The DOI matches its Crossref record; 20 of the 21 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Sex differences in personality are larger in gender equal countries: Replicating and extending a surprising finding
Open accessAbstract
Sex differences in personality have been shown to be larger in more gender equal countries. We advance this research by using an extensive personality measure, the IPIP‐NEO‐120, with large country samples ( N > 1000), from 22 countries. Furthermore, to capture the multidimensionality of personality we measure sex differences with a multivariate effect size (Mahalanobis distance D ). Results indicate that past research, using univariate measures of effect size, have underestimated the size of between‐country sex differences in personality. Confirming past research, there was a strong correlation ( r = .69) between a country's sex differences in personality and their Gender Equality Index. Additional analyses showed that women typically score higher than men on all five trait factors (Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness, Agreeableness and Conscientiousness), and that these relative differences are larger in more gender equal countries. We speculate that as gender equality increases both men and women gravitate towards their traditional gender roles.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source doesn’t support the claim as written.
In the citing paper
“After controlling for language regions, all personality studies (1–3) had negative correlations between gender equality and gender differences (rs = −0.79 to −0.88, ps < 0.002).”
From Simpson’s gender-equality paradox (2025) · cites this paper as [2]
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The variable to explain is the magnitude of gender differences across countries and the variable responsible is gender equality (or some related variable).”
From Simpson’s gender-equality paradox (2025) · cites this paper as [2]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“A further potential issue in GEP-studies is that gender equality, like gender differences, is multidimensional, and that GEP-studies tend to measure equality and differences along different dimensions (see (1–6))—which should weaken relationships between variables.”
From Simpson’s gender-equality paradox (2025) · cites this paper as [2]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The gender-equality paradox (GEP) refers to the result that places (often operationalized as countries) with more gender equality exhibit larger gender differences* on certain measures (1–6).”
From Simpson’s gender-equality paradox (2025) · cites this paper as [2]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Scholars vary in how they explain such paradoxes, but many interpret the findings with a causal lens (for 1–6), this interpretation is more prevalent in (1, 2, 4, 5); see SI Appendix, section 1.1 for more details): The variable to explain is the magnitude of gender differences across countries and the variable responsible is gender equality (or some related variable).”
From Simpson’s gender-equality paradox (2025) · cites this paper as [2]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The prime evidence for the GEP is based on correlations across countries (1–6, 32).”
From Simpson’s gender-equality paradox (2025) · cites this paper as [2]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“These data have, to our knowledge, not been used in GEP studies previously, although they consist of the probably largest cross-cultural dataset of personality, with over 9,000,000 participants, the greatest number of countries (k = 131) and the largest samples per country to date (we used 1,000 participants as cut-off for including countries, as used in 2).”
From Simpson’s gender-equality paradox (2025) · cites this paper as [2]
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“When data quality and gender equality were entered in the same model, gender equality became (clearly and borderline) nonsignificant in two studies (2; and ESS).”
From Simpson’s gender-equality paradox (2025) · cites this paper as [2]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn the citing paper
“For instance, in contrast to popular belief, the largest sex/gender differences in psychological constructs in the general population, and possibly neurodevelopmental conditions, are reported in egalitarian, high-income countries318.”
From Sex and gender in neurodevelopmental conditions (2023) · cites this paper as [318]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing
R Core Team (2000) · doi:10.32614/r.manuals · Cited by 355,893
The international personality item pool and the future of public-domain personality measures
Goldberg, L. R., Johnson, J. A., Eber, H. W., Hogan, R., Ashton, M. C., Cloninger, C. R., & Gough, H. G. (2006) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2005.08.007 · Cited by 3,185
Gender differences in personality traits across cultures: Robust and surprising findings.
Costa, P. T., Terracciano, A., & McCrae, R. R. (2001) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.81.2.322 · Cited by 2,986
The Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R)
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (2008) · SAGE Publications Ltd eBooks · doi:10.4135/9781849200479.n9 · Cited by 1,569
Wood, W., & Eagly, A. H. (2002) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.128.5.699 · Cited by 1,509
Schmitt, D. P., Realo, A., Voracek, M., & Allik, J. (2008) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.94.1.168 · Cited by 1,391
Tucker's Congruence Coefficient as a Meaningful Index of Factor Similarity
Lorenzo‐Seva, U., & ten Berge, J. M. F. (2006) · Methodology · doi:10.1027/1614-2241.2.2.57 · Cited by 1,130
Johnson, J. A. (2014) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2014.05.003 · Cited by 541
Genetic and environmental continuity in personality development: A meta-analysis.
