Are Women Really More Risk-Averse than Men?
By Julie A. Nelson. 2012
313 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Applied Psychology, General Decision Sciences, Safety Research
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/017c9c434b53678e05fc659fb19662a0d2c06db0
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Applied Psychology
In General Decision Sciences
In Safety Research
Citations in the corpus
- Gender diversity and bank misconduct (2021, result): “This would be in line with the view that women are not different from men in leadership positions or at managing risks and that more diverse boards perform better simply because of the benefits of a multiplicity of views and skills (Nelson, 2014).”
- Gender differences in customer expectations and perceptions of corporate social responsibility (2016, background): “…2008) and, consequently, to biased management and policy decisions, as has been shown in psychology (Hyde, 2005; Fine, 2010), economics (Filippin & Crosetto, 2014; Nelson, 2014) and many other different fields, from political sciences to medicine and pharmacology (Ziliak & McCloskey, 2008).”
- Female board representation, corporate innovation and firm performance (2018, unknown): “More generally, Nelson (2015) revisits the evidence on gender differences in risk-perception and risk-taking through a different lens and suggests that traditional inferences, supporting higher risk aversion among females, are in fact far more mixed.”
- The Gender Wage Gap: Extent, Trends, and Explanations (2017, result): “A review and analysis by Nelson (2015), however, finds the results to be more mixed, with some studies reporting higher female average risk taking and many cases in which the male advantage lacked statistical significance. more risk averse among persons drawn from the general population or among…”
- The Political Economy of “Transnational Business Feminism” (2015, unknown): “However, rather than ignoring gender and subsuming “women” under the ontological category of rational economic man as has been characteristic of much neoclassical economics (Ferber and Nelson 2003), there is a growing tendency to view women as more risk adverse than men and to have longer-term goals”