Gender Differences in Loneliness Across the Lifespan: A Meta‐Analysis

Different theoretical contentions on gender differences in loneliness exist, often including the emergence of gender differences in particular developmental periods. To explain those ideas, the current meta‐analysis synthesizes the available evidence on gender differences in loneliness across the lifespan. Three‐level meta‐analyses were conducted with 751 effect sizes, covering 399,798 individuals (45.56% males). Results showed a close‐to‐zero overall effect (g = 0.07). Most examined moderators were non‐significant, except for age, the scope of the sampling area, and year of publication. Most importantly, all effects were small, suggesting that across the lifespan mean levels of loneliness are similar for males and females.     

The criterion-related validity of conscientiousness in personnel selection: A meta-analytic reality check

A key finding in personnel selection is the positive correlation between conscientiousness and job performance. Evidence predominantly stems from concurrent validation studies with incumbent samples but is readily generalized to predictive settings with job applicants. This is problematic because the extent to which faking and changes in personality affect the measurement likely vary across samples and study designs. Therefore, we meta-analytically investigated the relation between conscientiousness and job performance, examining the moderating effects of sample type (incumbent vs. applicant) and validation design (concurrent vs. predictive). The overall correlation of conscientiousness and job performance was in line with previous meta-analyses ($\overline{r}=.17,k=102,n=23,305$). In our analyses, the correlation did not differ across validation designs (concurrent: $\overline{r}=.18,k=78,n=19,132$; predictive: $\overline{r}=.15,k=24,n=4173$), sample types (incumbents: $\overline{r}=.18,k=92,n=20,808$; applicants: $\overline{r}=.14,k=10,n=2497$), or their interaction. Critically, however, our review revealed that only a small minority of studies (~12%) were conducted with real applicants in predictive designs. Thus, barely a fraction of research is conducted under realistic conditions. Therefore, it remains an open question if self-report measures of conscientiousness retain their predictive validity in applied settings that entail faked responses. We conclude with a call for more multivariate research on the validity of selection procedures in predictive settings with actual applicants.