Brazilian Sex Differences on the Five Personality Dimensions and Socialization Difficulties

Q3 Arts and Humanities

Mankind Quarterly Pub Date : 2021-03-01 DOI:10.46469/MQ.2021.61.3.8

C. Flores-Mendoza, Karen Silva de Souza Saviotti

{"title":"Brazilian Sex Differences on the Five Personality Dimensions and Socialization Difficulties","authors":"C. Flores-Mendoza, Karen Silva de Souza Saviotti","doi":"10.46469/MQ.2021.61.3.8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Sex differences are ubiquitous in several aspects of human behavior. Here we present the analysis results of three datasets regarding personality and socialization difficulties in the Brazilian context. The first dataset (N = 1321; 67.3% females) used the NEO-FFI, which is based on the Big Five model of personality. The second dataset (N = 468 schoolchildren, 48% girls) used the Big Five for Children (BFC). The third dataset (N = 1458; 46.5% females) used the Canto Blanco Socialization Scale (SOC). The results indicate that the most pronounced personality sex differences in adults, favoring females, were in Neuroticism (d = -0.51), independently of age and ethnicity. Sex differences in Neuroticism, Agreeableness and Conscientiousness were found in children, but effect sizes were small. Adult males outscored females in socialization difficulties (d = 0.55), independently of age and educational level. These results corroborate previous studies on personality differences conducted around the world. Considering practical consequences, psychological trait differences were more important than sex for explaining care attitudes during the present pandemic situation in Brazil.","PeriodicalId":35516,"journal":{"name":"Mankind Quarterly","volume":"61 1","pages":"518-540"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mankind Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.46469/MQ.2021.61.3.8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Sex differences are ubiquitous in several aspects of human behavior. Here we present the analysis results of three datasets regarding personality and socialization difficulties in the Brazilian context. The first dataset (N = 1321; 67.3% females) used the NEO-FFI, which is based on the Big Five model of personality. The second dataset (N = 468 schoolchildren, 48% girls) used the Big Five for Children (BFC). The third dataset (N = 1458; 46.5% females) used the Canto Blanco Socialization Scale (SOC). The results indicate that the most pronounced personality sex differences in adults, favoring females, were in Neuroticism (d = -0.51), independently of age and ethnicity. Sex differences in Neuroticism, Agreeableness and Conscientiousness were found in children, but effect sizes were small. Adult males outscored females in socialization difficulties (d = 0.55), independently of age and educational level. These results corroborate previous studies on personality differences conducted around the world. Considering practical consequences, psychological trait differences were more important than sex for explaining care attitudes during the present pandemic situation in Brazil.

查看原文本刊更多论文

巴西性别差异在五个人格维度和社会化困难

性别差异普遍存在于人类行为的几个方面。在这里，我们展示了关于巴西背景下的人格和社会化困难的三个数据集的分析结果。第一个数据集（N=1321；67.3%的女性）使用了基于五大人格模型的NEO-FFI。第二个数据集（N=468名学童，48%为女孩）使用了儿童五大数据集（BFC）。第三个数据集（N=1458；46.5%的女性）使用了Canto Blanco社会化量表（SOC）。结果表明，与年龄和种族无关，成年人中最明显的个性性别差异是神经质（d=-0.51），有利于女性。儿童在神经质、随和性和尽责性方面存在性别差异，但影响大小较小。成年男性在社会化困难方面的得分高于女性（d=0.55），与年龄和教育水平无关。这些结果证实了之前在世界各地进行的关于人格差异的研究。考虑到实际后果，在解释巴西当前疫情期间的护理态度时，心理特征差异比性别更重要。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Mankind Quarterly Social Sciences-Anthropology

CiteScore

0.90

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： The Mankind Quarterly was founded as a quarterly journal of anthropology, in the broadest sense of "the science of man," in 1961. This was a time when the "study of man" had already diversified into physical anthropology, ethnography, quantitative cross-cultural research, archaeology and other subspecialties. Psychological and linguistic approaches were explored but the genetic study of population structure and population history was still in its infancy.