No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
At the interface of social cognition and psychometrics: Manipulating the sex of the reference class modulates sex differences in personality traits
Abstract
Psychometric surveys suggest that sex differences in personality are minimal. Herein, we argue that (a) the mind is likely biased toward assessing oneself relative to same-sex others, and (b) this bias may affect the measurement of sex differences in personality. In support of this, an experiment demonstrates modulation of sex differences on the HEXACO facets by manipulating the sex of the “reference class”—the group of people subjects compare themselves to when making self-assessments on survey items. Although patterns varied across traits, sex differences were relatively small in the “unspecified” and “same-sex” reference class conditions—but substantially larger in the “opposite-sex” condition. These findings point to a same-sex comparison bias that may impact the measurement of sex differences in personality.
... Furthermore, personality models are bad predictors of behaviors and outcomes in specific situations, including social interactions (Funder, 2008;Zhao & Smillie, 2015). Psychologists have begun to study how personality expresses itself in different social interactions (Fleeson, 2007;Fournier et al., 2008;Lukaszewski, 2013;Lukaszewski et al., 2013). However, they lack tools to study the effects of "interaction rules" on the expression of personality traits (in the strategic sense of the word "rule", not its normative sense). ...
We propose a game-theoretic model of reciprocity and trust that incorporates personality traits. In the model, positive and negative reciprocity are “reciprocal preferences:” parameters of heterogeneous utility functions that take into account the material welfare of others (positively if they have been kind, negatively if they have been hostile). Trust, on the other hand, is an individual bias that distorts probabilistic beliefs about the trustworthiness of others. Unlike typical game-theoretic models, our model provides an explanation for the heterogeneity of preferences and probabilistic beliefs: a person’s personality traits determine both the parameters of his utility function and the magnitude of his beleif bias. We tested the model experimentally. Subjects completed a psychometric questionnaire that measures three personality traits: positive reciprocity, negative reciprocity, and trust. Subsequently, they played a sequential prisoner’s dilemma with random re-matching and payoffs changing from round to round. From the subjects’ psychometric scores and game behaviors we inferred the relationship between reciprocal preferences, belief biases, and personality. The results confirmed the hypotheses of the model.
... At the same time, the apparent effect of increasing gender equality may be confounded with that of decreasing ecological stress in more developed countries (Kaiser, 2019). Yet another hypothesis is that, in less gender egalitarian societies, people tend to evaluate themselves using their own sex as the reference group; as gender equality increase, the reference group expands to include the entire population, thus increasing the size (and accuracy) of self-reported differences (Lippa, 2010;Lukaszewski, Roney, Mills, & Bernard, 2013; for a critical evaluation see Schmitt et al., 2016). ...
Objective: Sex differences in personality are a matter of continuing debate. In a study on the US standardization sample of Cattell’s 16PF (fifth edition), Del Giudice and colleagues (2012; PLoS ONE, 7, e29265) estimated global sex differences in personality with multigroup covariance and mean structure analysis (MG-CMSA). The study found a surprisingly large multivariate effect, D = 2.71. Here we replicated the original analysis with an open online dataset employing an equivalent version of the 16PF.
Method: We closely replicated the original MG-MCSA analysis on N = 21,567 US participants (63% females, age 16-90); for robustness, we also analyzed N = 31,637 participants across English-speaking countries (61% females, age 16-90).
Results: The size of global sex differences was D = 2.06 in the US and D = 2.10 across English-speaking countries. Parcel-allocation variability analysis showed that results were robust to changes in parceling (US: median D = 2.09, IQR [1.89, 2.37]; English-speaking countries: median D = 2.17, IQR [1.98, 2.47]).
Conclusions: Our results corroborate the original study (with a comparable if somewhat smaller effect size) and provide new information on the impact of parcel allocation. We discuss the implications of these and similar findings for the psychology of sex differences
... It would suggest that the moderate to large sex differences commonly observed in more progressive Northern European nations are "truer" estimates of psychological sex differences (after all, men and women are comparing themselves to everyone, not just their own gender), whereas in more traditional cultures researchers are merely observing masked versions of what, according to social role theory, must be incredibly larger sex differences in personality (Lukaszewski et al. 2013). Finding that so many sex differences in psychology range from large in egalitarian nations to extremely large in more traditional cultures would provide strong refutation of gender similarities theory (Hyde 2005). ...
