fei75766_ch06_179-205.indd 197  02/06/20 11:32 AM
Chapter 6    Horney: Psychoanalytic Social Theory197
model, sheanalyzed meta-analyses ofgender differences totesttheopposite predic -
tion:thatmales andfemales aremore alikethantheyaredifferent.
Onenagging problem inthestudy ofgender differences andsimilarities is
embedded intheverynature ofempirical science, andHyde’s method provided away
ofgetting around it.Thatis,comparing groups relies onstatistical testsofsignificant 
difference. When differences donotreach statistical significance, thensuchastudy is
typically notpublished. Thisisreferred toasthe“filedrawer problem.” Consider the
factthatthere arelikely countless studies ofgender differences inallkinds ofcogni -
tive,behavioral, andemotional domains thatdidnotresult instatistically significant 
differences between males andfemales, andthese wereputinsome researchers’ file
drawers because theresults didnotreach thestandard forpublication. Thismeans 
wehavemore evidence fordifferences between thegenders notnecessarily because 
theyaremeaningfully andlastingly there, butbecause onlythestudies thatresulted in
difference gotpublished.
Meta-analysis isastatistical method ofsystematically combining datafrom 
many studies (published andunpublished). Thisincreases power overindividual 
studies, andcanimprove ourcapacity toestimate thesizeofeffects. Hyde’s (2005) 
analysis didjustthis,examining 46meta-analyses, eachofwhich included between 20
and200individual gender difference studies, andherexamination ofeffect sizessup-
ported thegender similarities hypothesis. Thatis,there werefarmore arenas where 
gender differences wereeither meaninglessly small ineffect size,ornonexistent, than
theareas where thegenders diddiffer significantly. Insome ofthearenas inwhich we
holdthestrongest stereotypes about males andfemales being different, suchasmath 
andverbal ability aswellasaggression, self-esteem, andassertiveness, Hyde found 
thatgender differences werenegligible. 
Itseems thatourculture’s obsession withgender difference hasremained 
strong since Horney’s day,despite herinsistence thatweought tostop“bothering 
about what isfeminine andwhat isnot.” Women areapparently from Venus andmen
aresupposedly from Mars. Google “gender differences” andyougetover9million 
results! Whydowepersist inbelieving sostrongly ingender differences inpersonal -
ity,despite powerful evidence thattheyarebarely there atall?Oneanswer isthat
thinking males andfemales come from different planets appeals toourintuitions. The
danger here, ofcourse, isthatourexpectations likely guide ourcognitions andour
behaviors, creating aself-fulfilling prophecy. Welikely make gender differences come 
truewhen webelieve thatwomen are“badatmath” ormenare“notemotional.” 
When wetreateachgender based onthese expectations, thenweshould notbesur-
prised thattheybehave accordingly. Ifagirlisnotexpected toperform wellinmath, 
herparents might notencourage hertostudy, andshemaybegin tolackconfidence 
andeventually not,infact,gettheeducation thatwould make hergood atmath. Ifa
boyisexpected to“suck itup”andnotcrywhen hefeelshurt, hemaysuppress tears 
inaneffort tobemore masculine, andthese efforts may, overtime, create anactual 
inability tocryinadulthood. 
Hyde (2005) issued awarning inherarticle about thecosts ofoverinflated 
claims ofgender differences: “Arguably theycause harm innumerous realms, includ -
ingwomen’s opportunities intheworkplace, couple conflict andcommunication, and
analyses ofself-esteem problems among adolescents. Most important, these claims 
arenotconsistent withthescientific data” (p.590). Here weseeHorney’s prescience Final PDF to printer