Sex Differences in Competitiveness: Hunter-Gatherer Women and Girls Compete Less in Gender-Neutral and Male-Centric Tasks

Abstract

Despite numerous attempts to increase workplace equality, the near universal gender wage gap and underrepresentation of women in high status jobs persists in societies around the world. This persistence has led some researchers to speculate that psychological sex differences may be partly to blame. In particular, economists have begun to focus on sex differences in competitiveness as a possible cause. Here we test whether sex differences in competitiveness exist in a relatively isolated and evolutionarily relevant population of hunter-gatherers in Tanzania. In study 1 we examine sex differences in willingness to compete in a gender-neutral task in Hadza adults and children (N=191). We find that when choosing between an individualistic payment scheme and a competitive payment scheme, boys and men are significantly more likely to compete than girls and women. We find no evidence that this sex difference varies with age. In study 2 (N=88 and N=70) we use both a female-centric and a male-centric task to explore sex differences in competitiveness in adults. While we find no sex difference in willingness to compete in the female-centric task, we find that men are more likely to compete in the male-centric task. While further work is needed, this study lends some support to the idea of a sex difference in willingness to compete among hunter-gatherers, but it also highlights the importance of the task type. The observation that a sizable proportion of male Hadza choose to compete in each of the tasks is discussed in light of the fact that hunter-gatherers are largely egalitarian and non-hierarchical.

Digit ratio (2D:4D), aggression, and dominance in the Hadza and the Datoga of Tanzania

“…However, we failed to find associations between 2D:4D and aggression/dominance measures in Hadza men and Datoga men and women. Our finding on sex differences in the association between2D:4D and dominance are in line with recent findings (Apicella and Dreber, 2014), showing that the willingness to compete, among women, was positively related to the number of children born, while such an association was not found in men. Studies of 2D:4D and aggression in Western samples revealed negative relationships between 2D:4D and aggression (H€ onekopp et al, 2006a) and dominance (Manning and Fink, 2008), leading to the conclusion that 2D:4D may facilitate intra-sexual competition and promiscuity (H€ onekopp et al, 2006b).…”

“…Hadza are known for their egalitarianism and lack of formal leadership, and remained so nowadays. Yet they bear competitive potential, and men were found to be more competitive and willing to win in competitive tasks than women (Apicella and Dreber, 2014). Marginalization processes are less severe in the neighboring Datoga, although they have been exposed to the same environmental stressors.…”

Relative age effects in political selection

“…The gender gap in competitiveness appears to be stronger in mixed-sex competition than in single-sex competition or in self-competition (see, e.g., Gneezy et al, 2003, Niederle et al, 2013, and Apicella et al, 2017. The gender gap seems to emerge at an early age (see, e.g., Rustichini, 2004, andGlätzle-Rützler andSutter, 2014), and to exist in diverse societies (see, e.g., Gneezy et al, 2009, Apicella and Dreber, 2015, and Zhang, 2018. Gender differences in competitiveness have also been documented outside the laboratories (see, e.g., Buser et al 2014, Reuben et al, 2015, and Zhang, 2018.…”

The impact of stress on tournament entry

“…1The fact that women to a significantly higher extent than men opt out of this type of competitions has been documented in many (but not all) societies and across age groups (e.g., Gneezy et al 2009; Cárdenas et al 2012; Flory et al 2012; Mayr et al 2012; Andersen et al 2013; Almås et al 2015; Apicella and Dreber 2015; Sutter and Glätzle-Rützler 2015), and this tendency appears to be particularly strong for math-related tasks (Günther et al 2010; Grosse and Reiner 2010; Dreber et al 2014). See Flory et al (2010) for a field experiment in a real labor market.…”