Gender Difference: Personality Traits

Discuss about the Gender Difference for Personality Traits.

 

Introduction

It is notable that the study used a subsample of the New Zealand attitudes and Values data set was used. Data cleaning was conducted by removing outlier values from the data set. This owes to the fact that the researcher noticed that some observations had -9999, which was deemed abnormal. Additionally, the researcher used SPSS and relied on the independent sample t-test to examine whether there is a significant difference between male and female study participants in all the factors under discussion.

Hypotheses

1. There is no significant difference in extraversion scores based on gender.
2. There is no significant difference in agreeableness scores based on gender.
3. There is no significant difference in conscientiousness scores based on gender.
4. There is no significant difference in neuroticism scores based on gender.
5. There is no significant difference in openness scores based on gender.

Results

An independent samples t-test was used to conclude whether there is a difference in extraversion scores in male and female study participants. The results reveal that female study participants have higher extraversion scores (M = 4.11, SD = 1.265) than male study participants (M = 3.97, SD = 1.226) (t (988) = 1.727, p > .05). The same test was used to examine for the presence of a difference in agreeableness between male and female study participants. The results reveal that that female study participants have higher agreeableness scores (M = 5.65, SD 0.937) than male study participants (M = 5.06, SD = 1.045) (t (988) = 9.375, p < .05). The test in question was also used to examine whether there is a difference in conscientiousness scores in male and female study participants. The outcome indicates that female study participants have higher conscientiousness scores (M = 5.20, SD 1.067) than male study participants (M = 5.01, SD = 1.018) (t (988) = 2.738, p < .05).

The independent samples t-test was still used to examine the presence of a difference in the neuroticism scores of male and female study participants. The results reveal that female study participants have higher neuroticism scores (M = 3.62, SD = 1.172) than male study participants (M = 3.38, SD = 1.157) (t (988) = 3.183, p < .05). Similarly, the same test was used to check for the presence of a significant difference in openness scores between male and female study participants. The results reveal that male study participants have higher openness scores (M = 5.03, SD 1.199) than female study participants (M = 5.02, SD 1.178) (t (988) = -0.68, p > .05).

Discussion

The study human personality attracts attention from scholars and practitioners around the globe. Critical to the discussion is the fact that people believe in the differences between personality traits and gender to be so huge to the extent that it inhibits communication across gender. In fact, some authors argue that the differences in biological and social roles of different genders influence personality traits. It is notable that scholars have now reached some consensus on the study of human personality. This owes to the reality that scholars now concur of the existence of five personality types, which include, extraversion, agreeableness, neuroticism (emotionality), openness, and conscientiousness (Schwartz, Eichstaedt, Kern, Dziurzynski, Ramones, Agrawal, Shah, Kosinski, Stillwell, Seligman, and Unga, 2013). Consequently, authors such as Weisberg, DeYoung, and Hirsh (2012) examined the differences in the personality types between genders. The results in this section also examine differences in personality based on gender.

From the results obtained above it is evident that female study participants had mathematically higher extraversion scores than male study participants. Regardless, the results are not statistically significant because the p value obtained from the independent sample t-test was greater than 0.05. It follows that the test fails to reject the hypothesis implying that there is no statistically significant difference in extraversion scores between male and female study participants. It is notable that evidence from published studies indicates that extraversion appears to be evenly distributed across gender. As evidenced, Weiner (2017) argues that gender differences in extraversion scores may switch direction based on specific traits that are being measured. This owes to the reality that females tend to score higher on positive emotions, gregariousness, and warmth while men tend to score higher on excitement seeking and assertiveness than women (Lee, and Ashton, 2012). In short, the results obtained from the study are complemented by previous studies.

The results for agreeableness was higher in female (M = 5.65, SD 0.937) than in male study participants (M = 5.06, SD = 1.045) (t (988) = 9.375, p < .05). Evidently, the p value is less than 0.05, which rejects the hypothesis implying there is a statistically significant difference in agreeableness scores based on gender. Simply put, women score higher than men do on agreeableness. Critical to the discussion is the fact that Rahmani and Lavasani (2012) conducted a similar study. As a result, the authors concluded that there is a statistically significant difference score of agreeableness between male and female participants. Like the authors, the study also established a statistically significant difference in agreeableness scores between male and female study participants. In a different study, Vianello, Schnabel, Siram, and Nosek (2013) established that women score higher than men do on agreeableness scores. It follows that the finding from this study complements literature on the subject in question.

The results also indicate that female study participants have higher conscientiousness scores (M = 5.20, SD 1.067) than male study participants (M = 5.01, SD = 1.018) (t (988) = 2.738, p < .05). It is evident that the p value was lower than 0.05, which rejects the hypothesis. Simply put, the study established that there is a statistically significant difference on conscientiousness scores between male and female study participants. Specifically, female study participants record higher conscientiousness scores than male study participants. Imperative to the debate is the reality that previous studies have established similar results. As evidenced, Lydon, O’Connor, McVeigh, Offiah, and Byrne (2015) reveal that females scored significantly higher than males on conscientiousness (p < .001). In a different study, Weisberg, DeYoung, and Hirsh, (2012) did not establish a significant difference in conscientiousness scores between men and women. However, the same result was established when the authors controlled for age with the same variables.

