19 Jul Whether or not three of the five bivariate correlations is actually mathematically high, the latest recommendations of all relationship have been in the newest expected assistance

Preliminary Analysis

We start our analysis with descriptive analyses and some tentative tests of Hypothesis 1, which predicted that gender equality would be positively correlated with gender differences in value priorities. First, we replicated the cross-sectional association between gender equality and gender differences in personality by correlating GEI with the values. For the individual values, the correlation coefficients (Pearson’s r) are .30 for Achievement (p = .096), .62 for Benevolence (p < .001), .47 for Power (p = .007), .47 for Universalism (p = .007), and .15 for Stimulation (p = .480). To obtain a broader measure of personality differences, we also calculated an index that captures the average gender difference across all five values. The correlation between this index and GEI was .55 (p < .001). Together these findings mimic previous cross-sectional studies. For example, Falk and Hermle (2018) report a correlation of .56 between gender equality and a summary index of gender differences in preferences. Our tentative analysis renders initial partial support for Hypothesis 1.

Turning to Hypothesis 2, and this hypothesized that intercourse variations in all the four worth priorities carry out converge over the years across the countries, Fig. 1 suggests an average cross-country difference in philosophy between men between so you’re able to to have the 17 offered places. I average the difference for the last several series and you may subtract an average regarding first two series regarding ESS to minimize year-to-seasons activity. Negative results indicate an overlap into the philosophy ranging from people and positive values suggest a divergence. The development is pretty uniform round the places throughout the desire to the even more convergence towards every four thinking. Switzerland is deviating throughout the development since all the opinions hint in the a slight inclination towards the divergence. There are also deviations in the convergence trend towards some beliefs in almost any nations even though the chief trend leans to your overlap.

Mediocre change in gender variations in viewpoints out-of so you’re able to having 17 Europe. The quantity graphed denotes the alteration from inside the natural intercourse difference in and you may . Bad number signify the real difference in viewpoints was indeed decreasing (converging) to own a particular worth from inside the a particular country whereas positive number mean a rise in intercourse variation (divergence)

A rough technique for demonstrating that it development is by pooling most of the trials (countries) and you will researching the brand new standard change (Cohen’s d) anywhere between individuals in the 1st a couple of surf from ESS (2002–2004) towards last two surf out-of ESS (2014–2016). Dining table 2 signifies that Cohen’s d minimizes for everyone opinions which have the average decrease in fifteen%. This quite simple dysfunction of data is prior to Hypothesis dos, which claims that men’s and you will women’s value concerns gather over time.

Longitudinal Models

Turning to the longitudinal models, we first ran repeated measurement models with only time www.datingranking.net/cs/nudistfriends-recenze (see Table 3). Negative time coefficients mean that the difference between men and women is decreasing over time (i.e., converging) because the coefficients correspond to the average change in value differences between men and women across time points. Looking at specific values, Benevolence, Power, and Achievement are converging over time, whereas Universalism and Stimulation display no significant change over time. The effects are not substantial but they clearly refute the idea of a divergence in these values because men and women are becoming more alike over time. Hypothesis 2, predicting a gender convergence in values, is thus partly confirmed. Moreover, there is significant variation in intercept across countries (b = .15–.23, p < .001), but little or no variation in slope (Power: p = .040, all other ps > .22. In other words, the rate of change in value differences does not vary across countries. There is generally no covariance between intercept and slope, which indicates that the change in gender differences in values is not related to the size of the gender difference.