Individuals with ADHD are less tolerant of other people’s political views and more prone to support the idea of silencing other opinions

ADHD and political participation: An observational study. Israel Waismel-Manor et al. PLOS One, February 21, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0280445

Abstract

Background and objective: Over the past decade, researchers have been seeking to understand the consequences of adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) for different types of everyday behaviors. In this study, we investigated the associations between ADHD and political participation and attitudes, as ADHD may impede their active participation in the polity.

Methods: This observational study used data from an online panel studying the adult Jewish population in Israel, collected prior the national elections of April 2019 (N = 1369). ADHD symptoms were assessed using the 6-item Adult ADHD Self-Report (ASRS-6). Political participation (traditional and digital), news consumption habits, and attitudinal measures were assessed using structured questionnaires. Multivariate linear regression analyses were conducted to analyze the association between ADHD symptoms (ASRS score <17) and reported political participation and attitudes.

Results: 200 respondents (14.6%) screened positive for ADHD based on the ASRS-6. Our findings show that individuals with ADHD are more likely to participate in politics than individuals without ADHD symptoms (B = 0.303, SE = 0.10, p = .003). However, participants with ADHD are more likely to be passive consumers of news, waiting for current political news to reach them instead of actively searching for it (B = 0.172, SE = 0.60, p = .004). They are also more prone to support the idea of silencing other opinions (B = 0.226, SE = 0.10, p = .029). The findings hold when controlling for age, sex, level of education, income, political orientation, religiosity, and stimulant therapy for ADHD symptoms.

Conclusions: Overall, we find evidence that individuals with ADHD display a unique pattern of political activity, including greater participation and less tolerance of others’ views, but not necessarily showing greater active interest in politics. Our findings add to a growing body of literature that examines the impact of ADHD on different types of everyday behaviors.

Discussion

Previous work suggests that genetic and biological factors might help explain some political behaviors [52–55, 59]. This study examines whether and how one of the most prevalent neuropsychiatric disorders, ADHD [56–58], is correlated with measures of political participation and attitudes. We screened adult participants in a political participation study for ADHD symptomatology using the ASRS-6 screening questionnaire and compared political participation patterns and attitudes of participants who screened positive for ADHD to those of participants who screened negative. In our sample, where the prevalence of ADHD based on the ASRS-6 was 14.6%, we found that positive ADHD screening was associated with higher political participation through both physical and digital channels. However, while ADHD-positive participants tended to express their political opinions via social media, they did not report greater interest in politics or higher levels of active news consumption. Instead, the analysis demonstrated that individuals with ADHD symptoms are more likely to take a “political news will find me” approach. In this sense, our results align with previous work that finds that individuals who suffer from other health conditions in their daily lives tend to participate more regularly in political activity, such as contacting a politician or signing a petition [31].

Additionally, participants with ADHD symptoms were found to be less tolerant of other people’s views. Considering that participants with ADHD symptoms were not more likely to curb democratic norms as a whole, this might reflect their attentiveness rather than a broader democratic issue.

To the best of our knowledge, the impact of ADHD on political behavior has not previously been evaluated. However, a recent study has addressed the use of social media among patients with ADHD. Social media users with ADHD were found to be less agreeable, to post more often, and to use more negations, hedging, and swear words. ADHD is also correlated with addictive social media use [47]. Social media activity in general is rewarding for ADHD patients, as it provides immediate feedback and offers an easy distraction from other tasks. In this sense, political participation through social media platforms is equally rewarding for patients with ADHD.

Impatience and intolerance towards the opinion of others and/or willingness to interrupt others while speaking are also symptomatic of ADHD as defined by the DSM-V [5]. Our findings indicate that this trait is also applicable to the political arena, with participants who screened positive for ADHD displaying lower tolerance towards opposing opinions.

While there was no difference between the ADHD and non-ADHD groups in regard to the amount of political content they consume via popular news outlets, we found that participants with ADHD are more prone to consume news passively, waiting for it to “find them.” This implies, in turn, that these individuals tend to base their current political knowledge on information that is screened for them by others, or that is filtered and curated by social media algorithms. This finding, which was not previously reported, may have implications for how patients with ADHD perceive reality and their vulnerability to being captured by information bubbles.

Participants who were treated by stimulants did not differ from non-treated ADHD-positive participants in our study. A possible explanation for this finding is that pharmacological treatments for ADHD affect symptoms over a limited timeframe, even when long-acting agents are used. ADHD patients tend to take their medication in the morning, so as to manage their symptoms during working hours. However, they are more likely to post on social media at night [47]. As such, their political activity may take place largely at times of day when they are not medically treated.

Our study has four main limitations: First, it was performed on a small population in one specific political context (the state of Israel, which is considered highly polarized). It is, therefore, difficult to draw general conclusions regarding other countries. At the same time, attention disorders are common worldwide, and we hope that further research will this matter in other countries. Second, this study used a screening tool rather than a clinical diagnosis. Third, it is possible that individuals with ADHD will demonstrate a different pattern of responding to surveys. For example, they might lose interest in the middle of filing the survey, depending on the time of day. As no previous literature on this matter exists, our research was carried out using the conventional method without special adjustment for attention disorders. Forth, it examined political participation through self-reports.

Nonetheless, our findings provide insights into the possible effects of ADHD on political behavior. With growing recognition of the existence and impact of ADHD among adults, the effects of the disorder on all aspects of human life are beginning to unfold. Considering that political participation entails voluntary actions taken by individuals to influence public policy and those elected officials who shape those policies, and given that ADHD is correlated with weakened populations, it is important to understand both whether the voices of those with ADHD are heard, and how this segment of society affects the polity.

More broadly, as our understanding and acceptance of neurodiversity grows [59], we need to pay more attention to how various common neurodevelopmental disorders shape our society. The political arena in democratic societies is formed and shaped by all citizens, including “neuro-minorities,” and academic research should address their participation as part of an effort both to improve the social functioning of neurodivergent individuals and to enhance the political system for the benefit of all. Future research is needed to further validate and strengthen our findings, possibly using validated clinical diagnoses and evaluating digital political behaviors via actual inspection of participants’ social media accounts using automated approaches.

People want friends to be more prosocial toward oneself than toward others, and sometimes prefer friends who are more vicious than prosocial, for instance, toward one's enemies

Sometimes we want vicious friends: People have nuanced preferences for how they want their friends to behave toward them versus others. Jaimie Arona Krems et al. Evolution and Human Behavior, February 23 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2023.02.008

Abstract: Intuition and research alike suggest that people prefer friends to be prosocial—particularly kind and trustworthy. Here, we examine these preferences in light of the fact that dyadic friendships are embedded in wider social networks. Because our friends recurrently interact with other people, and these friend-other interactions can have various positive and negative effects on us, people should possess distinct preferences not only for how our friends behave toward us but also for how friends behave toward different other people (e.g., strangers, rivals). In six studies (N = 1183; two pre-registered) with complementary designs and cross-national samples (U.S. community, U.S. student, India community), we find: (a) When the targets of best friends' behavior are not specified, people's friend preferences track how one wants friends to behave toward oneself. Replicating patterns found in past work, (b) people generally want friends to be kinder and more trustworthy than not. But (c) people also want friends to be more prosocial toward oneself than toward others, and (d) people sometimes prefer friends who are more vicious than prosocial, for instance, toward one's enemies. These findings challenge some long-held conclusions about friend preferences, expand the known range of traits preferred in close relationship partners, and enrich our understanding of what it means to deem people, for example, “kind,” as such evaluative personality concepts may by default be indexed to the self.

