular readiness to encode and organize information in terms of gender. (22 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Sex differences in influenceability.

Examines the hypothesis that women are more influenceable than men in a variety of situations. For persuasion research and for conformity studies not involving group pressure, there is scant empirical support for a sex difference, and for group pressure conformity research, there is support among a substantial minority of studies. Also explored is the possibility that various sex differences in social influence studies are a product of contextual features of experimental settings. This is suggested by the fact that findings reporting greater influenceability among females were more prevalent in studies published prior to 1970 than in those published in the 1970s. Finally, sex differences in various psychological processes that may mediate persuasion and conformity are evaluated as possible explanations for those influenceability sex differences that appear to be genuine. It is suggested that a propensity to yield inherent in the female sex role appears to account for some aspects of influenceability findings, but a 2nd explanation, a tendency for women more than men to be oriented to interpersonal goals in group settings, is also plausible. (7? p ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Sex differences in neuropsychological performance and social functioning in schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.

Objective: To investigate sex differences in neurocognition and social functioning in schizophrenia and bipolar disorder and the possible role of sex as a moderator of this relationship. Method: Participants with schizophrenia (60 women/94 men), bipolar I disorder (55 women/51 men), and healthy controls (158 women/182 men) were assessed with an extensive neuropsychological test battery and a social functioning questionnaire. Results: We found significant main effects of sex for neuropsychological tests (p     

Sex differences in impulsivity: A meta-analysis.

Men are overrepresented in socially problematic behaviors, such as aggression and criminal behavior, which have been linked to impulsivity. Our review of impulsivity is organized around the tripartite theoretical distinction between reward hypersensitivity, punishment hyposensitivity, and inadequate effortful control. Drawing on evolutionary, criminological, developmental, and personality theories, we predicted that sex differences would be most pronounced in risky activities with men demonstrating greater sensation seeking, greater reward sensitivity, and lower punishment sensitivity. We predicted a small female advantage in effortful control. We analyzed 741 effect sizes from 277 studies, including psychometric and behavioral measures. Women were consistently more punishment sensitive (d = ?0.33), but men did not show greater reward sensitivity (d = 0.01). Men showed significantly higher sensation seeking on questionnaire measures (d = 0.41) and on a behavioral risk-taking task (d = 0.36). Questionnaire measures of deficits in effortful control showed a very modest effect size in the male direction (d = 0.08). Sex differences were not found on delay discounting or executive function tasks. The results indicate a stronger sex difference in motivational rather than effortful or executive forms of behavior control. Specifically, they support evolutionary and biological theories of risk taking predicated on sex differences in punishment sensitivity. A clearer understanding of sex differences in impulsivity depends upon recognizing important distinctions between sensation seeking and impulsivity, between executive and effortful forms of control, and between impulsivity as a deficit and as a trait. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Sex differences in self-disclosure: A meta-analysis.

Conducted a meta-analysis of 205 studies involving 23,702 Ss to determine whether there are sex differences in self-disclosure. Across these studies, women disclosed slightly more than men (d?=?18). This effect size was not homogeneous across studies. Several moderator variables were found. Sex of target and the interaction effect of relationship to target and measure of self-disclosure moderated the effect of sex on self-disclosure. Sex differences in self-disclosure were significantly greater to female and same-sex partners than to opposite-sex or male partners. When the target had a relationship with the discloser (i.e., friend, parent, or spouse), women disclosed more than men regardless of whether self-disclosure was measured by self-report or observation. When the target was a stranger, men reported that they disclosed similarly to women; however, studies using observational measures of self-disclosure found that women disclosed more than men. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)