Gender Differences in Online Dating: What Do We Know So Far? A Systematic Literature Review

With millions of users worldwide, online dating platforms strive to assert themselves as powerful tools to find dates and form romantic relationships. However, significant differences exist in male and female use of this mate-matching technology with respect to motivation, preferences, self-presentation, interaction and outcomes. While existing research has routinely reported on gender differences in online dating, these insights remain scattered across multiple studies. To gain a systematic insight into existing findings, in this study we conduct a meta-review of existing research. We find that evolutionary theory generally holds true in online dating: Users still follow natural stereotypes when it comes to choosing a mate online. Physical attractiveness is the key criteria for men; while women, being much more demanding, prioritize socio-economic attributes when choosing a male partner. Together, our structured findings offer a deeper insight into the underlying dynamics of gender differences in online dating.

How gender fair are German schoolbooks in the twenty-first century? An analysis of language and illustrations in schoolbooks for mathematics and German

Schoolbooks convey not only school-relevant knowledge; they also influence the development of stereotypes about different social groups. Particularly during the 1970s and 1980s, many studies analysed schoolbooks and criticised the overall predominance of male persons and of traditional role allocations. Since that time, women’s and men’s occupations and social functions have changed considerably. The present research investigated gender portrayals in schoolbooks for German and mathematics that were recently published in Germany. We examined the proportions of female and male persons in pictures and texts and categorized their activities, occupational and parental roles. Going beyond previous studies, we added two criteria: the use of gender-fair language and the spatial arrangements of persons in pictures. Our results show that schoolbooks for German contained almost balanced depictions of girls and boys, whereas women were less frequently shown than men. In mathematics books, males outnumbered females in general. Across both types of books, female and male persons were engaged in many different activities, not only gendertyped ones; however, male persons were more often described via their profession than females. Use of gender-fair language has found its way into schoolbooks but is not used consistently. Books for German were more gender fair in terms of linguistic forms than books for mathematics. For spatial arrangements, we found no indication for gender biases. The results are discussed with a focus on how schoolbooks can be optimized to contribute to gender equality.

Does gender-fair language pay off? The social perception of professions from a cross-linguistic perspective

In many languages, masculine forms (e.g., German Lehrer, “teachers, masc.”) have traditionally been used to refer to both women and men, although feminine forms are available, too. Feminine-masculine word pairs (e.g., German Lehrerinnen und Lehrer, “teachers, fem. and teachers, masc.”) are recommended as gender-fair alternatives. A large body of empirical research documents that the use of gender-fair forms instead of masculine forms has a substantial impact on mental representations. Masculine forms activate more male representations even when used in a generic sense, whereas word pairs (e.g., German Lehrerinnen und Lehrer, “teachers, fem. and teachers, masc.”) lead to a higher cognitive inclusion of women (i.e., visibility of women). Some recent studies, however, have also shown that in a professional context word pairs may be associated with lesser status. The present research is the first to investigate both effects within a single paradigm. A cross-linguistic (Italian and German) study with 391 participants shows that word pairs help to avoid a male bias in the gender-typing of professions and increase women's visibility; at the same time, they decrease the estimated salaries of typically feminine professions (but do not affect perceived social status or competence). This potential payoff has implications for language policies aiming at gender-fairness.

The nociceptive withdrawal reflex: Normative values of thresholds and reflex receptive fields

Assessments of spinal nociceptive withdrawal reflexes can be used in human research both to evaluate the effect of analgesics and explore pain mechanisms related to sensitization. Before the reflex can be used as a clinical tool, normative values need to be determined in large scale studies. The aim of this study was to determine the reference values of spinal nociceptive reflexes and subjective pain thresholds (to single and repeated stimulation), and of the area of the reflex receptive fields (RRF) in 300 pain-free volunteers. The influences of gender, age, height, weight, body-mass index (BMI), body side of testing, depression, anxiety, catastrophizing and parameters of Short-Form 36 (SF-36) were analyzed by multiple regressions. The 95% confidence intervals were determined for all the tests as normative values. Age had a statistically and quantitatively significant impact on the subjective pain threshold to single stimuli. The reflex threshold to single stimulus was lower on the dominant compared to the non-dominant side. Depression had a negative impact on the subjective pain threshold to single stimuli. All the other analyses either did not reveal statistical significance or displayed quantitatively insignificant correlations. In conclusion, normative values of parameters related to the spinal nociceptive reflex were determined. This allows their clinical application for assessing central hyperexcitability in individual patients. The parameters investigated explore different aspects of sensitization processes that are largely independent of demographic characteristics, cognitive and affective factors.

Reference values of mechanical and thermal pain tests in a pain-free population

Quantitative sensory tests are widely used in human research to evaluate the effect of analgesics and explore altered pain mechanisms, such as central sensitization. In order to apply these tests in clinical practice, knowledge of reference values is essential. The aim of this study was to determine the reference values of pain thresholds for mechanical and thermal stimuli, as well as withdrawal time for the cold pressor test in 300 pain-free subjects. Pain detection and pain tolerance thresholds to pressure, heat and cold were determined at three body sites: (1) lower back, (2) suprascapular region and (3) second toe (for pressure) or the lateral aspect of the leg (for heat and cold). The influences of gender, age, height, weight, body-mass index (BMI), body side of testing, depression, anxiety, catastrophizing and parameters of Short-Form 36 (SF-36) were analyzed by multiple regressions. Quantile regressions were performed to define the 5th, 10th and 25th percentiles as reference values for pain hypersensitivity and the 75th, 90th and 95th percentiles as reference values for pain hyposensitivity. Gender, age and/or the interaction of age with gender were the only variables that consistently affected the pain measures. Women were more pain sensitive than men. However, the influence of gender decreased with increasing age. In conclusion, normative values of parameters related to pressure, heat and cold pain stimuli were determined. Reference values have to be stratified by body region, gender and age. The determination of these reference values will now allow the clinical application of the tests for detecting abnormal pain reactions in individual patients.