Introduction

Most work on close relationships, especially friendships, tends to focus on the dyad and thus on how people want to be treated by their dyadic partners (i.e., their friends) (Hall, 2012; Huang, Ledgerwood, & Eastwick, 2020; Sprecher & Regan, 2002; Wiseman, 1986). What matters is that one's friend treats one well. In line with such thinking, robust evidence suggests that people prefer friends who are, for example, kind to them and disfavor those who are vicious to them (e.g., Cottrell, Neuberg, & Li, 2007; Fehr, 1996; Hall, 2011, Hall, 2012; Perlman, Stevens, & Carcedo, 2014; Sprecher & Regan, 2002). Somewhat similarly to such ‘canonical’ findings, ‘cooperative accounts’ of partner choice might predict that what matters is a friend's overall prosociality—to oneself or others—and so people should prefer friends who are maximally prosocial (to oneself and others) (for reviews—but not necessarily support for—such accounts, see Barakzai & Shaw, 2018; Hess & Hagen, 2006).1

Here, we integrate adaptationist theories of friendship, which emphasize friends' roles in providing one another preferential social support (DeScioli & Kurzban, 2009; Tooby & Cosmides, 1996), with our embedded dyad framework, and we test subsequent predictions about what people want in friends. Briefly, the embedded dyad framework emphasizes that dyads (e.g., friend pairs) exist embedded in wider and often densely interconnected social networks, wherein one's friends inevitably interact with other people (e.g., Basyouni & Parkinson, 2022; Dunbar, 2018, 2021). As implied by both this framework and adaptationist theories of friendship, friend-other interactions are not only a recurrent feature of the social landscape, but they can also have potentially profound effects on one's friends, one's friendships, and (thus) one's outcomes. Together, these lines of work suggest that friends should, on average, radiate positive effects on the self—both directly (via friend behavior toward the self) and also indirectly (via friend behavior toward others). If friends interacted only with oneself, then we would expect people to prefer friends who are maximally and solely prosocial. But because one's friends also interact with other people, including one's rivals, we suggest that people might sometimes prefer friends who behave with greater monstrousness than brotherly love—extending and sometimes challenging expectations from canonical work on friend preferences and cooperative accounts of partner choice.

Friends are associated with many benefits to health and happiness (see, e.g., Dunbar, 2018, 2021). Friends may have also helped one another solve several recurrent fitness challenges, from ensuring sufficient access to resources for survival to winning agonistic conflicts (e.g., DeScioli & Kurzban, 2009; Tooby & Cosmides, 1996; Williams, Krems, Ayers, & Rankin, 2022). But presumably, such benefits depend(ed) on securing good friends—those able and willing to help one meet one's needs. Friend preferences may thus play an important role in the formation of such friendships. Friend preferences are thought to guide people to invest their finite time and energy on attracting and maintaining friends who fit this bill (e.g., Conroy-Beam & Buss, 2016; Krems & Conroy-Beam, 2020; but see, Huang et al., 2020).

What do people want in friends? Theoretically, there are myriad preferences that people could prioritize in friends—intelligence, left-handedness, physical attractiveness, dislike of cats, formidability, detached earlobes (e.g., Benenson, 2014; Eisenbruch and Roney, 2020; Hall, 2011; Lewis et al., 2011; Lukaszewski, Simmons, Anderson, & Roney, 2016; Williams et al., 2022). But decades of research seem to paint a clear picture of people's friend preferences2: Although not an exhaustive list, people tend to most prefer friends who are kind and trustworthy (e.g., Andreoni & Bernheim, 2009; Barclay, 2016; Cottrell et al., 2007; Erikson, 1950, Erikson, 1964; Gurven & Winking, 2008; Hall, 2011; Hatfield, Traupmann, & Sprecher, 1984; Holmes & Rempel, 1989; Panchanathan & Boyd, 2004; Rempel, Holmes, & Zanna, 1985; Schwartz & Bardi, 2001; Shaw, DeScioli, & Olson, 2012; Yamagishi & Yamagishi, 1994). For example, people sometimes compete for friends by advertising their kindness (Barclay & Willer, 2007; Reis & Gruzen, 1976). People also value trustworthiness even over other desired traits, including intelligence and attractiveness (Cottrell et al., 2007).

Although less work examines traits disfavored in friends, people tend to eschew those who seem vicious or indifferent (e.g., Benenson, 2014; Hall, 2011, Hall, 2012; Shinada, Yamagishi, & Ohmura, 2004; Walster, Berscheid, & Walster, 1973).3 For example, people not only prefer kind friends, but they also disfavor the appreciably unkind, such that disagreeable individuals tend to be befriended less (Jensen-Campbell, Knack, Waldrip, & Campbell, 2007; Nettle, 2006; Selfhout et al., 2010). People also strongly prioritize friends' reciprocation of valuation and caring. A lack of reciprocated care from friends can end relationships (Delton & Robertson, 2016; Delton et al., 2023; Kenny & La Voie, 1982; La Gaipa & Wood, 1981; Rose, 1984; Shaw, DeScioli, Barakzai, & Kurzban, 2017; Walster et al., 1973). Though more tentative, people might also disfavor exploitative or impartial friends. People detect and avoid cheaters (e.g., Cosmides & Tooby, 1992), and, even as people consider impartiality a virtuous and desirable trait (Tyler, 2000), people consider friends' impartiality toward them undesirable (Shaw et al., 2017).

We additionally note that classic work in social psychology suggests that relationship partners tend to be similar, familiar, and nearby (Barry, 1970; Bornstein, 1989; Byrne, 1971; Newcomb & Svehla, 1937; Zajonc, 1968). This does not imply that these traits are necessarily prioritized in friendship formation, however (DeScioli & Kurzban, 2012).

Previous work in social psychology, relationship science, and related areas has often tended to focus on dyadic relationship processes (see, e.g., Basyouni & Parkinson, 2022; Dunbar, 2018; Fehr, 1996; Merrie, Krems, & Sznycer, n.d.). In line with this, friend preference research has tended to focus on the friend dyad, explicitly or implicitly. For example, participants might respond to items assessing how friends should behave toward oneself: “can make me laugh” (Oswald, Clark, & Kelly, 2004), “will cheer me up when I am sad” (Zarbatany, Conley, & Pepper, 2004), “really listens to what I have to say” (La Gaipa, 1987), “goes out of his/her way to help me” (Bank, 1994). Other friend preference measures—for example, asking about whether an ideal friend “is helpful” (e.g., Krems & Conroy-Beam, 2020; Williams et al., 2022)—could also be inferred as implicitly asking about ideal behavior toward oneself (e.g., “is helpful to me”; see Lukaszewski & Roney, 2010). In all, this work has generated a rich body of knowledge about friend preferences (see Hall, 2012), which we refer to as canonical preferences. Again, this work generally suggests that people prefer friends who are maximally prosocial (toward oneself) and eschew friends who are antisocial (toward oneself).

Another body of work on partner choice has focused on the importance of a partner's prosociality or cooperativeness. These cooperative accounts typically assert that people select partners (e.g., friends) based on the cooperative benefits they could provide (e.g., Baumard, André, & Sperber, 2013; Kenny, Mohr, & Levesque, 2001; Rand & Nowak, 2013), which can be gleaned from reputational information. On this view, people should prefer partners who have—and/or have reputations for—maximal prosociality—both toward oneself (direct reciprocity; e.g., preferring those kind to us) and others (indirect reciprocity; e.g., preferring those kind to others; for a review of cooperative accounts, see Hess & Hagen, 2006). Such accounts might additionally predict that people prefer friends who behave with minimal viciousness, indifference, or other dimensions of antisociality—again, toward oneself or others.

We derived additional predictions from an integration of our embedded dyad framework with adaptationist models of friendship. Briefly, this framework emphasizes that dyadic relationships (here, friendships) are embedded in wider networks, wherein one's friends inevitably interact with and have their own relationships with other people. These interactions can affect one's friends, one's friendships, and (thus) one's own outcomes in potentially profound ways—both positive and negative (e.g., Ackerman, Kenrick and Schaller, 2007; Barakzai and Shaw, 2018; Benenson, 2014; Jordan, Sommers, Bloom, & Rand, 2017; Klein & Milardo, 1993; Krems, Williams, Aktipis, & Kenrick, 2021; Krems, Williams, Merrie, Kenrick, & Aktipis, 2022; Owens, Shute, & Slee, 2000; Parker, Low, Walker, & Gamm, 2005; Shaw et al., 2017; Sugiyama, 2004).

This social complexity is also implied by adaptationist models of friendship, which emphasize friends as social insurance for times of illness, injury, or conflict. Consider a situation of drought and starvation; whereas strangers are unlikely to invest resources in a starving person, because that person looks like a bad bet for reciprocity, the starving person's friends might indeed share their finite resources with them even over others facing similar need (Tooby & Cosmides, 1996). By doing so, the sharing friend ensures the continued survival of a person who has a stake in their own welfare, and who would thus help them in their future times of trouble. Likewise, consider an agonistic conflict between Alex and Benji—both of whom are Cam's friends. According to the Alliance Hypothesis of Friendship, Cam should side with the friend who is more likely to take Cam's side in later conflicts, which ensures the continued survival of Cam's likeliest supporter (DeScioli & Kurzban, 2009; DeScioli, Kurzban, Koch, & Liben-Nowell, 2011).

