Are women less selfish than men?: Evidence from dictator experiments.
Abstract
Research in social sciences other than economics indicates substan tial differences in behaviour between men and women. The general conclusion drawn from this work is that women will be more socially‐orientated (selfless), and men more individually‐orientated (selfish). This paper reports the results of a double‐anonymous dictator experiment designed to permit the emergence of basic gender differences in economic behaviour. Our results are intended to provide a baseline for further research. We find that women, on average, donate twice as much as men to their anonymous partners when any factors that might confound cooperation are eliminated
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Women are on average more proficient at social cognition and tend to display more prosocial behavior than men.
“women are on average more proficient at social cognition and tend to display more prosocial behavior than men”
From Hypernatural Monitoring: A Social Rehearsal Account of Smartphone Addiction (2018) · cites this paper as Eckel and Grossman, 1998
Cites
Gottfredson, M. R., & Hirschi, T. (1990) · doi:10.1515/9781503621794 · Cited by 10,127 · see citing works
Altruism in Anonymous Dictator Games.
Eckel, C. C., & Grossman, P. J. (1996) · Games and Economic Behavior · doi:10.1006/game.1996.0081 · Cited by 1,126 · cited 3× · see citing works
“While there is evidence that knowledge of a partner's sex can in¯uence the decisions of subjects (Eckel and Grossman, 1996b), there is no evidence that single-sex groupings, such as we have employed, in¯uence subjects' play.”
BackgroundMethodSelf-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Falk, A., & Fischbacher, U. (2006) · Games and Economic Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.geb.2005.03.001 · Cited by 2,416 · see citing works
Fear and loathing across party lines: New evidence on group polarization
Iyengar, S., & Westwood, S. J. (2015) · American Journal of Political Science · doi:10.1111/ajps.12152 · Cited by 2,452 · see citing works
Women as Policy Makers: Evidence from a Randomized Policy Experiment in India
Chattopadhyay, R., & Duflo, E. (2004) · Econometrica · doi:10.1111/j.1468-0262.2004.00539.x · Cited by 2,284 · see citing works
Lodge, M., & Taber, C. S. (2005) · Political Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2005.00426.x · Cited by 588 · see citing works
Get Real! Individuals Prefer More Sustainable Investments
Bauer, R., Ruof, T., & Smeets, P. (2021) · The Review of Financial Studies · doi:10.1093/rfs/hhab037 · Cited by 552 · see citing works
Falk, A., & Fischbacher, U. (2000) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.203115 · Cited by 293 · see citing works
Hypernatural Monitoring: A Social Rehearsal Account of Smartphone Addiction
Veissière, S. P. L., & Stendel, M. (2018) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00141 · Cited by 105 · see citing works
“…and social neuroscience indicate that women are on average more proficient at social cognition and tend to display more prosocial behavior than men (Eckel and Grossman, 1998; Andreoni and Vesterlund, 2001; Meier, 2007; Laasch and Conaway, 2009; Rand et al., 2016; Soutschek et al., 2017; see…”
BackgroundDo Women Behave Less or More Prosocially than Men?: Evidence from Two Field Experiments
Meier, S. (2007) · Public Finance Review · doi:10.1177/1091142106291488 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Can Soft Information Survive Organizational Distance? Evidence from SMB Lending
Cerchiello, P., Filomeni, S., Tanda, A., & Toma, A. M. (2025) · European Accounting Review · doi:10.1080/09638180.2024.2447356
Can soft information survive organizational distance? Evidence from SMB lending
Cerchiello, P., Filomeni, S., & Tanda, A. (2025) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5065824
- Authors
- Eckel, C. C., & Grossman, P. J.
- Affiliations
- U.S. National Science Foundation (US)
- The University of Texas at Arlington (US)
- Venue
- The Economic Journal
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1998-05-01
- Volume
- 108
- Issue
- 448
- Pages
- 726-735
- ISSN
- 0013-0133 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-0297
- OpenAlex
- W1971839183
- Cited by
- 1,000
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 28 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 50 · 2021: 41 · 2020: 100 · 2019: 35 · 2018: 46 · 2017: 39 · 2016: 37 · 2015: 50 · 2014: 57 · 2013: 48 · 2012: 38
- FWCI
- 35.76
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The Economic Journal (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
- Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender, Labor, and Family Dynamics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Keywords
- gender differences, selfishness, dictator game, cooperation, social orientation, personal orientation, economic behavior
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
