CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,438Personality Traits and PsychologyGender Roles and Identity StudiesChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 15 of the 15 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Gender differences in self-esteem: A meta-analysis.

Kling, Kristen C., Hyde, Janet Shibley, Showers, Carolin J., Buswell, Brenda N.·1999·Psychological Bulletin
DOI 10.1037/0033-2909.125.4.470
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Two analyses were conducted to examine gender differences in global self-esteem. In analysis I, a computerized literature search yielded 216 effect sizes, representing the testing of 97,121 respondents. The overall effect size was 0.21, a small difference favoring males. A significant quadratic effect of age indicated that the largest effect emerged in late adolescence (d = 0.33). In Analysis II, gender differences were examined using 3 large, nationally representative data sets from the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). All of the NCES effect sizes, which collectively summarize the responses of approximately 48,000 young Americans, indicated higher male self-esteem (ds ranged from 0.04 to 0.24). Taken together, the 2 analyses provide evidence that males score higher on standard measures of global self-esteem than females, but the difference is small. Potential reasons for the small yet consistent effect size are discussed.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0033-2909.125.4.470

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • A meta-analysis of gender differences in self-esteem found a small difference favoring Caucasian males over Caucasian females, d = 0.20, but no gender difference for African American samples, d = −0.04.

    “a meta-analysis of gender differences in self-esteem found a small difference favoring Caucasian males over Caucasian females, d = 0.20, but no gender difference for African American samples, d = −0.04”

    From Gender Differences in Depression in Representative National Samples: Meta-Analyses of Diagnoses and Symptoms (2017) · cites this paper as Kling et al., 1999

  • For Self-esteem, all studies showed higher levels of general self-esteem for males (SMDs = 0.05-0.25).

    “For Self-esteem, all studies showed higher levels of general self-esteem for males (SMDs = 0.05–0.25; Bleidorn et al., 2016; Kling et al., 1999; Zuckerman et al., 2016).”

    From A Systematic Review and New Analyses of the Gender-Equality Paradox (2025) · cites this paper as Kling et al., 1999

  • The gender difference in self-esteem may be explained by divergent socialization experiences, different gender roles, or stronger cultural emphasis on girls' physical appearance.

    “The gender difference may be explained by divergent socialization experiences such as a tendency to give boys more autonomy than girls, different gender roles such as self-confidence being more valued in boys, or a stronger cultural emphasis on girls' physical appearance, together with idealized body images portrayed in the media, which may lead to lower self-esteem in girls (Kling et al., 1999).”

    From Low and decreasing self-esteem during adolescence predict adult depression two decades later. (2014) · cites this paper as Kling et al., 1999

  • Males report higher self-esteem, on average, than females, with the largest gender gap observed during adolescence.

    “A metaanalytic review by Kling, Hyde, Showers, and Buswell (1999) revealed that males report higher self-esteem, on average, than females, with the largest gender gap observed during adolescence.”

    From Low and decreasing self-esteem during adolescence predict adult depression two decades later. (2014) · cites this paper as Kling, Hyde, Showers, and Buswell, 1999

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Kling, K. C., Hyde, J. S., Showers, C. J., & Buswell, B. N.
Affiliations
University of Minnesota (US)
ORCID
Hyde, Janet Shibley
Venue
Psychological Bulletin
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
1999
Volume
125
Issue
4
Pages
470-500
ISSN
  • 0033-2909 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1455
DOI
10.1037/0033-2909.125.4.470
OpenAlex
W2053777467
Cited by
1,438
References
15
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 43 · 2024: 45 · 2023: 46 · 2022: 51 · 2021: 52 · 2020: 117 · 2019: 50 · 2018: 58 · 2017: 99 · 2016: 73 · 2015: 69 · 2014: 75 · 2013: 79 · 2012: 74
FWCI
34.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychological Bulletin (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender Roles and Identity Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Keywords
gender differences, self-esteem, global self-esteem, age differences, late adolescence, young adults, effect size
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Female, Gender Identity, Humans, Male, Personality Development, Personality Tests, Psychometrics, Self Concept, Sex Characteristics

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