Taken together, the embedded dyad framework and these adaptationist models imply that the benefits of friendship depend, in part, on how much one's friends value oneself relative to others, and thus that a friend's behavior toward others can influence one's own outcomes. For example, if Cam takes Alex's side in the above dispute, Cam is also siding against Benji. If people are affected by friends' behavior toward the self and toward others, then people should possess preferences for how friends behave toward the self and toward others. Specifically, insofar as friends generally radiate positive effects on the self—not only directly (via how they behave toward oneself) but also indirectly (via how they behave toward others)—people's friend preferences should be systematically predictable, such that (1) the friendship value of a target to the self is a function of the effects the target has (or is expected to have) on the self, both directly and also indirectly, and (2) the value of a trait in the target (e.g., the value of a friend's viciousness) to the self depends on the net effects (direct and/or indirect) that trait will have on the self, which is affected by toward whom that trait is directed. In other words, good friends should benefit or at least not hinder us, even as via their behavior toward other people.

This leads to predictions that extend, deviate from, and sometimes run counter to other accounts and intuition (e.g., people always eschew vicious friends). For example, imagine that your friend Amani demonstrates trustworthiness—but she does so by keeping in confidence your enemy's secret plan to harm you. Meanwhile, your friend Blanca demonstrates viciousness—but does so by deterring your enemy from harming you. As this example illustrates, in addition to the obvious and important (direct) effects that interactions with our friends can have on us, our friends' interactions with other people can also have major (indirect) effects on us as well. Note that, if you evaluate Amani and Blanca as friends via (a) intuition, (b) the inferences one might draw from canonical findings, or (c) cooperative accounts, you might conclude that Amani (trustworthy) is a better friend than Blanca (vicious). If you consider, however, the net (both direct and indirect) effects that Amani and Blanca have on your welfare, you would reach the opposite conclusion.

Previous work on friend preferences and cooperative accounts of partner choice generate multiple and sometimes competing predictions about how people will want ideal best friends to behave, as compared to our novel embedded dyad perspective.

First, work on friend preferences has, either explicitly or implicitly, addressed self-directed friend preferences—or how people want friends to behave toward them (see, e.g., Hall, 2012). We thus test whether (1) asking people how they want friends to behave (target-unspecified friend preferences) generates the same pattern of responses as asking how people want friends to behave toward them (self-directed friend preferences) (for a similar examination of mate preferences, see Lukaszewski & Roney, 2010). If unspecified friend preferences track self-directed (more than other-directed) friend preferences, this would be consistent with our argument that people prefer friends to behave differently toward the self versus others.

Second, and in line with canonical findings, we expect that people will generally prefer friends to be kind and trustworthy (but not vicious or indifferent)—both toward oneself and toward most others, as people tend to attach positive value to the welfare of other community members. Specifically, (2) for target-unspecified, self-directed, and neutral target-directed (i.e., stranger-directed) preferences, we predict that people will prefer friends to be kind and trustworthy, but not vicious, indifferent, or otherwise antisocial. Yet we also predict that (3) people will want friends to behave more prosocially toward oneself than toward others. After all, preferential prosociality may be part of the function of friends (e.g., DeScioli & Kurzban, 2009).

Further, the difference in preferred prosociality toward the self versus a stranger should be exaggerated when comparing preferences for how friends should behave toward oneself versus one's rivals. Indeed, people have rivalries and enemyships—relationships defined by competition and hatred (Adams, 2005; Holt, 1989)—which can harm one's outcomes (Aktipis et al., 2018; Günsoy, Cross, Uskul, Adams, & Gercek-Swing, 2015; Wiseman & Duck, 1995). Such relationships are often perceived as zero-sum; people believe they can be harmed when their enemies benefit (e.g., from others' kindness) and benefit when enemies are harmed (e.g., from others' viciousness; Aronson & Cope, 1968; Pietraszewski, 2016; Shaw, 2013). For a friend to achieve positive indirect effects on the self, that friend should not be kind toward one's enemy; rather, that friend should perhaps direct some degree of viciousness toward one's enemy. Thus, in some instances, we expect to see preferences for viciousness—counter to intuition, unlike in canonical findings, and at odds with cooperative account predictions. We test if (4a) people want friends who are appreciably more vicious toward one's enemies than they are toward oneself. We also test a stronger version of this prediction—(4b) that people prefer friends who are more vicious than kind toward one's enemies.4

We test these predictions in a two-wave study, in studies with varying designs, and in two nations. Methods were approved by university Institutional Review Board (IRB). All manipulations, focal (and exploratory) measures, and exclusions are noted. Data and syntax are on Open Science Framework (OSF) at https://osf.io/xeg48/.

Rolf Degen summarizing... In stark contrast to men, women preferred the competitive strategy of "levelling," where gains are split equally when pitted against a higher-performing partner

Levelling as a Female-Biased Competitive Tactic. Joyce F. Benenson & Henry Markovits. Evolutionary Psychological Science, February 22 2023. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40806-023-00355-2

Abstract: Direct contests occur more frequently between men than between women. This produces the conclusion that men are more competitive than women. However, no sex differences have been found in other more indirect competitive tactics such as self-promotion and reputation derogation. Qualitative evidence further suggests that one competitive tactic, levelling, may be more commonly used by girls and women than by boys and men. Levelling initially was defined as occurring when several lower-ranked men physically overpowered a higher-ranked man. When institutional support backs equality, however, levelling can be effectively employed by a lower-ranked individual against a higher-ranked individual. Qualitative evidence with humans indicates that beginning in early childhood and continuing through adolescence, individual levelling is used by girls and women more than by boys and men. To empirically test whether individual levelling is more common among women than men, we modified a popular economic game to include a levelling option. In a pre-registered study, we asked 252 women and 258 men from four developed world regions to play the game for monetary compensation three times: with an equal-performing, higher-performing, and lower-performing partner. In each game, participants chose which tactic they wanted to employ: a winner-take-all contest, levelling, or working alone. Rational payoff-maximizing decisions should lead more participants to choose contests with lower-performing partners and to select levelling with higher-performing partners. No sex differences occurred in choice of contests with lower-performing partners, but more women than men employed levelling with higher-performing partners, supporting our hypothesis. Despite sex-biased preferences for competitive tactics, overall no sex differences arose in payoff maximizing decisions.

We find that winning more in the lottery increases the probability of meeting friends on most days, which is consistent with the complementary effect of income on the strength of social ties

Does money strengthen our social ties? longitudinal evidence of lottery winners. Joan Costa-Font and Nattavudh Powdthavee. Rationality and Society, February 21, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1177/10434631231159567

Abstract: We study the effect of lottery wins on the strength of social ties and its different types, including support networks, in the United Kingdom. On average, we find that winning more in the lottery increases the probability of meeting friends on most days, which is consistent with the complementary effect of income on the strength of social ties. The opposite is true with regards to social ties held for more instrumental reasons such as talking to neighbours. Winning more in the lottery also lessens an individual support network consistently with a substitution of income and support network. However, further robustness checks reveal that such average lottery effects are driven by individuals exhibiting very large wins only, thus suggesting that small to medium-sized wins (below £10k) may not be enough to change people’s social ties and support network in a substantial way.