Psychologists have uncovered dozens of ways men and women differ in affect, behavior, and cognition. Social role theorists assume that men’s and women’s psychological differences solely result from sex role socialization processes and sociopolitical power differentials, and, as a consequence, social role theorists further assume psychological sex differences will be smaller in cultures with more egalitarian sex role socialization and greater sociopolitical gender equity. In this chapter, evidence is marshaled across 21 data sources that directly challenge this foundational assumption of social role theory. Empirically, sex differences in most psychological traits—in personality, sexuality, attitudes, emotions, behaviors, and cognitive abilities—are conspicuously larger in cultures with more egalitarian sex role socialization and greater sociopolitical gender equity. Even sex differences in many physical traits such as height, obesity, and blood pressure are larger in cultures with more egalitarian sex role socialization and greater sociopolitical gender equity. Three alternative evolutionary perspectives on psychological sex differences—obligate sex differences, facultatively mediated sex differences, and emergently-moderated sex differences—appear to better explain the universal and culturally-variable sex differences reliably observed across human cultures.
Four meta-analyses were conducted to examine gender differences in personality in the literature (1958-1992) and in normative data for well-known personality inventories (1940-1992). Males were found to be more assertive and had slightly higher self-esteem than females. Females were higher than males in extraversion, anxiety, trust, and, especially, tender-mindedness (e.g., nurturance). There were no noteworthy sex differences in social anxiety, impulsiveness, activity, ideas (e.g., reflectiveness), locus of control, and orderliness. Gender differences in personality traits were generally constant across ages, years of data collection, educational levels, and nations.
Literature in evolutionary psychology suggests that mate choice has been the primary mechanism of sexual selection in humans, but this conclusion conforms neither to theoretical predictions nor available evidence. Contests override other mechanisms of sexual selection; that is, when individuals can exclude their competitors by force or threat of force, mate choice, sperm competition, and other mechanisms are impossible. Mates are easier to monopolize in two dimensional mating environments, such as land, than in three-dimensional environments, such as air, water, and trees. Thus, two-dimensional mating environments may tend to favor the evolution of contests. The two-dimensionality of the human mating environment, along with phylogeny, the spatial and temporal clustering of mates and competitors, and anatomical considerations, predict that contest competition should have been the primary mechanism of sexual selection in men. A functional analysis supports this prediction. Men's traits are better designed for contest competition than for other sexual selection mechanisms; size, muscularity, strength, aggression, and the manufacture and use of weapons probably helped ancestral males win contests directly, and deep voices and facial hair signal dominance more effectively than they increase attractiveness. However, male monopolization of females was imperfect, and female mate choice, sperm competition, and sexual coercion also likely shaped men's traits. In contrast, male mate choice was probably central in women's mating competition because ancestral females could not constrain the choices of larger and more aggressive males through force, and attractive women could obtain greater male investment. Neotenous female features and body fat deposition on the breasts and hips appear to have been shaped by male mate choice.
Taxometric methods enable determination of whether the latent structure of a construct is dimensional or taxonic (nonarbitrary categories). Although sex as a biological category is taxonic, psychological gender differences have not been examined in this way. The taxometric methods of mean above minus below a cut, maximum eigenvalue, and latent mode were used to investigate whether gender is taxonic or dimensional. Behavioral measures of stereotyped hobbies and physiological characteristics (physical strength, anthropometric measurements) were examined for validation purposes, and were taxonic by sex. Psychological indicators included sexuality and mating (sexual attitudes and behaviors, mate selectivity, sociosexual orientation), interpersonal orientation (empathy, relational-interdependent self-construal), gender-related dispositions (masculinity, femininity, care orientation, unmitigated communion, fear of success, science inclination, Big Five personality), and intimacy (intimacy prototypes and stages, social provisions, intimacy with best friend). Constructs were with few exceptions dimensional, speaking to Spence's (1993) gender identity theory. Average differences between men and women are not under dispute, but the dimensionality of gender indicates that these differences are inappropriate for diagnosing gender-typical psychological variables on the basis of sex. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved).
