Women Form Social Networks More Selectively and Less Opportunistically than Men

Abstract

We test two hypotheses, based on sexual selection theory, about gender differences in costly social interactions. Differential selectivity states that women invest less than men in interactions with new individuals. Differential opportunism states that women's investment in social interactions is less responsive to information about the interaction's payoffs. The hypotheses imply that women's social networks are more stable and path dependent and composed of a greater proportion of strong relative to weak links. During their introductory week, we let new university students play an experimental trust game, first with one anonymous partner, then with the same and a new partner. Consistent with our hypotheses, we find that women invest less than men in new partners and that their investments are only half as responsive to information about the likely returns to the investment. Moreover, subsequent formation of students' real social networks is consistent with the experimental results: being randomly assigned to the same introductory group has a much larger positive effect on women's likelihood of reporting a subsequent friendship.JEL codes: C91, D81, J16

An Evolutionary Explanation for the Female Leadership Paradox

“…Compared to women, men may have also experienced greater selection to engage in rapid, large-scale coalition-building, for purposes of often violent aggression (Wrangham and Peterson, 1996). Perhaps consistent with this claim is evidence, at least in WEIRD populations, that men can be more likely to build larger social networks with more "weak" ties (Vigil, 2007;Seabright, 2012;Friebel et al, 2017), prefer socializing in larger same-sex groups (David-Barrett et al, 2015;Benenson, 2019;Peperkoorn et al, 2020), and organize their groups hierarchically while revering other group members' competitiveness (Berdahl and Anderson, 2005;Watkins and Jones, 2016;Benenson and Abadzi, 2020). One general interpretation of the foregoing is that men and women may have evolved different, though overlapping, political strategies, where for men within-group cooperation may be more beneficial for enhancing between-group competition, while for women, within-group cooperation is likely to be more circumscribed and focused on recruiting sources of stable social support (Vandermassen, 2008;Mcdonald et al, 2012).…”

“…This includes men's greater tendency for self-promotion, overconfidence and exaggerating their competence, which helps elevate many unqualified men to positions of power (Chamorro-Premuzic, 2019). To the extent men, more than women, prefer to socialize in larger same-sex groups (Low, 1992;David-Barrett et al, 2015;Benenson, 2019;Peperkoorn et al, 2020) and to build larger social networks comprised of many "weak" ties (Vigil, 2007;Seabright, 2012;Friebel et al, 2017), men may be unduly privileged in the pursuit of leadership, particularly in the mixed gender hierarchies of large organizations (van Vugt and Spisak, 2008;Cullen-Lester et al, 2016;Lindenlaub and Prummer, 2020). Effects of social networking on gender differences in leadership are exacerbated when leaders tend to be male and leaders in general prefer to hire and promote similar others (i.e., the "old boys network") (McDonald, 2011;Koch et al, 2015).…”

Pulling Effects in Migrant Entrepreneurship:Does Gender Matter?

“…After having investigated whether the existing stock of migrant firms induces more new firms of the same co-ethnic group in the same sector and province, we explore whether this pulling effect differs by gender. By doing so, this is the first paper to link the literature on the determinants of immigrant entrepreneurship with studies on gender differences in the exploitation of social networks (Friebel et al, 2017;Lalanne and Seabright, 2014;Lindenlaub and Prummer, 2014).…”

Pulling Effects in Immigrant Entrepreneurship: Does Gender Matter?

“…First, it contributes to the literature on the effects of immigrant networks on the creation of new firms by capturing an aggregate effect at the level of the immigrants' national group. Most importantly, this is the first paper that adds the gender dimension to the analysis by linking the literature on the determinants of immigrant entrepreneurship with studies on gender differences in the exploitation of social networks (Friebel et al, 2017;Lalanne and Seabright, 2011;Lindenlaub and Prummer, 2014). This literature builds on the notion of strong and weak links (Granovetter, 1973(Granovetter, , 1974.…”