Men with pretty faces were perceived as—and tended to rate themselves—as less paternally involved

Bartlome, Ronja I., and Anthony J. Lee. 2023. “Facial Attractiveness, but Not Facial Masculinity, Is Used as a Cue to Paternal Involvement in Fathers.” PsyArXiv. February 21. doi:10.31234/osf.io/7pj8w

Abstract: Facial femininity in men is purportedly used as a cue by women as a signal of paternal involvement. However, evidence for this claim is questionable. Previous findings have shown that paternal involvement is linked to testosterone, but have not investigated facial masculinity directly, while other studies have found that facial masculinity is negatively associated with perceptions of paternal involvement but do not assess the accuracy of this judgement. Here, we assess whether facial masculinity in men is used as a cue to paternal involvement, and whether this cue is accurate. We collected facial photographs of 259 men (156 of which were fathers) who also completed self-report measures of paternal involvement. Facial images were then rated by a separate group of raters on facial masculinity, attractiveness, and perceived paternal involvement. Shape sexual dimorphism was also calculated from the images using geometric morphometrics. We found that facial masculinity was not associated with perceptions of paternal involvement, nor was it related with self-reported paternal involvement. Interestingly, facial attractiveness was negatively associated with perceptions of paternal involvement, and we found partial evidence that facial attractiveness was also negatively associated with self-reported paternal involvement. These findings challenge the hypothesis that sexual dimorphism is used as a cue to paternal involvement, and perhaps indicate that facial attractiveness is more important for this judgement instead.

The Nature of Long-Term Unemployment: Predictability, Heterogeneity and Selection

The Nature of Long-Term Unemployment: Predictability, Heterogeneity and Selection. Andreas I. Mueller & Johannes Spinnewijn. NBER Working Paper 30979, Feb 2023. DOI 10.3386/w30979

Abstract: This paper studies the predictability of long-term unemployment (LTU) and analyzes its main determinants using rich administrative data in Sweden. Compared to using standard socio-demographic variables, the predictive power more than doubles when leveraging the rich data environment. The largest gains come from adding job seekers' employment history prior to becoming unemployed. Applying our prediction algorithm over the unemployment spell, we show that dynamic selection into LTU explains at least half of the observed decline in job finding. While the within-individual declines are small on average, we find substantial heterogeneity in the individual-level declines and thus reject the commonly used proportional hazard assumption. Applying our prediction algorithm over the business cycle, we find that the cyclicality in average LTU risk is not driven by composition but rather by within-individual cyclicality and that individual rankings are relatively persistent across years. Finally, we evaluate the implications of our findings for the value of targeting unemployment policies and how these change over the unemployment spell and the business cycle.

Surprise for the authors: People are willing to enact and excuse inconsistency in their moral lives; we discuss how to reconcile this observation with the foundational social psychological principle that people hate inconsistency

Moral inconsistency. Daniel A. Effron, Beth Anne Helgason. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, February 21 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aesp.2022.11.001

Abstract: We review a program of research examining three questions. First, why is the morality of people's behavior inconsistent across time and situations? We point to people's ability to convince themselves they have a license to sin, and we demonstrate various ways people use their behavioral history and others—individuals, groups, and society—to feel licensed. Second, why are people's moral judgments of others' behavior inconsistent? We highlight three factors: motivation, imagination, and repetition. Third, when do people tolerate others who fail to practice what they preach? We argue that people only condemn others' inconsistency as hypocrisy if they think the others are enjoying an “undeserved moral benefit.” Altogether, this program of research suggests that people are surprisingly willing to enact and excuse inconsistency in their moral lives. We discuss how to reconcile this observation with the foundational social psychological principle that people hate inconsistency.

Keywords: Behavioral ethicsMoral judgmentInconsistencyHypocrisyMoral licensingDishonestyPrejudice

Psychopathic Traits Are Associated with Mimicking Prosocial Personality Traits in Dating Contexts

The Chameleons of Dating: Psychopathic Traits Are Associated with Mimicking Prosocial Personality Traits in Dating Contexts. Kristopher J. Brazil, Destiny Cloutier, Nicole De Las Llagas, Samantha Grace McMahon, Victoria Benevides, Angela S. Book & Beth A. Visser. Evolutionary Psychological Science, February 20 2023. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40806-023-00356-1

Abstract: Psychopathic traits are associated with lower levels of Honesty-Humility, Emotionality, and Agreeableness from the HEXACO model, which capture antisocial traits. Yet, individuals with psychopathic traits—men in particular—appear to successfully acquire dating partners despite these traits. We examine in this paper whether men higher in psychopathic traits might shift their personality traits to mimic those that are more prosocial to appear more attractive to prospective dates. Participants were 165 heterosexual college men who completed the HEXACO and then watched a woman’s dating video. After the video, participants completed the HEXACO again with the instructions to be appealing to the woman in the video. Results showed that psychopathic traits were associated with greater increases in Honesty-Humility, Emotionality, and Agreeableness, and fewer increases in Extraversion across the HEXACO profiles. The observed increases in Honesty-Humility, Emotionality, and Agreeableness may represent men’s attempts at mimicking prosocial personality traits to appear more attractive as a potential partner. The findings suggest that psychopathic traits may affect men’s willingness to deceptively enhance prosocial personality traits, possibly as a means to appeal to prospective partners.

Rationing and Climate Change Mitigation: We argue that the rejection of markets, and a commitment to fair shares, is a key part of the value of rationing

Rationing and Climate Change Mitigation. Nathan Wood,Rob Lawlor & Josie Freear. Ethics, Policy & Environment, Feb 19 2023. https://doi.org/10.1080/21550085.2023.2166342

Abstract: In this paper, we argue that rationing has been neglected as a policy option for mitigating climate change. There is a broad scientific consensus that avoiding the most severe impacts of climate change requires a rapid reduction in global emissions. We argue that rationing could help states reduce emissions rapidly and fairly. Our arguments in this paper draw on economic analysis and historical research into rationing in the UK during (and after) the two world wars, highlighting success stories and correcting misconceptions. However, although the empirical details play an important role, the paper is primarily based on philosophical and ethical argument and policy analysis, particularly highlighting the normative assumptions behind policy choices.

We build on Hugh Upton’s work in healthcare ethics, rejecting a broader conception of rationing which conceals significant distinctions between policy options, obscuring the specific advantages of an egalitarian conception of rationing. While some argue for the modernisation of rationing, introducing tradable allowances, we argue that the rejection of markets, and a commitment to fair shares, is a key part of the value of rationing, and precisely what made rationing attractive to the public in the 1940s.

Keywords: Tradable energy quotasCarbon allowancesCarbon TaxEnergy justiceFairnessEquality

5. Objections and Replies

[...]

Keynes and Hayek recognized that there were concerns about the fairness of tax-based solutions, given that it would not be sufficient to tax the rich. For example, according to Bruce Caldwell, Keynes recognized that, if this was to be effective, the ‘tax would have to be extended to the working classes’ because

a tax on the rich would not sufficiently reduce expenditure, so it would not help with the problem of excess demand for consumption goods. (Caldwell & Caldwell, Citation1997 p. 34)

Caldwell states that Keynes tried to ‘soften this unpopular but inevitable truth’ with the ‘novel idea of “deferred pay” or “compulsory savings” provision’ (Caldwell & Caldwell, Citation1997). Instead of taking money away from people permanently, in taxation, money would be taken from people but put into savings that they would only be able to access after the war. This ingenious idea would limit people’s ability to consume but would not permanently deprive anyone of their money. In the case of climate change, however, it would not be clear when – if ever – we would be able to return people’s savings. But if this is what is necessary to make Keynes’ solution palatable, it should be clear that it is the tax-based solution, and not rationing, that becomes less attractive if a permanent solution is needed.

[...]

Low mood leads to the consumption of more negative information online which in turn leads to worse mood, and so on

Kelly, Christopher A., and Tali Sharot. 2023. “Knowledge-seeking Reflects and Shapes Well-being.” PsyArXiv. February 18. doi:10.31234/osf.io/yd6j5

Abstract: Humans are spending an increasing amount of time searching for knowledge online. It is thus imperative to examine whether and how this activity impacts well-being. Here, we test the hypothesis that the affective properties of the knowledge sought effect well-being, which in turn alters knowledge-seeking, forming a self-reinforcing loop. To that end, we quantified the affective properties of text in webpages participants (N = 947) chose to browse and related these to their well-being. We find that browsing more negative information was associated with worse mental-health and mood. By manipulating the webpages browsed and measuring mood and vice versa, we reveal that the relationship is causal and bi-directional. Moreover, when participants were made aware of the affective nature of webpages before browsing, they choose to access more positive and less negative webpages. These findings provide a potential method for assessing and enhancing human welfare in the digital age.

