Decoding the Gender-Equality Paradox
A new paper gets to the heart of a counterintuitive finding
One of the most surprising discoveries of the last few decades is known as the gender-equality paradox. This refers to the fact that, for a large number of traits, sex differences are larger, rather than smaller, in more gender-equal nations. The finding is surprising because it seems entirely plausible that, in cultures where men and women are treated differently and play different roles in society, sex differences will tend to be magnified. Even if there’s an innate contribution to many sex differences, this seems like a reasonable expectation. But the reasonable expectation turns out to be wrong. In fact, it’s not just wrong; it has things back-to-front, at least for some traits.
But how many and which ones? Are some sex differences smaller in more gender-equal nations, as we might originally have expected? And does gender equality per se predict these effects, or do other variables correlated with gender equality do a better job - variables like education, human development, or wealth?
These are some of the fascinating questions tackled in a new paper by Agneta Herlitz, Ida Hönig, and Martin Asperholm. The paper reports the results of two analyses. The first was a systematic review of 54 articles looking at the magnitude of sex differences across countries. The second was a new analysis based on 27 meta-analyses and large-scale studies on sex differences, which the authors used to assess which variables best predict how large or small the differences are. Crunching the numbers, they came to some fascinating, surprising conclusions.
Overview
Let’s start with an overview of the results. First, Herlitz and colleagues found that the sexes differed, on average, in a range of different traits. Women scored higher on agreeableness, proneness to negative emotions, verbal ability, episodic memory, the preference for financial prospects in a mate, and depression. Men, in contrast, scored higher on risk-taking, self-esteem, spatial ability, the preference for physical attractiveness in a mate, and aggression. These are commonly reported sex differences, and suggest that Herlitz and co.’s dataset is valid.
Second, as expected, many sex differences were larger in countries with better living conditions. This was the case, for instance, for sex differences in personality, self-esteem, reading ability, verbal episodic memory, aggression, some negative emotions, and depression.
Third, some sex differences were smaller in countries with better living conditions. These included sex differences in math performance, sexual behavior, many mate preferences, and intimate partner violence.
Finally, although the gender-equality paradox wasn’t found for all sex differences, it was found for a sizeable majority. It’s a genuine and pervasive phenomenon.
That’s the big picture; now, let’s dig into the details…
Personality
The figure below shows the results for sex differences in personality. These include the Big 5 personality traits,1 plus various specific traits, such as altruism, risk-taking, and self-esteem. The results of the authors’ new analyses are on the left; the results from the existing literature are on the right. Green squares indicate that the difference is larger in countries with better living conditions; red squares indicate that it’s smaller. The key finding is that there’s much more green than red - and indeed that, for many traits, there’s only green. As Herlitz and co. note, personality is the domain in which we most reliably find the gender-equality paradox.
Cognitive Abilities
The next figure shows the results for sex differences in cognitive abilities. The main categories explored in the paper were math performance, spatial abilities, reading, and episodic memory.