Gender differences across multiple types of prosocial behavior in adolescence: A meta-analysis of the prosocial tendency measure-revised (PTM-R).
Clicks: 452
ID: 63442
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
30.0
/100
452 views
58 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #1 of 14 articles by views in Journal of adolescence
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Literature on adolescent prosocial behavior (PB) has grown tremendously since the development of The Prosocial Tendency Measure-Revised (PTM-R), which includes subscales assessing different types of PB. However, findings of gender differences are inconsistent across studies. Thus, we computed meta-analyses to examine gender differences in adolescents' PB. Further, we examined the moderating roles of type of PB, and various sample (i.e., mean age, gender composition, ethnic composition) and study (i.e., reporter type, measurement form, reliability) characteristics in gender differences in PB.Using online databases (e.g., ProQuest), journal article references, and conference programs, we identified a total of 46 records from 32 studies (215 effect sizes, N = 12,024) across the globe that had measured adolescents' (age 10-18; 51% male) PB using the PTM-R or the PTM.Gender differences in the PB were small to medium in magnitude (ds ranged from 0 to 0.35) for absolute gender differences (i.e., overall magnitude of gender differences regardless of which gender was higher). There were larger gender differences for gender-typed prosocial behaviors (e.g., altruistic, d = 0.35) than gender-neutral behaviors (e.g., anonymous, d = 0.03). The type of PB (i.e., altruistic, compliant, public, emotional, dire, anonymous) and region (i.e., European, U.S., traditional cultures, Asian) and were significant moderators.Although males and females generally are more similar than different in their prosociality, it is important to consider the type of PB when examining gender differences.
| Reference Key |
xiao2019genderjournal
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Xiao, Sonya Xinyue;Hashi, Emi C;Korous, Kevin M;Eisenberg, Nancy; |
| Journal | Journal of adolescence |
| Year | 2019 |
| DOI |
S0140-1971(19)30154-X
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.