Learning disabled (LD) children's self-perceptions were investigated using the Perceived Competence Scale for Children. This self-report instrument taps children's perceptions of their scholastic and athletic competence, social acceptance, and feelings of global self-worth. Participants in the study were 86 students in Grades 3–8 who attended a public school LD resource room. Results indicated that social comparison processes play an important role in the formation of LD students' perceived academic competence. LD students perceived themselves as becoming less academically competent across the grade span tested when they compared themselves with normally achieving students in their regular classes. When they compared their abilities with LD peers in their resource room, they maintained high perceptions of their own academic competence. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
The experiments in this article were conducted to observe the automatic activation of gender stereotypes and to assess theoretically specified conditions under which such stereotype priming may be moderated. Across 4 experiments, 3 patterns of data were observed: (1) evidence of stereotype priming under baseline conditions of intention and high cognitive constraints; (2) significant reduction of stereotype priming when a counterstereotype intention was formed even though cognitive constraints were high; and (3) complete reversal of stereotype priming when a counterstereotype intention was formed and cognitive constraints were low. These data support proposals that stereotypes may be automatically activated, as well as proposals that perceivers can control and even eliminate such effects. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
A model is presented to account for the natural selection of what is termed reciprocally altruistic behavior. The model shows how selection can operate against the cheater (non-reciprocator) in the system. Three instances of altruistic behavior are discussed, the evolution of which the model can explain: (1) behavior involved in cleaning symbioses; (2) warning cries in birds; and (3) human reciprocal altruism. Regarding human reciprocal altruism, it is shown that the details of the psychological system that regulates this altruism can be explained by the model. Specifically, friendship, dislike, moralistic aggression, gratitude, sympathy, trust, suspicion, trustworthiness, aspects of guilt, and some forms of dishonesty and hypocrisy can be explained as important adaptations to regulate the altruistic system. Each individual human is seen as possessing altruistic and cheating tendencies, the expression of which is sensitive to developmental variables that were selected to set the tendencies at a balance ap...
This article proposes a contextual-evolutionary theory of human mating strategies. Both men and women are hypothesized to have evolved distinct psychological mechanisms that underlie short-term and long-term strategies. Men and women confront different adaptive problems in short-term as opposed to long-term mating contexts. Consequently, different mate preferences become activated from their strategic repertoires. Nine key hypotheses and 22 predictions from Sexual Strategies Theory are outlined and tested empirically. Adaptive problems sensitive to context include sexual accessibility, fertility assessment, commitment seeking and avoidance, immediate and enduring resource procurement, paternity certainty, assessment of mate value, and parental investment. Discussion summarizes 6 additional sources of behavioral data, outlines adaptive problems common to both sexes, and suggests additional contexts likely to cause shifts in mating strategy.
Secondary analyses of Revised NEO Personality Inventory data from 26 cultures (N = 23,031) suggest that gender differences are small relative to individual variation within genders; differences are replicated across cultures for both college-age and adult samples, and differences are broadly consistent with gender stereotypes: Women reported themselves to be higher in Neuroticism, Agreeableness, Warmth, and Openness to Feelings, whereas men were higher in Assertiveness and Openness to Ideas. Contrary to predictions from evolutionary theory, the magnitude of gender differences varied across cultures. Contrary to predictions from the social role model, gender differences were most pronounced in European and American cultures in which traditional sex roles are minimized. Possible explanations for this surprising finding are discussed, including the attribution of masculine and feminine behaviors to roles rather than traits in traditional cultures.
The HEXACO Personality Inventory (HEXACO-PI) operationalizes the six factors obtained from lexical studies of personality structure in several languages. In this study, psychometric properties of the HEXACO-PI were assessed using a community adult sample and also using observer reports, thereby extending the previous investigation relying only on self-reports from a college student sample. In addition to examining the original 24 HEXACO-PI facet scales, the authors also examined two new facet scales--Altruism versus Antagonism and Negative Self-Evaluation--that assess constructs located interstitially among the factors of the HEXACO space. The HEXACO-PI again showed favorable psychometric properties in terms of reliability and factor structure and also showed high levels of self/observer agreement.
