Cited by 349Evolutionary Game Theory and CooperationEvolutionary Psychology and Human BehaviorExperimental Behavioral Economics Studies

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

Open access
Balliet, Daniel, Li, Norman P., Macfarlan, Shane J., Van Vugt, Mark·2011·Psychological Bulletin

Abstract

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 = -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 = 0.16), yet women cooperate more than men in mixed-sex interactions (d = -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.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0025354

Cites

408 of 408 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • In the new analyses, there are no associations between living conditions and sex differences in talkativeness or cooperation in social dilemmas.

    “In the new analyses, there are, however, no associations between living conditions and sex differences in talkativeness or cooperation in social dilemmas (Balliet et al., 2011; Leaper & Ayres, 2007).”

    From A Systematic Review and New Analyses of the Gender-Equality Paradox (2025) · cites this paper as Balliet et al., 2011

  • Women are more likely to cooperate in mixed-sex interactions (SMD = 0.24).

    “Women are more likely to cooperate in mixed-sex interactions (SMD = 0.24; Balliet et al., 2011).”

    From A Systematic Review and New Analyses of the Gender-Equality Paradox (2025) · cites this paper as Balliet et al., 2011

  • Regarding Social interactions, men display higher levels of talkativeness (SMD = 0.21), negotiating performance (SMD = 0.15), and cooperation for same-sex interactions in social dilemmas (SMD = 0.17).

    “Regarding Social interactions, men display higher levels of talkativeness (SMD = 0.21; Leaper & Ayres, 2007), negotiating performance (SMD = 0.15; Shan et al., 2019), and cooperation for same-sex interactions in social dilemmas (SMD = 0.17; Balliet et al., 2011).”

    From A Systematic Review and New Analyses of the Gender-Equality Paradox (2025) · cites this paper as Balliet et al., 2011

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

5 of the 413 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Balliet, D., Li, N. P., Macfarlan, S. J., & Van Vugt, M.
Affiliations
  • Singapore Management University (SG)
  • Oregon State University (US)
Venue
Psychological Bulletin
Published
2011-11
Volume
137
Issue
6
Pages
881-909
ISSN
  • 0033-2909 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1455
OpenAlex
W2139079404
Cited by
349
References
413
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 28 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 37 · 2020: 44 · 2019: 31 · 2018: 29 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 4
FWCI
38.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • Psychological Bulletin (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • VU Research Portal (publishedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Singapore Management University Institutional Knowledge (InK) (Singapore Management University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Singapore Management University Institutional Knowledge (InK) (Singapore Management University) (submittedVersion)
  • Digital Academic REpository of VU University Amsterdam (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Evolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
Keywords
sex differences, cooperation, social dilemmas, evolutionary psychology, sociocultural theory, biosocial approach, repeated interaction, group size
MeSH terms
Animals, Cooperative Behavior, Culture, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Biological Evolution, Female, Game Theory, Gender Identity, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Men, Psychology, Social, Research, Sex Characteristics, Sex Factors, Social Behavior, Social Change, Social Environment, Women

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