Are women more empathetic than men? According to EEG estimations of sex/gender differences in empathic ability, it seems they are not

Are women more empathetic than men? Questionnaire and EEG estimations of sex/gender differences in empathic ability. Chenyu Pang, Wenxin Li, Yuqing Zhou, Tianyu Gao, Shihui Han. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, nsad008, Feb 18 2023. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsad008

Abstract: The debate regarding whether women are more empathetic than men has broad scientific, social, and clinical implications. However, previous independent questionnaires and brain imaging studies that tested different samples reported inconsistent results regarding sex/gender differences in empathic ability. We conducted three studies to investigate sex/gender differences in empathic ability using large-sample questionnaire and electroencephalography (EEG) measures. We showed that estimation of empathic ability using the interpersonal reactivity index questionnaire showed higher rating scores in women than men in all studies. However, our EEG measures of empathy, indexed by both phase-locked and non-phased locked neural responses to others' painful (vs. neutral) facial expressions, support a null hypothesis of the sex/gender difference in empathic ability. In addition, we showed evidence that priming social expectations of women and men's ability to share and care about others' feelings eliminated the sex/gender difference in questionnaire measures of empathic ability. Our large-sample EEG results challenge the notion of women's superiority in empathy that is built based on subjective questionnaire measures which are sensitive to social desirability. Our findings indicate that whether the notion of women’s superiority in empathic ability reflects a biological/social difference between women and men or a gender-role stereotype remains an open question.

Keywords: Electroencephalography, Empathy, Questionnaire, Sex/Gender, Social expectation

Contemporary sex differences in partner preferences are maintained by several psycho-biological mechanisms that evolved in conjunction, including not only sexual but also romantic attraction

The Role of Sexual and Romantic Attraction in Human Mate Preferences. Meike Scheller et al. The Journal of Sex Research, Feb 16 2023. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2023.2176811

Abstract: Sex differences in mate preferences are ubiquitous, having been evidenced across generations and cultures. Their prevalence and persistence have compellingly placed them in the evolutionarily adaptive context of sexual selection. However, the psycho-biological mechanisms contributing to their generation and maintenance remain poorly understood. As such a mechanism, sexual attraction is assumed to guide interest, desire, and the affinity toward specific partner features. However, whether sexual attraction can indeed explain sex differences in partner preferences has not been explicitly tested. To better understand how sex and sexual attraction shape mate preferences in humans we assessed how partner preferences differed across the spectrum of sexual attraction in a sample of 479 individuals that identified as asexual, gray-sexual, demisexual or allosexual. We further tested whether romantic attraction predicted preference profiles better than sexual attraction. Our results show that sexual attraction accounts for highly replicable sex differences in mate preferences for high social status and financial prospects, conscientiousness, and intelligence; however, it does not account for the enhanced preference for physical attractiveness expressed by men, which persists even in individuals with low sexual attraction. Instead, sex differences in physical attractiveness preference are better explained by the degree of romantic attraction. Furthermore, effects of sexual attraction on sex differences in partner preferences were grounded in current rather than previous experiences of sexual attraction. Taken together, the results support the idea that contemporary sex differences in partner preferences are maintained by several psycho-biological mechanisms that evolved in conjunction, including not only sexual but also romantic attraction.

Discussion

While sex differences in human mate preferences have been observed across cultures and generations (Buss, Citation1989; Shackelford et al., Citation2005; Walter et al., Citation2020) the proximate factors contributing to its generation and maintenance remain less well understood (but see Alexander et al., Citation2011; Balthazart, Citation2011, Citation2016; Little, Jones et al., Citation2011; Scheller et al., Citation2021). Attraction, especially sexual attraction, is a psycho-biological mechanism that is thought to guide interest, desire or the affinity toward specific features of others and establishes an individual’s preference profile. In order to better understand how sex and sexual attraction interact, and whether other forms of attraction (i.e., romantic) may explain persistent patterns in mate preferences, we assessed how partner preferences differ across the spectrum of sexual attraction intensity.

In individuals that experience high sexual attraction we replicated well-documented sex differences in partner preferences that are linked to sexual reproduction. Here, heterosexual men rated physical attractiveness higher than women, while the latter placed higher importance on social status and financial prospects than men. This is in line with a large body of research showing sex differences in preferences for these traits (Bech-Sørensen & Pollet, Citation2016; Buss, Citation1989; Walter et al., Citation2020). The data-driven nature of the factor composition indicated two further partner characteristic factors that were described as conscientiousness (ambition, emotional stability/maturity, reliability, diligence, humor, and sociability) and intelligence/education (be educated, similar education, intelligence). Here, individuals that experienced high sexual attraction showed significant sex differences in preferences, with women rating conscientiousness as more important, while men gave higher importance ratings for intelligence and education. Indeed, previous studies have found conscientiousness, ambition and emotional stability to be more highly valued by women (Botwin et al., Citation1997; Buss & Schmitt, Citation2019; Furnham, Citation2009); however, the enhanced importance ratings of intelligence and education in allosexual men seem to contradict previous findings in hetero-allosexual samples in which women valued education more than men (Buss & Schmitt, Citation2019; Shackelford et al., Citation2005). Lippa (Citation2007), however, reported that heterosexual women rated intelligence lower than lesbian women and gay men, which may suggest that sexual intensity and orientation may indeed mediate intelligence importance ratings. As women show lower average sexual attraction levels than men and often show higher levels of non-exclusivity in their sexual orientation (e.g., bisexual preferences; Diamond, Citation2016), the effect of diversity in sexual intensity and orientation in women may not have been captured in previous studies, but impacted the absolute importance ratings. However, this would likely have affected all partner characteristics, and future research into the effects of sexual orientation and intensity on the importance of specific partner traits is needed to elucidate whether these effects replicate in a different sample.

Effects of Sexual and Romantic Attraction on Sex Differences in Partner Preferences

Notably, our results show that sexual and romantic attraction both help explain the maintenance of sex-specific mate preference differentiation. Self-reported preferences for all four partner traits were significantly or marginally significantly modulated by sex as well as either sexual or romantic attraction. Furthermore, the results support the notion that both forms of attraction can function independently (Diamond, Citation2003, Citation2004; Fisher et al., Citation2005, Citation2006) and do not affect partner preferences in the same way. While sex-specific differences in preferences for a high social status and good financial prospects (women > men), as well as intelligence and education (men > women) were reduced in individuals with low or no sexual attraction, the increased preferences for a conscientious partner in women was more strongly modulated by romantic than sexual attraction. Surprisingly, the only sex-specific difference that sexual attraction could not account for was the heightened preference for a physically attractive partner in men. Even individuals that reported to have never experienced sexual attraction before showed a sex difference in the preference for this partner trait that was of similar magnitude (β = −0.41) as that present in allosexual individuals (β = −0.39). Instead, sex-specific physical attractiveness preferences were more dependent on the degree of romantic attraction, highlighting the importance of physical attractiveness in romantic contexts. Note that, while the interaction of romantic attraction and sex was only marginally significant (p = .06), effect sizes suggested that the average explanatory power of romantic attraction was 25 times higher than that of sexual attraction.

This suggests that physical attractiveness may serve more functions than providing good genes. In fact, the heightened preference that men express for physical attractiveness even extends outside of the mating context, affecting other social bonds such as friendships. Here, men place more importance than women on physical attractiveness in opposite-sex friends (Lewis et al., Citation2011). Perhaps this is due to the indirect benefit gained from being associated with physically attractive individuals. That is, partnering with a physically attractive woman may enhance the perception of someone’s own social status and mate value, thereby attaching higher chances of partnering with other attractive woman in the long term (C. Anderson et al., Citation2001; R. C. Anderson & Surbey, Citation2014; see supplement S3 for indirect appearance belief effects).