Previous research suggested that sex differences in personality traits are larger in prosperous, healthy, and egalitarian cultures in which women have more opportunities equal with those of men. In this article, the authors report cross-cultural findings in which this unintuitive result was replicated across samples from 55 nations (N = 17,637). On responses to the Big Five Inventory, women reported higher levels of neuroticism, extraversion, agreeableness, and conscientiousness than did men across most nations. These findings converge with previous studies in which different Big Five measures and more limited samples of nations were used. Overall, higher levels of human development--including long and healthy life, equal access to knowledge and education, and economic wealth--were the main nation-level predictors of larger sex differences in personality. Changes in men's personality traits appeared to be the primary cause of sex difference variation across cultures. It is proposed that heightened levels of sexual dimorphism result from personality traits of men and women being less constrained and more able to naturally diverge in developed nations. In less fortunate social and economic conditions, innate personality differences between men and women may be attenuated.
Four meta-analyses were conducted to examine gender differences in personality in the literature (1958-1992) and in normative data for well-known personality inventories (1940-1992). Males were found to be more assertive and had slightly higher self-esteem than females. Females were higher than males in extraversion, anxiety, trust, and, especially, tender-mindedness (e.g., nurturance). There were no noteworthy sex differences in social anxiety, impulsiveness, activity, ideas (e.g., reflectiveness), locus of control, and orderliness. Gender differences in personality traits were generally constant across ages, years of data collection, educational levels, and nations.
This research reports the childhood antecedents of the sexual division of labor, analyzing the family chores and paid employment of 669 boys and girls aged 2-17. Data from a statewide random sample of parents show that sex typing begins very early in work roles and that, by the time children reach adolescence, sharp differences exist between "boys' work" and "girls' work." Multiple classification analysis indicates that family background characteristics and family structure have relatively little impact compared to sex and age of child as determinants of sex typing.
We introduce a personality inventory designed to measure six major dimensions of personality derived from lexical studies of personality structure. The HEXACO Personality Inventory (HEXACO-PI) consists of 24 facet-level personality trait scales that define the six personality factors named Honesty-Humility (H), Emotionality (E), Extraversion (X), Agreeableness (A), Conscientiousness (C), and Openness to Experience (O). In this validation study involving a sample of over 400 respondents, all HEXACO-PI scales showed high internal consistency reliabilities, conformed to the hypothesized six-factor structure, and showed adequate convergent validities with external variables. The HEXACO factor space, and the rotations of factors within that space, are discussed with reference to J. S. Wiggins' work on the circumplex.
The origins of sex differences in human behavior can lie mainly in evolved dispositions that differ by sex or mainly in the differing placement of women and men in the social structure. The present article contrasts these 2 origin theories of sex differences and illustrates the explanatory power of each to account for the overall differences between the mate selection preferences of men and women. Although this research area often has been interpreted as providing evidence for evolved dispositions, a reanalysis of D. M. Buss's (see record
1989-32627-001) study of sex differences in the attributes valued in potential mates in 37 cultures yielded cross-cultural variation that supports the social structural account of sex differences in mate preferences. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
The experiments in this article were conducted to observe the automatic activation of gender stereo-types and to assess theoretically specified conditions under which such stereotype priming may be moderated. Across 4 experiments, 3 patterns of data were observed: (a) evidence of stereotype prim-ing under baseline conditions of intention and high cognitive constraints, (b) significant reduction of stereotype priming when a counterstereotype intention was formed even though cognitive con-straints were high, and (c) complete reversal of stereotype priming when a counterstereotype inten-tion was formed and cognitive constraints were low. These data support proposals that stereotypes may be automatically activated as well as proposals that perceivers can control and even eliminate such effects. Among the significant recent advances in social psychology is the study of unconscious and automatic processes in human thought and behavior (Bargh, stereotyping has begun to benefit from such an analysis, as demonstrated by a number of studies that have shown how stereotypes may influ-ence responses without perceivers' awareness of that influence (e.g., Banaji & Greenwald, 1995; Banaji, Hardin, & Rothman, 1993; Devine, 1989; Macrae; Milne, & Bodenhausen, 1994; Macrae, Stangor, & Milne, 1994). Lack of awareness, however, is only one of the conditions under which an automatic process may be revealed (Bargh, 1989, 1994). Perceiver intentions and cognitive resources may also determine the extent to which a response reflects an automatic or a controlled process (see Bargh, 1989, 1994; Kihlstrom, 1990). That is, automatic pro-cesses may result in stereotyping if perceivers do not have an intention to avoid the influence of such processes or if the nec-essary cognitive resources are not available for perceivers to readily carry out their intention, regardless of perceivers' aware-ness of the influence of stereotypes on judgment.
