Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

New study shows why women have to be likeable, and men don't

#1
C C Offline
https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/...012720.php

RELEASE: A new study in The Economic Journal finds that likeability is an influencing factor in interactions between women, as well as interactions between men and women, but not in all-male interactions.

The researchers conducted experiments where participants rated the likeability of other participants, based on photographs. The participants were divided in to pairs, shown the photograph of their partner beforehand, and learned how their partner rated them. The pairs then played games with each other where rewards depended on the degree of cooperation.

In one version, participants chose to contribute any integer value out of an initial endowment of 6 euros to a joint project. Overall, men contributed on average 4.05 euros, and women contributed 3.92 euros. Researchers found that in same-sex pairings, men in low as well as high mutual likeability teams contributed similar amounts, suggesting likeability was not a factor in determining contribution. However if mutual likeability in all-female teams was low, women contributed 30% less on average.

In mixed-sex pairings for the cooperation game, female participants contributed on average 4.70 euros in high mutual likeability teams, and about 37% less in low mutual likeability teams. In contrast to same sex teams, the likeability effect for men factored in mixed sex teams. If mutual likeability was low, men's contribution was 50% lower than if mutual likeability was high.

In the ten round coordination game, researchers found that women in same-sex pairings chose significantly lower numbers in low mutual likeability teams than in high mutual likeability teams in each round of the game. Male participants in same-sex pairings chose high numbers from the start, regardless of the level mutual likeability. In mixed sex teams, mutual likeability was on average positively associated with the number chosen for both women and men.

"Our results hint at the existence of a likeability factor that offers a novel perspective on gender differences in labour market outcomes," said Leonie Gerhards, the paper's lead author. "While likeability matters for women in every one of their interactions, it matters for men only if they interact with the opposite sex."

Researchers concluded that for women, likeability is an asset in all interactions. For men, likeability matters only in interactions with the opposite sex. Results suggest that the likeability factor leads to considerable advantages in terms of average performance and economic outcomes for men
Reply
#2
Syne Offline
Evolutionary psychology 101. Women have evolved to seek mutual/social support from others, where contributing more to allies is a mutual benefit while contributing more to non-allies is a personal detriment. Men have evolved to enlist cooperation by proactive example among other men (competition for leader of men), and only seek female cooperation from potential mates.
Reply
#3
Zinjanthropos Offline
IMHO this is like flipping a coin 1000 times and determining a trend with the results. Highly unlikely results are 50-50. Why do we worry about likeability?
Reply
#4
Leigha Offline
Interesting. Personally, I don't think men ''worry'' about being ''liked'' as much as women do, in the workplace. I've stopped caring as much about being liked, and want to be respected for my views, and contributions. (but, it's a work in progress, it doesn't come naturally for me to ''not care,'' like it seems to for my male colleagues)

Why don't men care (as much) about these things? Is it all a matter of biological wiring?
Reply
#5
Syne Offline
(Feb 4, 2020 04:46 AM)Leigha Wrote: Why don't men care (as much) about these things? Is it all a matter of biological wiring?

Pretty much. Men are, evolution-wise, either leaders or followers. They did not have an evolutionary history of needing to seek mutually cooperation. Even between tribes and nations, it was always just as likely to be war as peaceful trade or mutual avoidance. Whereas the natural vulnerability of carrying and tending to young made seeking cooperation, by being likeable, a primary survival tactic for women. And that is a better strategy, but only socially, where women shine. In the workplace, likeability will only make up for so much lack of merit. And in the eyes of men, likeability can seem a compensation for lacking merit.
Reply
#6
Leigha Offline
That makes sense, but women can be respected based on merit and desire to be liked. It's a tug of war thing that I tend to go through.

Women (on average) tend to be more open minded to change, and new ideas than men, all things being equal. (imo) Of course there are outliers, but I've noticed in the workplace, that women tend to be more pliable than men, when it comes to testing out new ideas and methodologies. Likeability can be a strength, because it can mean one is willing to engage with others, and work to build a cohesive team. Being qualified to do a particular job, should be based on merit, but building a team that works well together also requires some finesse and the ability to get along well with others.
Reply
#7
Syne Offline
(Feb 4, 2020 05:43 AM)Leigha Wrote: Women (on average) tend to be more open minded to change, and new ideas than men, all things being equal. (imo) Of course there are outliers, but I've noticed in the workplace, that women tend to be more pliable than men, when it comes to testing out new ideas and methodologies. Likeability can be a strength, because it can mean one is willing to engage with others, and work to build a cohesive team. Being qualified to do a particular job, should be based on merit, but building a team that works well together also requires some finesse and the ability to get along well with others.

That's why men do more technical jobs, where following more strict guidelines is needed, and all the cohesion necessary. And that's why women do more care-giving and creative jobs, where a lot of give and take is required.
Reply
#8
Yazata Online
I don't believe it, frankly. 

It sounds like something a woman might write about men, not something that a man would write. (Men might be as hard for women to figure out as women are for men.)

In real life, being likable among men is kind of a mix of appearing to not be aggressive towards others in social groups, cooperative, not an asshole, humane, trustworthy in terms of being somebody that other people can count on, and stuff like that.

Males most emphatically did evolve in conditions of cooperation. Hunting bands, war parties... associating with females was pretty important too... all sorts of situations where they had to coordinate, cooperate, transmit information and trust their lives to one another. The same kind of evolutionary 'forces' led to increased social instincts that also led to the development of linguistic communication. The need to cooperate in groups. (Humans are social animals, not solitary predators.)

In other words, I think that being likeable is equally important for men as for women, but perhaps it's expressed somewhat differently. (But all those things are important for women too.)

I'm inclined to think that women being likable among women is different than how they try to be likable among men. Women behave very differently among men, at least men that they are attracted to or need something from. Among other women, it's more like how men try to be likable with each other, I guess.

At least that's my male's eye view of it.
Reply
#9
Syne Offline
(Feb 5, 2020 01:20 AM)Yazata Wrote: In real life, being likable among men is kind of a mix of appearing to not be aggressive towards others in social groups, cooperative, not an asshole, humane, trustworthy in terms of being somebody that other people can count on, and stuff like that.
Um, I think that's called a milquetoast.

Quote:Males most emphatically did evolve in conditions of cooperation. Hunting bands, war parties... associating with females was pretty important too... all sorts of situations where they had to coordinate, cooperate, transmit information and trust their lives to one another. The same kind of evolutionary 'forces' led to increased social instincts that also led to the development of linguistic communication. The need to cooperate in groups. (Humans are social animals, not solitary predators.)
There's cooperation that makes more direct exchanges, and then there's the building of social capital in the hopes of an eventual reciprocity. Very different behaviors caused by very different evolutionary pressures.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Food expiration dates don’t have much science behind them C C 0 84 Aug 8, 2022 08:18 PM
Last Post: C C
  Puppies are wired to communicate with people, study shows C C 1 122 Jun 7, 2021 10:26 PM
Last Post: confused2
  New study reveals why your doctor may not be taking you seriously C C 0 110 Apr 9, 2021 12:25 AM
Last Post: C C
  In science, questions matter a lot. Men are more likely than women to ask them. C C 1 212 Jul 29, 2019 03:00 AM
Last Post: Syne
  Men want beauty, women want wealth, & other unscientific tosh C C 19 4,293 Jan 2, 2018 07:01 PM
Last Post: Secular Sanity
  Cats have the best relationships with adult women + What's slug doing on this cat? C C 0 279 May 11, 2017 06:58 PM
Last Post: C C



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)