2022
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-25141-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

On the robustness of gender differences in economic behavior

Abstract: Because of the importance of economic decisions, researchers have looked into what factors influence them. Gender has received a lot of attention for explaining differences in behavior. But how much can be associated with gender, and how much with an individual’s biological sex? We run an experimental online study with cis- and transgender participants that (1) looks into correlational differences between gender and sex for competitiveness, risk-taking, and altruism by comparing decisions across these differen… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 67 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Our study is also related to work describing how norms and gender correlate or interact. The results are mixed, while most studies, which we will explain in more detail in the following, do find an interaction between gender, norms, and economic behavior, others do not find an influence of gender on economic behavior (Fornwagner et al, 2022). Prominent examples can be found in the labor market, where it is the norm that women negotiate less fiercely over wages and promotions (Exley et al, 2020), and men are traditionally the breadwinners in the household (Gauri et al, 2019;Bursztyn et al, 2020).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Our study is also related to work describing how norms and gender correlate or interact. The results are mixed, while most studies, which we will explain in more detail in the following, do find an interaction between gender, norms, and economic behavior, others do not find an influence of gender on economic behavior (Fornwagner et al, 2022). Prominent examples can be found in the labor market, where it is the norm that women negotiate less fiercely over wages and promotions (Exley et al, 2020), and men are traditionally the breadwinners in the household (Gauri et al, 2019;Bursztyn et al, 2020).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Sex differences can also emerge in decision-making where an animal is given a choice between an option that provides a smaller but guaranteed gain and an option that provides a larger gain but also could provide a loss. In humans, it is well-established that men tend to be more risk-seeking than women in a wide domain of decision-making ( Fornwagner et al, 2022 ), gambling ( Raylu and Oei, 2002 ; van den Bos et al, 2013a ), and financial risk-taking ( Dwyer et al, 2002 ; Eckel and Grossman, 2002 ; Charness and Gneezy, 2012 ). In contrast, studies on non-human animals, including common laboratory mice, have been limited in their conclusions.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Many behavioral studies have examined how people behave in the canonical games DG and the UG, allowing the aggregation of empirical insights in large meta-analyses (see meta-analyses on DG 30 and UG 31 ). A diverse overview exists of how demographic factors, such as age 30,32 and gender, shape behavior in economic games (DG 30 ; UG [33][34][35] ). Likewise no clear relationship between prompted gender and behavior in LLMs appears to exist -at least in terms of responses to the personality inventory 35 .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A diverse overview exists of how demographic factors, such as age 30,32 and gender, shape behavior in economic games (DG 30 ; UG [33][34][35] ). Likewise no clear relationship between prompted gender and behavior in LLMs appears to exist -at least in terms of responses to the personality inventory 35 . However, evidence on how socio-demographic prompting of these features in uences LLMs' advice remains scarce.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%