Explaining Sex Differences in Social Behavior: A Meta-Analytic Perspective

Abstract

The relatively simple question of whether sex differences exist has evolved into the more theoretically interesting question of why sex differences occur. This transition has come about because of the meta-analytic investigations of sex differences in social behavior which established sex difference trends in a variety of social behaviors. Many psychologists have questioned the validity of these meta-analytic generalizations since they violate many of the concepts in our textbooks and violate the popular view that sex differences exist only in the minds of perceivers. This role analysis focuses on gender roles, socially constructed rules about male and female behavior. Role theory .1.s in harmony with the overall sex differences established in meta-analyses, tending to be consistent with the normative expectations that women should be communal and men aaentic. To account for variability in findings about sex differences, a theory should suggest moderator variables that specify social settings that lirit and accentuate sex differences. Meta-analysis is suited to the detection of such interactions between sex and situational variables when the studies differ in theory-relevant aviacts of their social settings. Sex differences in behavior may appear stronger in laboratory than in natural settings. Meta-analytiz studies should enable development of mote valid generalizations about women and men. (ABL)Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document.

Cultural and Gender Differences in Gender-Role Beliefs, Sharing Household Task and Child-Care Responsibilities, and Well-Being Among Immigrants and Majority Members in The Netherlands

“…The social-role approach, the predominant approach to understanding gender-role beliefs, attributes the sources of these beliefs to the different social roles performed by men and women (Eagly and Wood 1991). In the ideology of separate gender roles (traditional family model), women are primarily responsible for the home, child rearing, and maintenance of good relationships.…”

Gender differences in aggression as a function of provocation: A meta-analysis.

“…The results of the comparison between the average effect sizes for the provocation and neutral conditions, as well as the assessment of effects of the mean judged level of provocation and negative affect, support the prediction that provocation will reduce the magnitude of gender differences in aggression. Eagly and Wood (1991) advised that, if differences between the social roles of men and women cause observed gender differences in aggressive behavior, variables that reflect the consequences of these roles should mediate these differences in aggression. Thus, men's and women's perceptions or cognitive appraisals of situations can be expected to differ.…”

Tracing Gender Differences in Parliamentary Debates: A Growth Curve Analysis of Ugandan Mps’ Activity Levels in Plenary Sessions, 1998–2008

“…Scholars point to cultural stereotypes about gender and expectations related to social roles as a reason that men and women behave differently. Assuming responsibilities at home, women develop traits that manifest communal and less aggressive behaviour (Eagly 1987;Eagly and Wood 1991). The prevailing political culture of masculinity engrained in legislative assemblies and organisations such as political parties may also act as a major obstacle to female politicians (Lovenduski 2005; see also Duerst-Lahti 2005;Whip 1991).…”