Sexual attraction is not a prerequisite for romantic attraction. In fact, many individuals with reduced sexual desire still experience romantic attraction and look to engage in romantic relationships with others (Antonsen et al., Citation2020). However, the specific preferences for such romantic, non-sexual relationships may differ. For instance, women with low sexual attraction placed more importance on intelligence and education, and less importance on physical attractiveness, status and financial prospects or conscientiousness than women with higher sexual attraction. At the same time, men with low sexual attraction placed less importance on all partner characteristics, except social status and financial prospects, which already received the lowest importance rankings amongst all character traits. Our results show that sex differences in preferences for conscientiousness and physical attractiveness are better explained by romantic attraction, while those in social status/resources and intelligence are better explained by sexual attraction. This pattern may be explained by the types of benefits accrued in different relationship contexts (Buss & Schmitt, Citation1993; Li, Citation2007; Regan et al., Citation2000). For example, although previous research has often noted potential good-gene benefits from short-term partnerships, a long-term romantic relationship with a conscientious and physically attractive partner would provide commitment, investment, and potentially good gene benefits to offspring. Indeed, as romantic attraction is a crucial factor facilitating pair-bonding and (parental) care in monogamous relationships we might also expect that physical attractiveness will be important if there are associated benefits to offspring. Our data may suggest that, if sexual attraction is associated with short term mating (Edlund et al., Citation2021; Li, Citation2007), perhaps the increased preferences for status/resources reflect more material direct benefits from such partnerships.

Furthermore, our data showed that, while sexual and romantic orientation (directionality) were mostly aligned in allosexual individuals, the correlation was markedly lower among those with lower sexual attraction ratings. This divergent sexual and romantic orientation again suggests that sexual attraction and romantic attraction operate independently not only via their intensity but also their orientation (Antonsen et al., Citation2020; Diamond, Citation2004; Tennov, Citation1998).

Limitations

Firstly, the AIS score was used as an indicator of progressively decreasing sexual attraction in the present study. However, it was primarily developed to differentiate those identifying as asexual from those who do not (Yule et al., Citation2015). As the AIS incorporates further measures that go beyond mere sexual attraction (such as sex-related disgust, sexual behavior avoidance, or sexual identity), it captures a wider experience of reduced sexual attraction and interest. In order to ensure that the main feature of interest i.e., reduced sexual attraction, was the modulating factor, we included a second, isolated measure of sexual attraction intensity, along with a measure of romantic attraction intensity. Here, participants were asked to indicate how strongly they felt sexually or romantically attracted to men and to women on a 7-point Likert scale. Comparing our findings from the first analysis using AIS scores and the second analysis using raw sexual attraction intensity scores, we found that results were similar across both analyses: both AIS scores and sexual attraction intensity show no interaction with sex in explaining preferences for physical attractiveness, while they both explain sex differences in the preferences for social status, conscientiousness, and intelligence (note that the inverse coefficients result from low sexual attraction being indicated by high AIS scores). This suggests that, while the AIS score offers a more fine-grained and experience-dependent measure of sexual attraction, desire and interest, sexual attraction alone is a large contributing factor to the expression of specific partner preferences.

Secondly, while sexual attraction is considered here as a psycho-biological mechanism that evolved to maintain partner preferences that adapted to evolutionary reproductive pressures, reduced sexual attraction does not automatically equate to a lowered desire to procreate. That is, individuals with reduced sexual attraction may not seek sexual encounters for pleasure but may still express the desire to have and raise children. If the desire is not reduced, this can suggest that partner preferences in people with reduced sexual attraction may not be targeted at a partner with whom genetic material or resources are exchanged to provide for offspring. Instead, the alteration in partner preferences might be driven by other factors, depending on the function of the partnership. Indeed, previous research suggests that the function of a partnership, such as in short-term or long-term mating, alters mate preferences (Bode & Kushnick, Citation2021; Jonason et al., Citation2013; Li, Citation2007). However, we observed, on average, a reduced desire to have and raise children across sexual orientation groups with low sexual attraction (demi-, gray- and asexuals), compared to individuals with high sexual attraction (see supplement S6). This suggests that reduced sexual desire and reduced desire to have and raise children with a partner may shape the expression of specific partner preferences.

We appraise the empirical claims claiming that implicit bias deeply affects legal proceedings and practices, and that training can be used to reduce that bias; we find that these claims carry many indicia of unreliability

Jason Chin, Alexander Holcombe, Kathryn Zeiler, Patrick Forscher & Ann Guo, Metaresearch, Psychology, and Law: A Case Study on Implicit Bias (2023). SSRN Feb 15 2023. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4360335

Abstract: When can scientific findings from experimental psychology be confidently applied to legal issues? And when applications have clear limits, do legal commentators readily acknowledge them? To address these questions, we survey recent findings from an emerging field of research on research (i.e., metaresearch). We find that many aspects of experimental psychology’s research and reporting practices threaten the validity and generalizability of legally relevant research findings, including those relied on by courts and policy-setting bodies. As a case study, we appraise the empirical claims relied on by commentators claiming that implicit bias deeply affects legal proceedings and practices, and that training can be used to reduce that bias. We find that these claims carry many indicia of unreliability. Only limited evidence indicates that interventions designed to reduce prejudicial behavior through implicit bias training are effective, and the research area shows many signs of publication bias. To examine whether law journal articles are acknowledging these limits, we collected a sample of 100 law journal articles mentioning “implicit bias training” published from 2017-2021. Of those 100 articles, 58 recommend implicit bias training and only 8 of those 58 express any skepticism about its effectiveness. Overall, only 19 articles express skepticism about implicit bias training. We end with recommendations for law journal authors, researchers, and practitioners towards more credible application of psychology findings in law research and policy. Our focus is on how empirical research can be best used to solve our most important social issues including racism.

The fears about the menace of misinformation are primarily fed by the misconception that others are more gullible than oneself

People believe misinformation is a threat because they assume others are gullible. Sacha Altay, Alberto Acerbi. New Media & Society, February 17, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448231153379

Abstract: Alarmist narratives about the flow of misinformation and its negative consequences have gained traction in recent years. If these fears are to some extent warranted, the scientific literature suggests that many of them are exaggerated. Why are people so worried about misinformation? In two pre-registered surveys conducted in the United Kingdom (Nstudy_1 = 300, Nstudy_2 = 300) and replicated in the United States (Nstudy_1 = 302, Nstudy_2 = 299), we investigated the psychological factors associated with perceived danger of misinformation and how it contributes to the popularity of alarmist narratives on misinformation. We find that the strongest, and most reliable, predictor of perceived danger of misinformation is the third-person effect (i.e. the perception that others are more vulnerable to misinformation than the self) and, in particular, the belief that “distant” others (as opposed to family and friends) are vulnerable to misinformation. The belief that societal problems have simple solutions and clear causes was consistently, but weakly, associated with perceived danger of online misinformation. Other factors, like negative attitudes toward new technologies and higher sensitivity to threats, were inconsistently, and weakly, associated with perceived danger of online misinformation. Finally, we found that participants who report being more worried about misinformation are more willing to like and share alarmist narratives on misinformation. Our findings suggest that fears about misinformation tap into our tendency to view other people as gullible.

Men and women are less alike, especially in personality traits and basic human values, in countries that have invested the most in gender equality

Linking gender differences with gender equality: A systematic-narrative literature review of basic skills and personality. Marco Balducci. Front. Psychol., February 16 2023, Volume 14 - 2023. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1105234

Abstract: There is controversy regarding whether gender differences are smaller or larger in societies that promote gender equality highlighting the need for an integrated analysis. This review examines literature correlating, on a national level, gender differences in basic skills—mathematics, science (including attitudes and anxiety), and reading—as well as personality, to gender equality indicators. The aim is to assess the cross-national pattern of these differences when linked to measures of gender equality and explore new explanatory variables that can shed light on this linkage. The review was based on quantitative research relating country-level measures of gender differences to gender equality composite indices and specific indicators. The findings show that the mathematics gender gap from the PISA and TIMMS assessments, is not linked to composite indices and specific indicators, but gender differences are larger in gender-equal countries for reading, mathematics attitudes, and personality (Big Five, HEXACO, Basic Human Values, and Vocational Interests). Research on science and overall scores (mathematics, science, and reading considered together) is inconclusive. It is proposed that the paradox in reading results from the interrelation between basic skills and the attempt to increase girls’ mathematics abilities both acting simultaneously while the paradox in mathematics attitudes might be explained by girls being less exposed to mathematics than boys. On the other hand, a more nuanced understanding of the gender equality paradox in personality is advanced, in which a gene–environment-cultural interplay accounts for the phenomenon. Challenges for future cross-national research are discussed.

