Hier mal ein paar Studien zu Geschlechterunterschieden in der Persönlichkeit:
Although large international studies have found consistent patterns of sex differences in personality traits among adults (i.e., women scoring higher on most facets), less is known about cross-cultural sex differences in adolescent personality and the role of culture and age in shaping them. The present study examines NEO Personality Inventory-3 (NEO-PI-3, McCrae, Costa, & Martin, 2005) informant ratings of adolescents from 23 cultures (N = 4,850) and investigates culture and age as sources of variability in sex differences of adolescents’ personality. The effect for Neuroticism (with females scoring higher than males) begins to take on its adult form around age 14. Girls score higher on Openness to Experience and Conscientiousness at all ages between 12 and 17 years. A more complex pattern emerges for Extraversion and Agreeableness, although by age 17, sex differences for these traits are highly similar to those observed in adulthood. Cross-sectional data suggest that (1) with advancing age, sex differences found in adolescents increasingly converge towards adult patterns with respect to both direction and magnitude; (2) girls display sex-typed personality traits at an earlier age than boys; and (3) the emergence of sex differences was similar across culture. Practical implications of the present findings are discussed.
Die Besprechung der Ergebnisse dort finde ich auch interessant:
The cross-sectional examination of how sex differences unfold in 12–17-year adolescents enabled us to investigate age as a possible source of inconsistencies that characterize the literature on sex differences in adolescents’ personality. Our study suggests that, with increasing age, the sex difference in N, N1: Anxiety, N6: Vulnerability, E6: Positive Emotions, and O5: Ideas becomes larger and that adolescent boys and girls converge with respect to E3: Assertiveness, O2: Aesthetics, and C4: Achievement striving. These findings put some of the seemingly contradictory findings from earlier studies into perspective. More specifically, some researchers (Branje et al., 2007; Costa et al., 2008) found no sex difference for N, while others did (Klimstra et al., 2009; McCrae, Costa, et al., 2005). Both sets of results are consistent with the present finding that the sex difference for N emerges at age 14, since studies that found no sex difference for N have typically used younger samples (Branje et al., 2007; Costa et al., 2008), compared to the studies that did find a sex difference for N (Klimstra et al., 2009; McCrae, Costa, et al., 2005). Furthermore, some have reported that girls score higher on C than boys (Klimstra et al., 2009; McCrae, Costa, et al., 2005), whereas others could not find a sex difference for this personality trait (McCrae et al., 2002). In the present study, girls scored higher than boys for C and its facets from age 12 onward, but both sexes tended to converge when moving toward adulthood (although this trend was only significant for C4: Achievement striving). As significant age effects were also found for facets of E and O, differences in age distributions between previously published studies might be responsible for inconsistent findings with respect to these personality traits as well (Soto et al., 2011).
As hypothesized, and in line with the biological changes that are thought to be underlying the sex gap in internalizing problems (i.e., depression), girls begin to score higher than boys on N and its facets from age 14 onwards. Most sex differences for the facets of A (with girls scoring higher than boys) emerge at age 17, although girls already score higher than boys by age 12 on A6: Tender-Mindedness. The latter suggests that the intensification of affiliative orientation in girls between age 11 to 13 years is predominantly associated with A6: Tender-Mindedness, and to a lesser extent with the other facets of A. The picture for E is somewhat more differentiated, as this component consists of an energy and an interpersonal component. As hypothesized, girls are found to score higher than boys on the interpersonal or affiliative facets (E1: Warmth, E2: Gregariousness, E3: Assertiveness) already by age 12. Less consistent sex differences are found for the energy facets (E4: Activity, E5: Excitement-Seeking, E6: Positive Emotions). Although we hypothesized that sex differences on these facets would emerge round age 14, boys already score higher on E5: Excitement-Seeking from age 12 onward, but adolescent girls score consistently higher than boys on E6: Positive Emotions from age 16 onward. No substantial sex differences between age 12 and 17 were observed for E4: Activity. Furthermore, the present study shows that although girls tend to be higher on C and its facets across the entire period of 12–17 years, more (substantial) sex differences for these personality traits occur in 12–14-year than in 15–17-year adolescents. The finding that boys tend to catch up with girls in personality development (also reported by Klimstra and colleagues, 2009) parallels the tendency that girls are generally ahead of boys in intellectual and cognitive functioning (e.g., executive functioning) during early adolescent years, but that boys tend to catch up at later adolescent age. Finally, although it has been demonstrated that intelligence and O share additive genetic effects (Bratko et al., 2012), the development of sex differences for O does not mirror the emergence of the sex gap in intellectual development observed in adolescence. In our study, we find that adolescent girls are higher than boys on O from age 12 onwards and that this sex difference mainly rests on sex differences for O2: Aesthetics and O3: Feelings. The masculine-typed effect for O5: Ideas begins to show by age 17.
