ArticlePloS one2025
Gender difference in self-reported empathy: Effects of task instructions and exposure to gender essentialism primes.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Emotional Valence Influences Empathic Capacity in Adolescence and Young Adulthood.Journal of adolescence · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Women often score higher on average than men on self-report measures of empathy. However, self-report estimates of empathic tendencies and other attributes could be susceptible to a range of biases. For instance, participants might respond in a manner that is socially desirable and aligns with gender stereotypes about empathic abilities. We examined whether gender differences in self-reported empathy were affected by a) manipulating task instructions or b) priming with fictive narratives describing gender differences as either fixed or malleable. In Study 1, participants (N = 154) completed questionnaire measures of empathy, social desirability and acceptance of stereotyping. Contrary to our prediction, gender differences in self-reported empathy were not larger when participants were told that we were measuring 'empathy'. However, in both genders, average scores were higher for empathic concern in the 'empathy' condition than in the control condition, which suggests that describing the task as measuring empathy encouraged both male and female participants to present themselves as showing concern for others. Also, participants who scored higher on social desirability scored higher on empathic concern, suggesting a link between motivation to conform to social expectations and self-reported affective empathy. In Study 2, participants (N = 155) completed questionnaire measures of empathy, personality and gender essentialism. Gender differences in self-reported empathy were not larger in the condition that primed gender essentialism. However, women who scored high on empathic concern were more likely to align themselves with feminine adjectives, suggesting a link between self-reported consideration for others and feminine attributes. In both studies, on average, women scored significantly higher than men on self-reported empathic tendencies. Although the experimental manipulations did not impact empathy scores in either study, self-reported empathy appears to be related to social desirability and broader social attitudes, which suggests that a range of cultural and social factors might contribute to gender differences in empathy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.