35
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      He is a Stud, She is a Slut! A Meta-Analysis on the Continued Existence of Sexual Double Standards

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          (Hetero)sexual double standards (SDS) entail that different sexual behaviors are appropriate for men and women. This meta-analysis ( k = 99; N = 123,343) tested predictions of evolutionary and biosocial theories regarding the existence of SDS in social cognitions. Databases were searched for studies examining attitudes or stereotypes regarding the sexual behaviors of men versus women. Studies assessing differences in evaluations, or expectations, of men’s and women’s sexual behavior yielded evidence for traditional SDS ( d = 0.25). For men, frequent sexual activity was more expected, and evaluated more positively, than for women. Studies using Likert-type-scale questionnaires did not yield evidence of SDS (combined M = −0.09). Effects were moderated by level of gender equality in the country in which the study was conducted, SDS-operationalization (attitudes vs. stereotypes), questionnaire type, and sexual behavior type. Results are consistent with a hybrid model incorporating both evolutionary and sociocultural factors contributing to SDS.

          Related collections

          Most cited references146

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The gender similarities hypothesis.

          Janet Hyde (2005)
          The differences model, which argues that males and females are vastly different psychologically, dominates the popular media. Here, the author advances a very different view, the gender similarities hypothesis, which holds that males and females are similar on most, but not all, psychological variables. Results from a review of 46 meta-analyses support the gender similarities hypothesis. Gender differences can vary substantially in magnitude at different ages and depend on the context in which measurement occurs. Overinflated claims of gender differences carry substantial costs in areas such as the workplace and relationships. Copyright (c) 2005 APA, all rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Improved tests for a random effects meta-regression with a single covariate.

            The explanation of heterogeneity plays an important role in meta-analysis. The random effects meta-regression model allows the inclusion of trial-specific covariates which may explain a part of the heterogeneity. We examine the commonly used tests on the parameters in the random effects meta-regression with one covariate and propose some new test statistics based on an improved estimator of the variance of the parameter estimates. The approximation of the distribution of the newly proposed tests is based on some theoretical considerations. Moreover, the newly proposed tests can easily be extended to the case of more than one covariate. In a simulation study, we compare the tests with regard to their actual significance level and we consider the log relative risk as the parameter of interest. Our simulation study reflects the meta-analysis of the efficacy of a vaccine for the prevention of tuberculosis originally discussed in Berkey et al. The simulation study shows that the newly proposed tests are superior to the commonly used test in holding the nominal significance level. Copyright 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              A Nonparametric “Trim and Fill” Method of Accounting for Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Pers Soc Psychol Rev
                Pers Soc Psychol Rev
                PSR
                sppsr
                Personality and Social Psychology Review
                SAGE Publications (Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA )
                1088-8683
                1532-7957
                27 December 2019
                May 2020
                : 24
                : 2
                : 163-190
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Utrecht University, The Netherlands
                Author notes
                [*]Joyce J. Endendijk, Child and Adolescent Studies, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 1, P.O. Box 80140, 3508 TC Utrecht, The Netherlands. Email: J.J.Endendijk@ 123456uu.nl
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8149-912X
                Article
                10.1177_1088868319891310
                10.1177/1088868319891310
                7153231
                31880971
                a900540e-ad26-4c69-bf59-cd2aec0ed7ce
                © 2019 by the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc

                This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License ( http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages ( https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).

                History
                Categories
                Articles

                sexual double standards,meta-analysis,gender,sexuality,social cognitions

                Comments

                Comment on this article