6. Discussion

The systematic narrative literature review investigated recent studies on gender differences in basic skills and personality to determine whether cross-national relationships can be found with gender equality. The goal was to assess whether theories predicting that gender equality is linked with smaller gender differences have empirical support or whether a gender equality paradox has emerged in recent years. The general trend considers gender equality as either being connected to an increase in gender variations or having no relation with them, with a gender equality paradox occurring for gender gaps in some cognitive domains (attitudes toward mathematics, mathematics self-efficacy, mathematics anxiety, and reading) and personality.

6.1. Summary of the review

Based on the foregoing literature review, it can be seen that research supporting reduced gender differences in more gender-equal countries is scarce and inconsistent. A negative correlation is generally detected when analyzing gender differences in mathematics skills utilizing PISA data, although the correlation is influenced by either the year considered in the study or the sample country (see below). Moreover, “women in research” is the only specific indicator consistently negatively linked to the mathematics gender gap, albeit with disagreement about the strength of the association. Lastly, no connection between gender differences in mathematics and gender equality indicators is found when analyzing the TIMMS assessment. However, many studies have focused solely on mean differences in mathematics abilities, which are small or non-existent. Only Bergold et al. (2017) and Hyde and Mertz (2009) assessed the right tail of the distribution, where gender differences are more pronounced. This lack of studies on top performers highlights a gap in the research that needs to be filled. Also important is analyzing intra-individual strengths when studying the mathematics gender gap, as Stoet and Geary (2018) have emphasized.

Research supporting a positive link between gender variances and gender equality measures appears to be more robust and consistent. The literature on mathematics attitudes and anxiety shows that composite indicators predict a widening gender gap as equality between men and women advances. In addition, scholars agree that gender equality is connected with a larger advantage for women in reading and evidence further shows that gender personality differences are larger in more gender-equal nations. Men and women are less alike, especially in personality traits and basic human values, in countries that have invested the most in gender equality. Further support for a gender equality paradox in personality also emerges when examining other personality domains not included in this review. For example, wider gender gaps in self-esteem and narcissism (higher in men) exist in more gender-equal nations where women have more reproductive control, more executive positions, and their education is either similar to or higher than that of men (Bleidorn et al., 2016; Jonason et al., 2020).

Specific indicators are either directly or inversely related to the mathematics gender gap, raising doubt about them being related to a general advantage (Table 4). In addition, findings on science and overall scores are uncertain, even though both science anxiety and science intra-individual strengths follow a trend opposite to that anticipated by theories predicting a link between gender equality and smaller gender differences. Interestingly, other skills, such as episodic memory and visuospatial ability, show the same widening tendency, strengthening the case for a possible paradox in this area (Lippa et al., 2010; Asperholm et al., 2019).

Table 4. Summary of the papers included in the review.

6.2. Implications of the gender equality paradox

Understanding the possible reasons for the increase in gender differences in countries that promote gender equality is important and relevant since these countries may be leading men and women toward gendered trajectories, a path that is already observable in higher education. Charles and Bradley (2009) noted that the most advanced societies demonstrate more pronounced gender segregation in education. Stoet and Geary (2018) also observed that more gender-equal nations (measured by the GGI) have the widest gender gap among STEM graduates. Supporting these results, research has shown that gender differences using “interest in math careers” as a predictor of future major subjects are greater in countries with higher gender equality, with both men and women being, on average, less interested in mathematics than those in other countries (Goldman and Penner, 2016; Charles, 2017; Breda et al., 2020). The same pattern is observed in the job market, where horizontal segregation is more pronounced in more gender-equal environments (Blackburn and Jarman, 2006; Wong and Charles, 2020). Several investigations have documented this phenomenon and concluded that “Scandinavian countries are notable for their exceptionally high degrees of segregation” despite their advancement in gender equality (Jarman et al., 2012). However, more recent findings have also detected desegregation patterns in more gender-equal nations (Hustad et al., 2020).

6.3. The gender equality paradox: Possible explanations

The question of why gender differences are sometimes higher in more gender-equal countries remains. Some have proposed that the paradox in mathematics anxiety and attitudes might originate from the better economic conditions needed for these emotions to emerge. In countries where women are highly oppressed, these are more concerned about meeting more basic needs. Conversely, where economic, political, and educational circumstances are more favorable for women, anxiety toward mathematics activities is more likely to emerge (Else-Quest et al., 2010). However, at the national level, both men and women are less anxious about mathematics in developed, gender-equal countries, indicating that alternative explanations are needed (Stoet et al., 2016). In fact, others have suggested that, in gender-equal nations, men and women set aside financial drives and follow more intrinsic career interests because of easier access to economic resources. Hence, women are less exposed than men to STEM activities, “giving them less opportunity to reduce their negative feelings about mathematics” (Stoet et al., 2016).

With respect to reading abilities, the paradox might result from the interaction of two factors: the interrelation between basic skills and Western societies’ strong efforts to equalize boys’ and girls’ mathematics performance that has instead, paradoxically, increased reading skills in girls. Notably, where mathematics gender differences are reduced, the reduction is mainly due to an improvement in women’s reading (Guiso et al., 2008). It follows that countries with smaller mathematics gender differences have the largest reading gaps (Stoet and Geary, 2013). As mathematics is promoted in girls, their reading skills appear to benefit. However, because boys’ disadvantage in reading is, on average, less of a concern among policymakers, gender variations in this dimension have widened.

Some researchers have explained the gender equality paradox in personality by arguing that only differences in self-reported domains are increased (Eagly and Wood, 2012). Here, the reference-group effect (Heine et al., 2002) might conceal variances in less gender-equal countries, where men and women compare themselves with others of their own gender (Guimond et al., 2007). If this explanation holds true, the gap in gender-equal nations would be a better estimate of personality differences between the genders because in these nations both women and men have a more accurate comparative term that includes the whole population rather than just a subset (Schmitt et al., 2017).

Another explanation may be that personality is strongly culturally influenced. According to this view, individualism and self-expressive values act in tandem with gender stereotypes, promoting gender variance as individuals act out their “gendered self” (Charles and Bradley, 2009; Breda et al., 2020). This explanation of the gender equality paradox corresponds to the findings in gender-equal nations that cultural mechanisms are at play accommodating women-typical roles, such as job flexibility and high parental care—roles that encourage women to embark on gendered paths and experience more communal traits (Levanon and Grusky, 2018). Thus, it should not be surprising that, in gender-equal countries, men and women appear to differ more than in non-gender-equal countries and that this difference is expanding as women-typical roles are becoming more prevalent. Rather than expressing intrinsic gender differences, in these nations, there is a reinforcement of gender essentialist beliefs, which constitute an artifact of social expectations about how men and women should comply with gender stereotypes (England, 2010).

While this argument is somewhat persuasive, research aiming at linking gender stereotypes with gender equality suffers from several theoretical and methodological limitations. Often scholars apply broad assumptions and rely on a limited, as well as unreliable, set of items to capture latent dimensions of implicit stereotypes hidden in survey data. For instance, in their recent article Napp and Breda (2022) used solely one item to grasp an alleged stereotype that girls lack talent by arguing that systematic gender difference in answering the question would highlight “the magnitude of the (internalized) stereotype associating talent with boys rather than girls.” In addition, several studies have argued that stereotypes about group features, when measured reliably, appear to be accurate (Jussim et al., 2015; Moè et al., 2021). Löckenhoff et al. (2014) observed that perceived gender differences in personality substantially match those found in self- and observer-rated personality tests. The authors concluded that gender stereotypes constitute “valid social judgments about the size and direction of sex differences” that are more relevant than socialization processes and ascribed cultural gender roles (Löckenhoff et al., 2014). This is not to say that culture plays no role in the emergence of gender differences, but that the social mechanisms amplifying gender variances—mechanisms that social-role theorists have identified—also capture intrinsic gender differences.

Evolutionary theorists propose a different explanation for the gender equality paradox. As they argue, some gender variations are sensitive to context-related fluctuations, demonstrating a gene–environment interplay. In societies in which conditions are favorable, gender-specific genes flourish due to a lower prevalence of diseases, lower ecological stressors, and lower starvation rates. Per this view, wider gender gaps in gender-equal nations most likely “reflect a more general biological trend toward greater dimorphism in resource-rich environments” (Schmitt et al., 2008). If this explanation holds true, then heritability estimates will be higher in developed societies than in less-advanced cultures. Some evidence in this direction has recently emerged (Selita and Kovas, 2019); however, the “WEIRD” gene problem—that nearly all twin studies have been conducted among Western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic societies—represents an obstacle for generalizing results and making inferences about cross-cultural heritability differences (Henrich et al., 2010).