Briley, D. A., & Tucker-Drob, E. M. (2014) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0037091 · Cited by 435
Personality and gender differences in global perspective
Schmitt, D. P., Long, A. E., McPhearson, A., O'Brien, K., Remmert, B., & Shah, S. H. (2016) · International Journal of Psychology · doi:10.1002/ijop.12265 · Cited by 429
Flagged first, then by citations
1 of the 21 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Hausmann R., 2011, The global gender gap report 2011
- Mahalanobis P. C., 1936, Mahalanobis distance, Proceedings National Institute of Science of India, 49, 234
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 201–216 of 216
The gender gap in preferences: Evidence from 45,397 Facebook interests
Cuevas, √., Cuevas, R., Desmet, K., & Ortuño-Ortı́n, I. (2025) · Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization · doi:10.1016/j.jebo.2025.107165 · Cited by 3
Personality in sport: an updated critical review
Allen, M. S., Jones, M. V., Sheffield, D., & Laborde, S. (2025) · International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology · doi:10.1080/1750984x.2025.2569032 · Cited by 1
Realo, A., & Allïk, J. (2025) · European Journal of Personality · doi:10.1177/08902070251389080
Weller, S., Derntl, B., & Plewnia, C. (2024) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.26635113
Understanding and assessing personality across cultures: A scoping review
Sheppard, H., Bizumić, B., Christensen, B. K., & Monaghan, C. (2026) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0338521 · Cited by 4
How Personality Traits, Social Resources, and Gender May Relate to Engagement in Prosocial BehaviourPreprint
Wakjira, W. K., & Temple, E. C. (2026) · Qeios · doi:10.32388/y1idyv
Kumar, T. K. S., Menon, V. A., Thomas, J., & Thomas, L. P. (2026) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/979-8-2600-0477-7.ch006
The Paradox of Gender Equality: Bibliometric Analysis Based on Web of Science (WoS) Data (1994-2025)
Durdağ, F. M. (2026) · Trends in Business and Economics · doi:10.16951/trendbusecon.1725640
Wakjira, W. K., & Temple, E. C. (2026) · Qeios · doi:10.32388/y1idyv.2
Wänman, J., Berglund, L., Blohm, M., Jolbäck, P., & McGrath, A. M. (2026) · Scandinavian Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1177/14574969261459277
Prati, G. (2025) · Social Psychology · doi:10.1027/1864-9335/a000595
Polito, N. D., Gambarota, F., Hampson, E., & Herlitz, A. (2026) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2026.106877
Schmidt, S., Jaramillo, I., Mack, J. T., Weise, V., Asselmann, E., & Garthus‐Niegel, S. (2026) · BMC Public Health · doi:10.1186/s12889-026-28783-2
Personality and Success in a First-Year Veterinary Gross Anatomy Course
Kehl, M., Hooper, S. E., & Kotzé, S. H. (2026) · Journal of Veterinary Medical Education · doi:10.3138/jvme-2025-0127
How many? The Big Five and the number of children across three cultures
Fisher, M. L., Wade, T. J., Komatsu, H., Tanaka, N., Kubota, H., Burch, R., Salmon, C., & Widman, D. (2026) · Culture and Evolution · doi:10.1556/2055.2026.00073
Yehya, A., Allïk, J., & Realo, A. (2026) · European Journal of Personality · doi:10.1177/08902070261498562
Metadata
- Authors
- Mac Giolla, E., & Kajonius, P. J.
- Affiliations
- Department of Psychology University of Gothenburg Gothenburg Sweden
- University West (SE)
- ORCID
- Kajonius, Petri J.
- Venue
- International Journal of Psychology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2018-09-11
- Volume
- 54
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 705-711
- ISSN
- 0020-7594 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-066X
- OpenAlex
- W2891670863
- Semantic Scholar
- c583dfd2e373bd67304b35781f1b54879a8c7e01
- Cited by
- 217
- References
- 21
- Citations by year
- 2026: 16 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 30 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 69 · 2019: 9
- FWCI
- 29.02
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- public-domain
- onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)
- Locations
- International Journal of Psychology (publishedVersion, public-domain)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Cultural Differences and Values
- Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender Roles and Identity Studies
- Keywords
- sex differences in personality, gender equality, cross-national comparison, Mahalanobis distance, Big Five personality traits, gender equality index, traditional gender roles, replication
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Aged, Female, Gender Identity, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Personality, Personality Inventory, Sex Characteristics, Young Adult
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
