Boundary conditions for gender differences in risk taking

Gender differences in risky behavior and decision-making have been observed across a number of behavioral domains. Reviews of this literature have tended to overlook the question of whether specific objective situational factors that are relevant to a particular risky decision moderate observed gender differences within risk domains. The current work explores this question by employing a naturalistic observation method. Over 2,700 pedestrians were observed crossing a busy intersection adjacent to a college campus in the southeastern U.S. Observers noted the number of male and female pedestrians present during each cycle of the traffic signal as well as how many individuals of each gender either crossed when the 'don't walk' sign was active or waited for the safer 'walk' signal in order to cross. Also noted was whether these pedestrians were crossing at a 'low risk' area of the intersection, where a concrete safety island was present, or a 'high risk' area, where there was no safety island. The oft-observed gender difference in physical risk-taking was observed, with men being substantially more likely to cross during a 'don't walk' signal compared to women. However, this was only observed at the 'low risk' area of the intersection. In contrast, risk-taking did not differ by gender at the 'high risk' crossing area. Implications for the understanding of the nature of gender-differences in risk taking are discussed.

Automated summary

The study observed gender differences in risky behavior by analyzing pedestrian crossing patterns. Men were more likely to take physical risks by crossing during a 'don't walk' signal in a 'low risk' area, while gender differences weren't observed in the 'high risk' area. This suggests that situational factors play a role in moderating gender differences in risk-taking behavior.