IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jbuset/v144y2017i4d10.1007_s10551-016-3110-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sex Differences Through a Neuroscience Lens: Implications for Business Ethics

Author

Listed:
  • Lori Verstegen Ryan

    (San Diego State University)

Abstract

Recent, groundbreaking work in neuroscience has illuminated sex differences that could have a profound impact on business organizations. Distinctions between the sexes that may have previously been presumed to be due to “nurture” may now also be demonstrably related to “nature.” Here, we report recent neuroscience findings related to males’ and females’ brain structures and brain chemistry, along with the results of recent neuroeconomic studies. We learn not only that male and female brains are structured differently, but also that different portions of their brains are used for the same tasks, often leading to identical conclusions. Neuroeconomic studies also demonstrate that the effects of hormones—most notably, oxytocin and testosterone—urge males and females to both think and behave differently in ethical situations. We suggest that examination of these new results could benefit six areas of business ethics research: trust, moral decision-making, organizational justice, moral development, the ethic of care, and female management styles. We conclude with a discussion of the implications of these findings for business practice, suggesting that it may be ethical to allow men and women to be treated differently in the workplace: such treatment may be advantageous not only for the workers’ firms, but also for the workers themselves.

Suggested Citation

  • Lori Verstegen Ryan, 2017. "Sex Differences Through a Neuroscience Lens: Implications for Business Ethics," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 144(4), pages 771-782, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:144:y:2017:i:4:d:10.1007_s10551-016-3110-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s10551-016-3110-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10551-016-3110-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10551-016-3110-1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Angela A. Stanton, 2010. "Hormonal Influence on Male Decision-making: Implications for Organizational Management," Chapters, in: Angela A. Stanton & Mellani Day & Isabell M. Welpe (ed.), Neuroeconomics and the Firm, chapter 8, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Burton, Brian K. & Dunn, Craig P., 1996. "Feminist Ethics as Moral Grounding for Stakeholder Theory 1," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(2), pages 133-147, April.
    3. Conlisk, John, 2011. "Professor Zak's empirical studies on trust and oxytocin," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 78(1-2), pages 160-166, April.
    4. Buchan, Nancy R. & Croson, Rachel T.A. & Solnick, Sara, 2008. "Trust and gender: An examination of behavior and beliefs in the Investment Game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 68(3-4), pages 466-476, December.
    5. Sandro Castaldo & Katia Premazzi & Fabrizio Zerbini, 2010. "The Meaning(s) of Trust. A Content Analysis on the Diverse Conceptualizations of Trust in Scholarly Research on Business Relationships," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 96(4), pages 657-668, November.
    6. Conlisk, John, 2011. "Professor Zak's empirical studies on trust and oxytocin," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 78(1), pages 160-166.
    7. Michael Kosfeld & Markus Heinrichs & Paul J. Zak & Urs Fischbacher & Ernst Fehr, 2005. "Oxytocin increases trust in humans," Nature, Nature, vol. 435(7042), pages 673-676, June.
    8. Kristina M. Durante & Gad Saad, 2010. "Ovulatory Shifts in Women’s Social Motives and Behaviors: Implications for Corporate Organizations," Chapters, in: Angela A. Stanton & Mellani Day & Isabell M. Welpe (ed.), Neuroeconomics and the Firm, chapter 7, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Dobson, John & White, Judith, 1995. "Toward the Feminine Firm: An Extension to Thomas White," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(3), pages 463-478, July.
    10. Dulebohn, James H. & Conlon, Donald E. & Sarinopoulos, Issidoros & Davison, Robert B. & McNamara, Gerry, 2009. "The biological bases of unfairness: Neuroimaging evidence for the distinctiveness of procedural and distributive justice," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 110(2), pages 140-151, November.
    11. Salvador, Rommel & Folger, Robert G., 2009. "Business Ethics and the Brain: Rommel Salvador and Robert G. Folger," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 19(1), pages 1-31, January.
    12. Alesina, Alberto & La Ferrara, Eliana, 2002. "Who trusts others?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(2), pages 207-234, August.
    13. Dr. Peter Kenning & Hilke Plassmann, 2004. "NeuroEconomics," Experimental 0412005, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Paul J. Zak & Karla Borja & William T. Matzner & Robert Kurzban, 2005. "The Neuroeconomics of Distrust: Sex Differences in Behavior and Physiology," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(2), pages 360-363, May.
    15. Angela A. Stanton & Mellani Day & Isabell M. Welpe (ed.), 2010. "Neuroeconomics and the Firm," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13502.
    16. White, Thomas I., 1992. "Business, Ethics, and Carol Gilligan's “Two Voices”," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(1), pages 51-61, January.
    17. Glenn Harrison & Don Ross, 2010. "The methodologies of neuroeconomics," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(2), pages 185-196.