The abstract for this document is available on CSA Illumina.To view the Abstract, click the Abstract button above the document title.
* A highly controversial book challenging current evolutionary thinking on women
* A new book in the popular field of evolutionary psychology
* Accessible and dynamic account of evolutionary theory
Theories of human evolution portray ancestral men as active individuals who shaped future generations by testosterone-driven competition, creating a critical gulf between reproductive winners and losers. But what role is left for women within such evolutionary thinking? Their role has been constricted to mere consumers of the fruits of male competition accepting the winning male genes to pass to their children. Allegedly devoid of the need and capacity for competition amongst themselves, women could be neither winners nor losers in the reproductive stakes and so could contribute nothing to the genetic variability that drives selection. Is it any wonder that feminists are dismissive of such evolutionary approaches? That many have sought to ignore the contribution that evolutionary theory can make to our understanding of women? But have women really just been bit part actors in the whole story of evolution? Have they not played their own role in ensuring their reproductive success? In this highly accessible and thought provoking new book, Anne Campbell challenges this passive role of women in evolutionary theory, and redresses the current bias within evolutionary writing. Guiding us through the basics of evolutionary theory, she proposes that women have forged their own strategic way forward, acting through their own forms of competition, rivalry, aggression, and sexuality, to shape their own destiny. Throwing down a challenge to feminist theories, Campbell argues that evolutionary theory can indeed teach us plenty about the development of the female mind - we just need to get it right. This is an important book that will force others to re-evaluate their own assumptions about the evolution of the female mind.
I argue that the magnitude and nature of sex differences in aggression, their development, causation, and variability, can be better explained by sexual selection than by the alternative biosocial version of social role theory. Thus, sex differences in physical aggression increase with the degree of risk, occur early in life, peak in young adulthood, and are likely to be mediated by greater male impulsiveness, and greater female fear of physical danger. Male variability in physical aggression is consistent with an alternative life history perspective, and context-dependent variability with responses to reproductive competition, although some variability follows the internal and external influences of social roles. Other sex differences, in variance in reproductive output, threat displays, size and strength, maturation rates, and mortality and conception rates, all indicate that male aggression is part of a sexually selected adaptive complex. Physical aggression between partners can be explained using different evolutionary principles, arising from the conflicts of interest between males and females entering a reproductive alliance, combined with variability following differences in societal gender roles. In this case, social roles are particularly important since they enable both the relatively equality in physical aggression between partners from Western nations, and the considerable cross-national variability, to be explained.
Contextual and developmental factors that may Flsult in same-sex peer preferences may be observed among two-year-olds prior to the emergence of gender segregation as a dominant pattern in their playgroups.
Development and validation of a measure of individual differences in social comparison orientation (the Iowa-Netherlands Comparison Orientation Measure [INCOM]) are described. Assuming that the tendency toward social comparison is universal, the scale was constructed so as to be appropriate to and comparable in 2 cultures: American and Dutch. It was then administered to several thousand people in each country. Analyses of these data are presented indicating that the scale has good psychometric properties. In addition, a laboratory study and several field studies are described that demonstrated the INCOM's ability to predict comparison behavior effectively. Possible uses of the scale in basic and applied settings are discussed.
The authors argue that a new six-dimensional framework for personality structure--the HEXACO model--constitutes a viable alternative to the well-known Big Five or five-factor model. The new model is consistent with the cross-culturally replicated finding of a common six-dimensional structure containing the factors Honesty-Humility (H), Emotionality (E), eExtraversion (X), Agreeableness (A), Conscientiousness (C), and Openness to Experience (O). Also, the HEXACO model predicts several personality phenomena that are not explained within the B5/FFM, including the relations of personality factors with theoretical biologists' constructs of reciprocal and kin altruism and the patterns of sex differences in personality traits. In addition, the HEXACO model accommodates several personality variables that are poorly assimilated within the B5/FFM.
Does sexual selection explain sex differences in human aggression?
- J Archer
Archer, J. (2009). Does sexual selection explain sex differences in human
aggression? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 32, 249-266.