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

**Authors:** Tim Lomas, R. Noah Padgett, Meg A. Warren, Byron R. Johnson, Tyler J. VanderWeele

PMC · DOI: 10.1038/s41598-026-40963-z · Scientific Reports · 2026-02-22

## TL;DR

This study compares wellbeing between men and women across 22 countries, finding small gender differences that vary by region.

## Contribution

The study uses a broad, cross-cultural dataset to examine male-female differences in flourishing across six wellbeing domains.

## Key findings

- Females score slightly higher in happiness, social relationships, and meaning, while males score higher in health and financial security.
- Males have a slight overall advantage in flourishing due to larger gaps in health and financial domains.
- Results vary significantly by country, indicating local socio-cultural influences.

## 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.

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1038/s41598-026-40963-z.

## Full-text entities

- **Diseases:** anxiety (MESH:D001007), health (OMIM:603663), pain (MESH:D010146), rumination (MESH:D000079562), anxiety disorders (MESH:D001008), CMDs (MESH:D001523), traumatic distress (MESH:D012128), bullying (MESH:D000073397), CMD (MESH:C565145), depression (MESH:D003866)
- **Chemicals:** alcohol (MESH:D000438)
- **Species:** Homo sapiens (human, species) [taxon 9606]
- **Mutations:** 2025 INSIGHT

## Full text

_Full body text omitted from this summary view._ Fetch the complete paper as Markdown: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC13021907/full.md

## References

29 references — full list in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC13021907/full.md

---
Source: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC13021907