Cited by 21Experimental Behavioral Economics StudiesDecision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsNonprofit Sector and Volunteering

Do Women Behave Less or More Prosocially than Men?: Evidence from Two Field Experiments

Meier, Stephan·2007·Public Finance Review

Abstract

The behavior of others and the price of giving are two important determinants of contributions to public goods. Using two field experiments, this article tests whether men and women differ in their reactions to either a change in the average behavior of the group or a change in the price of giving, that is, a contribution-matching mechanism. The results of the field experiments show that men and women do not differ in their reactions to a matching mechanism. However, substantial gender differences can be detected with respect to social comparison. Men tend to align their behavior with the average behavior of the group, whereas women seem to be insensitive to information about group behavior.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1091142106291488

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • 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”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 35 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Meier, S.
Affiliations
Federal Reserve Bank of Boston (US)
Corresponding author
Meier, Stephan
Venue
Public Finance Review
Published
2007-03
Volume
35
Issue
2
Pages
215-232
ISSN
  • 1091-1421 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-7530
OpenAlex
W2160318930
Cited by
21
References
35
Citations by year
2024: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Public Finance Review (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Nonprofit Sector and Volunteering
Keywords
gender differences, prosocial behavior, public goods, social comparison, voluntary contributions, field experiments

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