Galinsky Adam D, Turek Aurora, Agarwal Grusha, Anicich Eric M, Rucker Derek D, Bowles Hannah R, Liberman Nira, Levin Chloe, Magee Joe C
Management Division, Columbia University, New York City, NY 10027, USA.
Organizational Behavior Unit, Harvard University, Boston, MA 02163, USA.
PNAS Nexus. 2024 Feb 27;3(2):pgae025. doi: 10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae025. eCollection 2024 Feb.
This research addresses the long-standing debate about the determinants of sex/gender differences. Evolutionary theorists trace many sex/gender differences back to natural selection and sex-specific adaptations. Sociocultural and biosocial theorists, in contrast, emphasize how societal roles and social power contribute to sex/gender differences beyond any biological distinctions. By connecting two empirical advances over the past two decades-6-fold increases in sex/gender difference meta-analyses and in experiments conducted on the psychological effects of power-the current research offers a novel empirical examination of whether power differences play an explanatory role in sex/gender differences. Our analyses assessed whether experimental manipulations of power and sex/gender differences produce similar psychological and behavioral effects. We first identified 59 findings from published experiments on power. We then conducted a -curve of the experimental power literature and established that it contained evidential value. We next subsumed these effects of power into 11 broad categories and compared them to 102 similar meta-analytic sex/gender differences. We found that high-power individuals and men generally display higher agency, lower communion, more positive self-evaluations, and similar cognitive processes. Overall, 71% (72/102) of the sex/gender differences were consistent with the effects of experimental power differences, whereas only 8% (8/102) were opposite, representing a 9:1 ratio of consistent-to-inconsistent effects. We also tested for discriminant validity by analyzing whether power corresponds more strongly to sex/gender differences than extraversion: although extraversion correlates with power, it has different relationships with sex/gender differences. These results offer novel evidence that many sex/gender differences may be explained, in part, by power differences.
本研究探讨了关于性别差异决定因素的长期争论。进化理论家将许多性别差异追溯到自然选择和特定性别的适应性。相比之下,社会文化和生物社会理论家强调社会角色和社会权力如何在任何生物学差异之外促成性别差异。通过连接过去二十年的两项实证进展——性别差异元分析以及关于权力心理效应的实验数量增长了6倍——本研究对权力差异是否在性别差异中发挥解释作用进行了新颖的实证检验。我们的分析评估了权力和性别差异的实验操纵是否产生相似的心理和行为效应。我们首先从已发表的关于权力的实验中确定了59项研究结果。然后我们对实验性权力文献进行了曲线分析,并确定其具有证据价值。接下来,我们将这些权力效应归纳为11个广泛类别,并将它们与102个类似的元分析性别差异进行比较。我们发现高权力个体和男性通常表现出更高的能动性、更低的社交性、更积极的自我评价以及相似的认知过程。总体而言,71%(72/102)的性别差异与实验性权力差异的效应一致,而只有8%(8/102)与之相反,一致与不一致效应的比例为9:1。我们还通过分析权力与性别差异的对应关系是否比外向性更强来检验区分效度:尽管外向性与权力相关,但它与性别差异的关系不同。这些结果提供了新的证据,表明许多性别差异可能部分由权力差异来解释。