    18. Wicks, Andrew C. & Gilbert, Daniel R. & Freeman, R. Edward, 1994. "A Feminist Reinterpretation of The Stakeholder Concept," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(4), pages 475-497, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Haiquan Wu & Wenli Liao & Zhifang Zhou & Yi Li, 2021. "Can Financial Constraints and Regulatory Distance Reduce Corporate Environmental Irresponsibility?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-25, November.
    2. Javed, Muzhar & Wang, Fangjun & Usman, Muhammad & Ali Gull, Ammar & Uz Zaman, Qamar, 2023. "Female CEOs and green innovation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    3. Jaehong Lee & Eunsoo Kim, 2021. "Would Overconfident CEOs Engage More in Environment, Social, and Governance Investments? With a Focus on Female Representation on Boards," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-16, March.
    4. Ewa Lombard & Rajna N. GibsonBrandon, 2024. "Do Wealth Managers Understand Codes of Conduct and Their Ethical Dilemmas? Lessons from an Online Survey," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 189(3), pages 553-572, January.
    5. Liu, Chelsea, 2018. "Are women greener? Corporate gender diversity and environmental violations," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 118-142.
    6. Xin Li & Fei Guo & Jiaqi Wang, 2024. "A path towards enterprise environmental performance improvement: How does CEO green experience matter?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(2), pages 820-838, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Songfa Zhong & Mikhail Monakhov & Helen P Mok & Terry Tong & Poh San Lai & Soo Hong Chew & Richard P Ebstein, 2012. "U-Shaped Relation between Plasma Oxytocin Levels and Behavior in the Trust Game," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(12), pages 1-9, December.
    2. Hong, Kessely & Bohnet, Iris, 2007. "Status and distrust: The relevance of inequality and betrayal aversion," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 197-213, April.
    3. Silke Machold & Pervaiz Ahmed & Stuart Farquhar, 2008. "Corporate Governance and Ethics: A Feminist Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 81(3), pages 665-678, September.
    4. Russell S. Cropanzano & Sebastiano Massaro & William J. Becker, 2017. "Deontic Justice and Organizational Neuroscience," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 144(4), pages 733-754, September.
    5. Daniel Serra, 2019. "La neuroéconomie en question : débats et controverses," Working Papers halshs-02160911, HAL.
    6. Domènec Melé, 2014. "“Human Quality Treatment”: Five Organizational Levels," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 120(4), pages 457-471, April.
    7. Daniel Serra, 2021. "Decision-making: from neuroscience to neuroeconomics—an overview," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 91(1), pages 1-80, July.
    8. Heidi Weltzien Hoivik & Domènec Melé, 2009. "Can an SME Become a Global Corporate Citizen? Evidence from a Case Study," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 88(3), pages 551-563, September.
    9. Kate Grosser & Jeremy Moon, 2019. "CSR and Feminist Organization Studies: Towards an Integrated Theorization for the Analysis of Gender Issues," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 155(2), pages 321-342, March.
    10. Markus Knell & Helmut Stix, 2021. "Inequality, perception biases and trust," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 19(4), pages 801-824, December.
    11. Antoci, Angelo & Bonelli, Laura & Paglieri, Fabio & Reggiani, Tommaso & Sabatini, Fabio, 2019. "Civility and trust in social media," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 83-99.
    12. Sofianos, Andis, 2022. "Self-reported & revealed trust: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    13. Ashraf, Nava & Bohnet, Iris & Piankov, Nikita, 2003. "Is Trust a Bad Investment?," Working Paper Series rwp03-047, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    14. Marc Orlitzky, 2017. "How Cognitive Neuroscience Informs a Subjectivist-Evolutionary Explanation of Business Ethics," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 144(4), pages 717-732, September.
    15. Perodaud, Maxime & Hanaki, Nobuyuki & Yamada, Takashi, 2022. "An experimental analysis of gender discrimination in a credence goods market," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    16. Paul R Ward & Loreen Mamerow & Samantha B Meyer, 2014. "Interpersonal Trust across Six Asia-Pacific Countries: Testing and Extending the ‘High Trust Society’ and ‘Low Trust Society’ Theory," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(4), pages 1-17, April.
    17. Yafet Yosafet Wilben Rissy, 2021. "The stakeholder model: its relevance, concept, and application in the Indonesian banking sector," Journal of Banking Regulation, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 22(3), pages 219-231, September.
    18. Algan, Yann & Cahuc, Pierre, 2014. "Trust, Growth, and Well-Being: New Evidence and Policy Implications," Handbook of Economic Growth, in: Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 2, pages 49-120, Elsevier.
    19. Schwerter, Frederik & Zimmermann, Florian, 2020. "Determinants of trust: The role of personal experiences," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 413-425.
    20. Teresa Heath & Lisa O’Malley & Matthew Heath & Vicky Story, 2016. "Caring and Conflicted: Mothers’ Ethical Judgments about Consumption," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 136(2), pages 237-250, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:144:y:2017:i:4:d:10.1007_s10551-016-3110-1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.