The DOI matches its Crossref record; 128 of the 128 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Evaluating gender similarities and differences using metasynthesis.
Abstract
Despite the common lay assumption that males and females are profoundly different, Hyde (2005) used data from 46 meta-analyses to demonstrate that males and females are highly similar. Nonetheless, the gender similarities hypothesis has remained controversial. Since Hyde's provocative report, there has been an explosion of meta-analytic interest in psychological gender differences. We utilized this enormous collection of 106 meta-analyses and 386 individual meta-analytic effects to reevaluate the gender similarities hypothesis. Furthermore, we employed a novel data-analytic approach called metasynthesis (Zell & Krizan, 2014) to estimate the average difference between males and females and to explore moderators of gender differences. The average, absolute difference between males and females across domains was relatively small (d = 0.21, SD = 0.14), with the majority of effects being either small (46%) or very small (39%). Magnitude of differences fluctuated somewhat as a function of the psychological domain (e.g., cognitive variables, social and personality variables, well-being), but remained largely constant across age, culture, and generations. These findings provide compelling support for the gender similarities hypothesis, but also underscore conditions under which gender differences are most pronounced.
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.
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
Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences
(1990) · Computers, Environment and Urban Systems · doi:10.1016/0198-9715(90)90050-4 · Cited by 65,269
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.).
Lachenbruch, P. A., & Cohen, J. (1989) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2290095 · Cited by 37,395
Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2011) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797611417632 · Cited by 6,567
Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures
Buss, D. M. (1989) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00023992 · Cited by 4,484
The gender similarities hypothesis.
Hyde, J. S. (2005) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.60.6.581 · Cited by 3,084
Fixed-and random-effects models in meta-analysis.
Hedges, L. V., & Vevea, J. L. (1998) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.3.4.486 · Cited by 2,977
Voyer, D., Voyer, S., & Bryden, M. P. (1995) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.117.2.250 · Cited by 2,868
Gender and leadership style: A meta-analysis.
Eagly, A. H., & Johnson, B. T. (1990) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.108.2.233 · Cited by 2,749
You just don't understand : women and men in conversation
Tannen, D. (1992) · Cited by 2,589
Eagly, A. H., Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C., & van Engen, M. L. (2003) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.129.4.569 · Cited by 2,547
Cited by
Why are some STEM fields more gender balanced than others?
Cheryan, S., Ziegler, S. A., Montoya, A. K., & Jiang, L. (2017) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/bul0000052 · Cited by 1,259
The future of sex and gender in psychology: Five challenges to the gender binary.
Hyde, J. S., Bigler, R. S., Joel, D., Tate, C. C., & van Anders, S. M. (2019) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/amp0000307 · Cited by 983
Sex Differences in the Adult Human Brain: Evidence from 5216 UK Biobank Participants
Ritchie, S. J., Cox, S. R., Shen, X., Lombardo, M. V., Reus, L. M., Alloza, C., Harris, M. A., Alderson, H. L., Hunter, S., Neilson, E., et al. (2018) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhy109 · Cited by 855
“2003), and would assist in explaining several behavioral sex differences (Zell et al. 2015; Gur and Gur 2017).”
BackgroundMedia Use Is Linked to Lower Psychological Well-Being: Evidence from Three Datasets
Twenge, J. M., & Campbell, W. K. (2019) · Psychiatric Quarterly · doi:10.1007/s11126-019-09630-7 · Cited by 429
Gender differences in loneliness across the lifespan: a meta-analysis
Maes, M., Qualter, P., Vanhalst, J., Van den Noortgate, W., & Goossens, L. (2019) · European Journal of Personality · doi:10.1002/per.2220 · Cited by 405
Metadata
- Authors
- Zell, E., Krizan, Z., & Teeter, S. R.
- Venue
- American Psychologist
- Published
- 2015-01
- Volume
- 70
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 10-20
- ISSN
- 0003-066X (ISSN-L)
- 1935-990X
- OpenAlex
- W2326505861
- Cited by
- 434
- References
- 128
- FWCI
- 74.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Evaluating gender similarities and differences using metasynthesis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/a0038208
- The paper
- Zell, E., Krizan, Z., & Teeter, S. R. (2015). Evaluating gender similarities and differences using metasynthesis. American Psychologist. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038208
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