The results from the study are recorded as female (M = 3.62, SD = 1.172) and male study participants (M = 3.38, SD = 1.157) (t (988) = 3.183, p < .05). From the results, the p value is less than 0.05, which rejects the hypothesis. It follows that there is a statistically significant difference in neuroticism scores between male and female study participants. It is notable that the study is consistent with other publications that examined the same topic. Specifically, Vianello, Schnabel, Siram, and Nosek (2013) examined for the presence of a statistically significant difference in neuroticism scores between men and women. Consequently, the researchers concluded that women score higher than men do on neuroticism. Critical to the discussion is the reality that Weisberg, DeYoung, and Hirsh (2012) established similar results from their study. It follows that the outcome of the study complements those of previous authors.

The results reveal that male study participants have higher openness scores (M = 5.03, SD 1.199) than female study participants (M = 5.02, SD 1.178) (t (988) = -0.68, p > .05). Vital to the debate is the truth that the difference is mathematically significant but statistically insignificant. This owes to the fact that the p value from the results is greater than 0.05, which fails to reject the hypothesis. Authors such Weisberg, DeYoung, and Hirsh (2012) as have conducted similar studies and concluded that there is no significant differences in openness/intellect scores based on gender in terms of the big five domain. However, the authors found that women scored statistically significant higher than men did in openness. Analogously the same study reveals that men recorded statistically higher scores than women did on intellect. It follows that the results complement with previous literature.

Apparently, the study has established that there is a statistically significant difference of scores in agreeableness, conscientiousness, and neuroticism based on gender. The same study also indicates the absence of statistically significant scores in openness and extraversion based on gender. Critical to the discussion is the fact that the study is limited because it did examine individual factors that influence and individual’s personality. For instance, the study could examine how questions such as; Q1. Like order; Q2. Make a mess of things; Q3. Get chores done right away; and Q4r. Often forget to put things back in their proper place differ based on gender. As Weisberg, DeYoung, and Hirsh (2012) argue, age could act as an intervening variable and when conducting the study in question. In fact, the authors examined the subject while conducting for the effect of age on the outcomes. It follows that this study should also have controlled for age on the personalities of the study participants.

References

Bridges, R. K., and Harnish, J. R. (2015). Gender Differences in Formal Thinking: Their Impact

on Right-Wing Authoritarianism and Religious Fundamentalism. Psychology, 6, 1676-1684. Retrieved from https://file.scirp.org/pdf/PSYCH_2015101913493088.pdf

Lee, K., and Ashton, M. C. (2012). Getting mad and getting even: Agreeableness and Honesty-

Humility as predictors of revenge intentions. Personality and Individual Differences, 52: 596-600. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/f133/1ef0c52d7062cc1e892e28d6250cdc45b0da.pdf

Lydon, S., O’Connor, P., McVeigh, T., Offiah, G., and Byrne, D. (2015) Medical Specialty

Choices: Does Personality Matter? Irish Medical Journal, 108(3), 75-77. Retrieved from

https://aran.library.nuigalway.ie/bitstream/handle/10379/5139/personality_aran.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

Manson, JH. (2015). Life History Strategy and the HEXACO Personality Dimensions.

Evolutionary Psychology, 13(1), 48 - 66. Retrieved from: https://escholarship.org/uc/item/3qp935pj

Rahmani, S., and Lavasani, G. M. (2012). Gender Differences in Five-Factor Model of

Personality and Sensation Seeking. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46: 2906 – 2911. Retrieved from doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.05.587

Rey, L., and Extremera, N. (2014). Positive Psychological Characteristics and Interpersonal

Forgiveness: Identifying the Unique Contribution of Emotional Intelligence Abilities, Big Five Traits, Gratitude, and Optimism. Personality and Individual Differences 68, 199-204. Retrieved from https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.04.030

Schwartz, A. H., Eichstaedt, J. C., Kern, L. M., Dziurzynski, L., Ramones, M., Agrawal, M.,

Shah, A., Kosinski, M., Stillwell, D., Seligman, E. P. M., Unga, U. H. (2013). Personality, Gender, and Age in the Language of Social Media: The Open-Vocabulary Approach. PLOSone, 8(9): 1-16. Retrieved from https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0073791&type=printable

Vianello, M., Schnabel, K., Siram, N., and Nosek, B. (2013). Gender Differences in Implicit and

Explicit Personality Traits. Personality and Individual Differences, 55 (2013) 994–999. Retrieved from https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.08.008

Weiner, I. B. (2017). Handbook of personality assessment. John Wiley and Sons Inc.

Weisberg, J. Y., DeYoung, G. C., and Hirsh, B. J. (2012). Gender Differences in Personality

Across the Ten Aspects of the Big Five. Frontiers in Psychology, 2(178): 1-11. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3149680/pdf/fpsyg-02-00178.pdf