A cross-sectional analysis of male versus female flourishing among 202,898 participants across 22 countries on 73 variables in the global flourishing study

A prominent debate in modern society is how males or females are faring relative to each other. Despite a vast literature, most research is constrained by two issues: a limited conceptualization and assessment of what it means to do well; and a relatively narrow, often Western-centric coverage. To address these issues, this paper examines male-female differences on 73 items relating to all aspects of wellbeing in the Global Flourishing Study, with data from 202,898 participants across 22 countries. When organizing the items into six domains according to VanderWeele’s flourishing framework, females do slightly better on three (happiness and satisfaction, social relationship quality, and meaning and purpose), and males on two (self-rated health, and financial and material security), and with character/virtue equal. While all domains are weighted equally, since females are only marginally higher on three, whereas the gaps on the two male-led ones are much bigger, males fare slightly better on an overall flourishing index. There is also considerable country-level variation throughout the findings however, showing these general trends are not universal but contingent on local socio-cultural dynamics.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Scientific Reports
Published
2026-02-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-40963-z
Primary Topic
Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A cross-sectional analysis of male versus female flourishing among 202,898 participants across 22 countries on 73 variables in the global flourishing study

Tim Lomas, Meg A. Warren, R. Noah Padgett, Byron R. Johnson et al.
Scientific Reports
Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
article

A cross-sectional analysis of male versus female flourishing among 202,898 participants across 22 countries on 73 variables in the global flourishing study

Tim Lomas, Meg A. Warren, R. Noah Padgett, Byron R. Johnson, Tyler J. VanderWeele
article en

Abstract

A prominent debate in modern society is how males or females are faring relative to each other. Despite a vast literature, most research is constrained by two issues: a limited conceptualization and assessment of what it means to do well; and a relatively narrow, often Western-centric coverage. To address these issues, this paper examines male-female differences on 73 items relating to all aspects of wellbeing in the Global Flourishing Study, with data from 202,898 participants across 22 countries. When organizing the items into six domains according to VanderWeele’s flourishing framework, females do slightly better on three (happiness and satisfaction, social relationship quality, and meaning and purpose), and males on two (self-rated health, and financial and material security), and with character/virtue equal. While all domains are weighted equally, since females are only marginally higher on three, whereas the gaps on the two male-led ones are much bigger, males fare slightly better on an overall flourishing index. There is also considerable country-level variation throughout the findings however, showing these general trends are not universal but contingent on local socio-cultural dynamics.

Scientific ReportsVol. 16(1)
Harvard University (US), Baylor University (US), Harvard University Press (US), Cancer Research And Biostatistics (US), Western Washington University (US)
Gender equality
Openalex Percentile: Top 53%
Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.