Gender as a Moderator of the Relation Between Age Cohort and Three-Dimensional Wisdom in Iranian Culture

Abstract

This study examined whether gender moderated the association between age cohort and the cognitive, reflective, and compassionate dimensions of wisdom, using an Iranian sample of 439 adults from three age cohorts: young (18-34), middle-aged (35-54), and older (55 and above). Results indicated that the interaction effect between gender and age cohort was significant for three-dimensional wisdom and all three wisdom dimensions. Compared with younger women and older men, older women tended to have less education and to score lower on the cognitive wisdom dimension, but they had similar average scores as older men on the compassionate wisdom dimension. Overall, the association between age and wisdom was only positive for men, due mainly to the positive relation between age and the reflective and compassionate wisdom dimensions for men after adjusting for education. The results are interpreted with reference to generation gaps, socialization of men versus women, and life experiences and opportunities.

Gender Effect on Views of Wisdom and Wisdom Levels

“…They try to gain life insights from these events and actively project them into a future life. However, Cheraghi et al (2015) obtained different results using 3D-WS. Specifically, they found that there were no significant differences between young men and women (aged 18–35 years) in the reflective dimension of 3D-WS.…”

“…Although some empirical studies have found a significant relationship between overall wisdom and gender ( Ardelt and Jeste, 2018 ; Webster et al, 2018 ) and significant differences in wisdom levels between men and women ( Cheraghi et al, 2015 ; Huynh et al, 2017 ), most had a small effect size: the absolute value of r ranges from 0.062 to 0.291; the absolute value range of partial n 2 is 0.01 to 0.03. According to the judgment criteria for the magnitude of effect size proposed by Cohen (1988) , these results were not ideal, or their explanatory powers were limited (see Table 2 for further details).…”

“…The difference between genders is mainly reflected in the affective dimension of wisdom (as shown in Table 2 and Figure 2 ). Using 3D-WS, researchers found that women scored significantly higher than men on the affective dimension ( Cheraghi et al, 2015 ; Brudek and Sekowski, 2019 ). This dimension refers to showing compassion, benevolence, positive emotions and behavior toward people, and the motivation to promote their wellbeing.…”

Bridge Over Troubled Water: Commenting on Kovacs and Conway's Process Overlap Theory

“…Relevant evidence appears inconclusive. Some studies have reported close-to-zero correlations between wisdom and age across the lifespan (e.g., Cheraghi, Kadivar, Ardelt, Asgari, & Farzad, 2015;Grossmann & Kross, 2014;Grossmann, Oakes, & Santos, 2019;Levenson et al, 2005), whereas others have reported small-to-moderate negative correlations (e.g., Monika Ardelt & Jeste, 2016;Bang & Montgomery, 2013;Mansfield, McLean, & Lilgendahl, 2010), while still other studies have reported moderate-to-large correlations (e.g., Grossmann et al, 2010;Kunzmann & Baltes, 2003).…”

Factors Affecting the Wisdom of Counselors: Perceptions of Indonesian Pre-service Counselors

“…The results showed that 5.85% of personal attributes (gender, age, ethnicity) and spiritual guidance contribute to wisdom according to the views of prospective Indonesian counselors. Empirical studies show that gender and age have a significant positive effect on overall wisdom and on the cognitive, reflective, and affective dimensions (Cheraghi, Kadivar, Ardelt, Asgari, & Farzad, 2015). Other studies (Hollingworth, Sánchez-Escobedo, Graudina, Misiuniene, & Park, 2013) indicated that gender contributes 52% to the variation in wisdom of adolescents aged 15-18 years in Latvia, Lithuania, Mexico, Korea, and the USA.…”