Das Jungen sich etwas langsamer entwickeln ist für eine Spezies mit hoher intrasexueller Konkurrenz unter Männern durchaus üblich: Indem sie etwas länger Kinder sind, sind sie noch nicht der vollen Konkurrenz ausgesetzt und haben daher mehr Zeit zu wachsen und zu lernen. Es zeigt auch, dass einige Unterschiede erst unter der Einwirkung der Sexualhormone in der Pubertät entwickelt werden.
Eine andere Studie:
Using data from over 200,000 participants from 53 nations, I examined the cross-cultural consistency of sex differences for four traits: extraversion, agreeableness, neuroticism, and male-versus-female-typical occupational preferences. Across nations, men and women differed significantly on all four traits (mean ds = -.15, -.56, -.41, and 1.40, respectively, with negative values indicating women scoring higher). The strongest evidence for sex differences in SDs was for extraversion (women more variable) and for agreeableness (men more variable). United Nations indices of gender equality and economic development were associated with larger sex differences in agreeableness, but not with sex differences in other traits. Gender equality and economic development were negatively associated with mean national levels of neuroticism, suggesting that economic stress was associated with higher neuroticism. Regression analyses explored the power of sex, gender equality, and their interaction to predict men’s and women’s 106 national trait means for each of the four traits. Only sex predicted means for all four traits, and sex predicted trait means much more strongly than did gender equality or the interaction between sex and gender equality. These results suggest that biological factors may contribute to sex differences in personality and that culture plays a negligible to small role in moderating sex differences in personality.
Auch hier ein kleiner Auszug aus der Besprechung:
The mean effect sizes in Table 1 show that agreeableness and neuroticism were the Big Five traits showing the largest gender differences (mean ds = 0.40 and 0.34, respectively), with women moderately higher than men on both traits. Gender differences in the other Big Five traits were smaller in magnitude, with women tending to be higher than men on all traits. Thus, in terms of gender differences, agreeableness and neuroticism appear to
be the ‘big two’ of the Big Five.
It is worth noting that although gender differences are ‘small’ for three of the Big Five traits, they are sometimes larger for trait facets. For example, Costa et al. (2001) reported that, despite small gender differences in overall extraversion, women tended to be moderately higher than men on the extraversion facets of warmth, gregariousness, and positive emotions, whereas men tended to be higher than women on the extraversion facets of
assertiveness and excitement seeking. Similarly, women tended to score higher than men on the ‘esthetics’ and ‘feelings’ facets of openness, whereas men tended to score higher than women on the ‘ideas’ facet of openness.
For the people–things dimension of interests, the results in Table 1 are clear, strong, and unambiguous. Men tend to be much more thing-oriented and much less people-oriented than women (mean d = 1.18, a ‘very large’ difference, according to Hyde (2005) verbal designations). The Su et al. (2009) meta-analysis generated the smallest effect size (d = 0.86). However, as Su et al. note in their paper, a number of the interest inventories that fed into their meta-analysis used item selection strategies intentionally designed to reduce gender differences. Thus, the Su et al. estimate for the overall gender difference in people-versus-thing orientation is almost certainly an underestimate
Das bedeutet, dass man sehr genau schauen muss, was man prüft. Wenn bestimmte Bereiche abgeprüft werden, dann können Männer in dem einen Teil dieses Bereiches und Frauen in dem anderen besser abschneiden. Rechnet man beide zusammen, dann ergibt sich ein sehr kleiner Unterschied und die zwei bestehenden Unterschiede werden ausgeblendet.
Und hier noch eine Studie:
Men are over-represented in socially problematic behaviors, such as aggression and criminal behavior, which have been linked to impulsivity. We organize our review of impulsivity 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 = -.33), but men did not show greater reward sensitivity (d = .01). Men showed significantly higher sensation seeking on questionnaire measures (d = .41) and on a behavioral risk taking task (d = .36). Questionnaire measures of deficits in effortful control showed a very modest effect size in the male direction (d = .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.
Frauen lassen sich also eher durch Bestrafungen abschrecken, Männer sind eher darauf aus, aufregende Erfahrungen zu machen und gehen eher Risiken ein.