What do men want? Gender differences and two spheres of belongingness: Comment on Cross and Madson (1997).

Baumeister, Roy F.; Sommer, Kristin L.

doi:10.1037/0033-2909.122.1.38

Cited by 465 publications

(390 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

362

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Men may not have excluded relationships from their broader ideological sphere (Baumeister & Sommers, 1997;Gabriel & Gardner, 1999), allowing them to forge connections between their political beliefs and their relationship beliefs that women may be less likely to make. To the extent this is so, when participants are focused on their own personal relationships, an association between system-related motivations and committed relationships may exist for women.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

System justification and the defense of committed relationship ideology.

Day

Kay²,

Holmes

et al. 2011

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A consequential ideology in Western society is the uncontested belief that a committed relationship is the most important adult relationship and that almost all people want to marry or seriously couple (DePaulo & Morris, 2005). In the present article, we investigated the extent to which the system justification motive may contribute to the adoption of this ideology. In Studies 1 and 2, we examined whether a heightened motive to maintain the status quo would increase defense of committed relationship values. In Study 3, we examined the reverse association, that is, whether a threat to committed relationship ideology would also affect sociopolitical system endorsement. As past research has found that the justification of political systems depends upon how much these systems are perceived as controlling, in Study 4 we tested whether the defense of the system of committed relationships would also increase when framed as controlling. Results from Studies 1–4 were consistent with our hypotheses, but only for men. In Study 5, using cross-cultural data, we sought to replicate these findings correlationally and probe for a cause of the gender effect. Results from more than 33,000 respondents indicated a relationship (for men) between defense of the sociopolitical system and defense of marriage in countries where the traditional advantages of men over women were most threatened. In Studies 6 and 7, we investigated when this gender difference disappears. Results revealed that when we measured (Study 6) or manipulated (Study 7) personal relationship identity rather than relationship ideology, effects also emerge for women.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

System justification and the defense of committed relationship ideology.

Day

Kay²,

Holmes

et al. 2011

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The sociocultural perspective suggests that women find close interpersonal relationships more important for defining their self concept compared to men (Cross & Madson, 1997), whereas men tend to value groups in defining their self concept (Baumeister & Sommer, 1997)-and this perspective predicts relatively greater male cooperation in larger groups (Gabriel & Gardner, 1999). An evolutionary perspective suggests that men should be more cooperative than women in larger groups, because men have more to gain (and less to lose) from interacting with many other individuals for the purpose of trading and warfare ).…”

Section: Group Sizementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The sociocultural perspective suggests that sex differences in social roles may result in sex differences in the importance of close relationships and group memberships in defining women's and men's self-concepts, respectively (Baumeister & Sommer, 1997;Cross & Madson, 1997). An implication of this perspective is that women may be more cooperative in social dilemmas involving close interpersonal dyadic interactions, and men may be more cooperative than women in larger group social dilemmas.…”

Section: Group Size and Cooperationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sex differences in cooperation: A meta-analytic review of social dilemmas.

Balliet

Macfarlan

et al. 2011

Psychological Bulletin

285

234

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although it is commonly believed that women are kinder and more cooperative than men, there is conflicting evidence for this assertion. Current theories of sex differences in social behavior suggest that it may be useful to examine in what situations men and women are likely to differ in cooperation. Here, we derive predictions from both sociocultural and evolutionary perspectives on context-specific sex differences in cooperation, and we conduct a unique meta-analytic study of 272 effect sizes-sampled across 50 years of research-on social dilemmas to examine several potential moderators. The overall average effect size is not statistically different from zero (d ϭ -0.05), suggesting that men and women do not differ in their overall amounts of cooperation. However, the association between sex and cooperation is moderated by several key features of the social context: Male-male interactions are more cooperative than female-female interactions (d ϭ 0.16), yet women cooperate more than men in mixed-sex interactions (d ϭ -0.22). In repeated interactions, men are more cooperative than women. Women were more cooperative than men in larger groups and in more recent studies, but these differences disappeared after statistically controlling for several study characteristics. We discuss these results in the context of both sociocultural and evolutionary theories of sex differences, stress the need for an integrated biosocial approach, and outline directions for future research.

show abstract

“…Such relational competences seem not equally divided across the two sexes in that they are also shaped by genetics (Baron-Cohen, 2002;Seeley, Gardner, Pennington, & Gabriel, 2003). Research has shown that, compared to men, women relate less often to highly abstract entities, such as groups, institutions, and organizations (Baumeister & Sommer, 1997;Gabriel & Gardner, 1999) because they are less equipped in predicting the behavior of systems (Baron-Cohen, 2002). Given that some resource extensions, such as capital, can often only be accessed through relationships with institutions such as banks, women may face greater challenges in accessing such resource extensions.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Step-Change: Micro-Entrepreneurs’ Entry into the Middle-Class Market

Daouda

Ingenbleek

Trijp

2016

Journal of African Business

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With upcoming middle classes in Africa, micro-entrepreneurs witness new opportunities that can potentially lift them out of poverty. Exploiting these opportunities requires entrepreneurs to make a 'step-change' away from the bottom of the pyramid to middle-class markets. This process hosts potential conflicts between informal-sector and formal-sector stakeholders as it requires both new resources and continued access to existing resources. By taking a strategic marketing perspective, this study labels and defines the phenomenon of step-change and offers an explanatory conceptual framework for it. The article draws implications for business development, the gender debate, as well as academic research.

show abstract

What do men want? Gender differences and two spheres of belongingness: Comment on Cross and Madson (1997).

Cited by 465 publications

References 29 publications

System justification and the defense of committed relationship ideology.

System justification and the defense of committed relationship ideology.

Sex differences in cooperation: A meta-analytic review of social dilemmas.

Step-Change: Micro-Entrepreneurs’ Entry into the Middle-Class Market

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About