6.4. A novel socio-cultural evolutionary account of the gender equality paradox in personality

The present review proposes that the evolutionary explanation for the gender equality paradox might be more complex than it appears due to the presence of socio-cultural elements in the evolutionary process. As previously noted, genetic effects depend on the environmental conditions (diseases and ecological stress) under which they occur, yet the environment is embedded into society. Thus, the gene–environment interplay is enclosed within a cultural context with specific social norms and, by itself, cannot encompass all involved elements (Figure 2). Stated otherwise, the gene–environment interplay is a function of culture (Uchiyama et al., 2022). Therefore, gender-specific genes can be expected to be emphasized in societies embracing cultural values that would favor the expression of these genes. Consider, for example, individualism and self-expression. It is unsurprising that these values are related to the gender equality paradox, as Charles and Bradley (2009) have highlighted. In resource-rich environments that also value individualism and self-expression, intrinsic gender differences are more likely to emerge. This thesis points toward interpretation of Kaiser (2019), which states that both cultural individualism and pathogen levels confound the gender equality paradox in personality (see below). Also, Murphy et al. (2021) reached similar conclusions. A coherent, yet opposite, prediction might see gender differences as remaining stable or even decreasing in those resource-rich environments that culturally constrain self-expression. Accordingly, favorable cultural values would trump social mechanisms that amplify gender-based genes to emerge via a feedback-loop effect or “reciprocal causation” (Dickens and Flynn, 2001) according to which social structures adjust to distinct gender traits and vice versa, thus increasing gender differences.

Figure 2. Socio-cultural evolutionary explanation of the gender equality paradox. The gears show the interrelations between gender-specific genes, social structures, and environmental components mediated by cultural values.

6.5. Challenges for future cross-national research

While searching and analyzing the literature, this review also highlighted some challenges that researchers might face when conducting cross-national studies relating gender differences to gender equality measures. For mathematics ability, results could depend on outlier countries such as Scandinavian and gender-segregated, Muslim countries. In addition, the restricted country samples in international student assessments might be problematic. Despite the strong effort of PISA and TIMMS to be more inclusive, wealthy countries have traditionally been overrepresented, although the latest rounds have had very high coverage, including over 75 participating nations worldwide. Nevertheless, researchers, when assessing gender differences in mathematics abilities, should pay close attention to the countries included in their study because either the inclusion of outliers or a lack of heterogeneity might lead to biased estimations.

Another possible source of bias in research linking gender differences to gender equality on a cultural level is participant sample sizes, with some nations being overrepresented in comparison to others. How countries are clustered may also be problematic since countries are not independent data points and, “as such, they are like members of the same family or pupils of the same classroom” (Kuppens and Pollet, 2015). Therefore, appropriate statistical methods, multilevel modeling, for example, should be utilized to account for both unbalanced sample sizes and data structure.

Correlations between mathematics gender differences and gender equality might originate from a lack of country-level effects in the models. Anghel et al. (2019) argued that when time-invariant country unobserved heterogeneity is controlled for, no association between the two variables is found. Moreover, the link between gender equality and the gender gap in mathematics attitudes might be confounded by country-level academic achievements and socioeconomic status (Marsh et al., 2021).

Further, the gender equality paradox could be due to measurement error. Given that many international assessments and personality models have been developed in WEIRD countries, it is plausible that measurement error could be higher in non-WEIRD nations generating an illusory gender equality paradox. However, international assessments have been constructed to prevent such bias. For instance, PISA computes each student’s score based on a set of 5/10 plausible values designed to prevent measurement error and simplify secondary data analysis (Marsh et al., 2021). Also, the gender equality paradox in personality appears to hold even after correcting for measurement error (Kaiser, 2019; Fors Connolly et al., 2020; Tao et al., 2022). Nevertheless, when analyzing the link between gender differences in personality and gender equality, statistical procedures that control for measurement error should be applied (see for example Schmidt and Hunter, 2015).

Fors Connolly et al. (2020) highlighted the need for more temporal analyses of personality because an observed cross-national pattern may result from “a spurious relationship between gender equality and differences in personality” due to different country-level elements. Kaiser (2019) identified these elements as cultural individualism, food consumption, and historical pathogen prevalence levels. Other research has also agreed that cultural individualism could be a possible confounding factor as gender differences in personality are more pronounced in nations that highly regard individual self-expression (Costa et al., 2001; Schmitt et al., 2008; Tao et al., 2022).

Some scholars have called attention to the misuse of composite indicators of gender equality, raising several concerns thereof and arguing that they might not be suitable for empirical research (Else-Quest et al., 2010; Hyde, 2012). One concern is that these indicators, which encompass various domains from politics to economics, do not measure opportunities (Richardson et al., 2020). Another concern is that they are not interchangeable since they are differentially constructed. Thus, comparisons between research relying on different measures of gender equality might not be suitable. Some of the disparate findings concerning math ability might be driven by computational differences in the indices included in the analysis. Nevertheless, the gender equality composite indicators most commonly utilized (GGI, GEI, and GEM) show very high correlation coefficients (r ≥ 0.84), while other indicators substantially relate to one another, suggesting that, although some differences occur, these indices are similar in their ability to capture the general dimension of gender equality (Else-Quest et al., 2010; van Staveren, 2013; Stoet and Geary, 2015). Lastly, composite indicators may present a biased view of society due to the way gender equality is understood in the models. Often, disadvantages pertaining mostly to men are not taken into account when computing the indicators (Benatar, 2012). As an example of this bias, the GGI from the World Economic Forum assumes perfect gender equality in areas where women have an advantage over men. Specifically, values higher than 1, which would assume a men’s disadvantage, in each sub-index are capped. Thus, a more simplified approach to measuring national gender inequality is preferred (Stoet and Geary, 2019).

In addition, methodological issues also arise when using these indices. Some scholars have pointed out that correlations between gender gaps and the indices of gender equality could be driven by the strong economic component in these indices (Fors Connolly et al., 2020). Therefore, it is important to control for appropriate economic indicators, such as GDP per capita and the Human Development Index, when linking gender differences with gender equality (Kuppens and Pollet, 2015). Another difficulty may arise when contrasting results between composite indices and specific indicators occur. For mathematics attitudes, for instance, although composite indices suggest a gender equality paradox, specific indicators are either positively or negatively related to the gender gap. This may suggest that composite indices either capture an overall influence of gender equality or are unsuitable for evaluating gender differences. However, evaluation may lie outside the scope of models using these indices. Research linking gender differences with gender equality indicators has not tried to explain the paradox emerging from the analysis on the basis of gender equality per se; instead, it has just highlighted a paradoxical pattern that would otherwise have remained concealed. Since no theory has been put forward that fully unravels the paradox, further studies are needed.

Theories considered in this review that predict that gender equality is linked with smaller gender differences do not offer a valid explanation of gender differences in basic skills and personality. In addition, for some dimensions, the gender equality paradox raises further questions about how gender variation emerges, which calls for a new approach. Based on these premises, this review explored both social-role and evolutionary hypotheses and suggested new insights that combine these views, while also highlighting explanatory variables that might cause bias in the results. Thus, specific research that more closely examines the explanations proposed is needed, especially studies with an interdisciplinary focus. Notably, Fors Connolly et al. (2020) highlighted the importance of cross-temporal analyses of the gender equality paradox because these may reveal a different path. Since country comparisons may be insufficient for fully grasping the evolution of the paradox, future research should include a thorough cross-temporal examination for a more comprehensive understanding.

Lastly, the gender equality paradox is an emerging phenomenon that has gained substantial scientific support across subjects (Falk and Hermle, 2018; Campbell et al., 2021; Block et al., 2022; Vishkin, 2022). It requires attention from both the scientific community and the public because attempting to close gender gaps following traditional social-role theories and applying conventional methods, might end up exacerbating gender variations. In addition, the general pattern of increased gender differences in more gender-equal countries might inform that achieving equal opportunities does not go hand in hand with a reduction of gender gaps. Thus, policymakers should consider this trend when justifying interventions attempting to achieve equality of outcome between men and women.