GENDER DIFFERENCES IN SELF-COMPASSION AMONG UNIVERSITY

STUDENTS

PriyankaPathak

Assistant Professor

P. G. Department of Psychology,

Veer Kunwar Singh University

Abstract

Self-compassion has gained popularity in the last two decades. It involves empathy, kindness,

concern, and support towards oneself in a difficult situation. The objective of this study was to

compare the gender differences in a different dimensions of self-compassion and self-

compassion among university students (male and female). Total 100 students (50 males and 50

female students) between 18-25 years were selected for this study. All the subjects were assessed

on the self-compassion scale (SCS) to analyze the self-compassion of both the groups of

students. To find out the significant difference between the male and female university students

in different dimensions of self-compassion and self-compassion, an independent sample t-test

was used. Findings of this study show that there is a significant difference between male and

female university students on isolation and self-compassion. But, no difference was found in

other dimensions (self-kindness, self-judgment, common humanity, isolation, mindfulness, and

over-identification) of self-compassion.

Key Words: self-compassion, self-kindness, self-judgment, common humanity, isolation,

mindfulness, over-identification.

Mukt Shabd Journal

Volume IX, Issue VII, JULY/2020

ISSN NO : 2347-3150

Page No : 1679

In academic life, college students experience a higher level of stress, conflict, and

frustration, and it affects their psychological, physical as well as emotional health. Self –

compassion and its dimensions are positively related to well-being and negatively associated

with negative mental states. Studies show that low level of mindfulness (Cash &Whittingham,

2010) and low level of self-compassion (Lightsey& Barnes, 2007) results in psychological

distress and high levels of mindfulness (Brown & Ryan, 2003; Carmody& Baer, 2008; Howell et

al., 2008) and high self-compassion (Neely et al., 2009) related to well-being. Researches on

college students were less studied on self-compassion and its dimensions. So the main purpose of

this study was to find out the tendency of self-compassion among university students and along

with this, it was also to find out that if any significant difference between male and female

university students exists on self-compassion and its dimensions.

Self-compassion is not a new construct; it comes from the 2500-year-old Buddhist

tradition, but studies on self-compassion recently began in western countries. The Indian culture

believes in Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam, which teaches us to love, respect, and care to people of the

entire universe. Still, at the same time, it is also necessary to do the same for our-self, and self-

compassion teaches the same. Self-compassion means compassion directed inward. Neff (2003)

defined self-compassion as an open-hearted way of relating to negative aspects of oneself and

one’s experience that enables greater emotional resilience and psychological well-being. Neff

(2003) suggested three main bi-dimensional key factors of self-compassion.

Self-kindness, the first dimension of self-compassion, involves being kind and

understanding toward oneself in failure and painful situations. On the other hand, self-judgment

involves harsh judgment and self-criticism toward oneself under challenging conditions.

Common humanity, the second dimension of self-compassion, indicates that happy or

painful experiences as not personal, but as all human beings. According to Neff (2009), it

involves recognizing that all humans are imperfect and that they fail and make mistakes. On the

other side, self-isolation includes different views from common humanity, which shows that

person seeing one’s experiences as separating and isolating in failure and pain.

Mindfulness, the third component of self-compassion, is most widely emerging concept

in the recent field of positive psychology. It is a pre-conceptual awareness that allows individual

to accept life’s most stressful and painful emotions without being judgmental or avoiding them

Mukt Shabd Journal

Volume IX, Issue VII, JULY/2020

ISSN NO : 2347-3150

Page No : 1680

(Gunaratana, 1993; Martin, 1997; Neff, 2003; Nisker, 1998; Rosenberg, 1999). It is a mental

state in which persons accept thoughts and feelings in their original form without modifying and

suppressing them. On the other hand, in over-identification, person exaggeratedly over-identifie

shis/her thoughts and feelings.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Self-compassion is a powerful motivating force for growth and strength which enables

the human being to face difficult situations and changes. A self-compassionate individual is

capable of recognizing the interconnections among all human nature and accepting oneself with

kindness and the non-judgmental way in a painful condition. Self-compassion is found to have a

significant positive association with the more excellent personal initiative for self-change and

self-improvement as well as with positive psychological functioning, which are happiness,

optimism, wisdom, curiosity, own initiative, and positive effect (Neff, Rude, & Kirkpatrick,

2007). Accordingly, self-compassionate individuals do not criticize themselves for mistakes, so it

is more likely that they will be open to admitting mistakes and taking on new challenges (Neff,

2009).

The main reason for this study on self-compassion in the context of gender is to find a

direction that is not very clear based on previous studies. Research evidence suggests that

generally females have a more interdependent sense of self (Cross & Madson, 1997; Gilligan,

1988) and to be more empathic than males (Eisenberg & Lennon, 1983; Zahn-Waxler, Cole, &

Barrett, 1991) so it means self-compassion is less accessible to men than women. On the other

hand, many studies show that females have lower levels of self-compassion than males (Neff,

2003; Neff, Hseih, Dejitthirat, 2005; Neff &McGehee, 2010), females tend to be more self-

critical and to have more of ruminative coping style than males (Leadbeater, Kuperminc, Blatt,

& Hertzog, 1999; Nolen-Hoeksema, Larson, & Grayson, 1999), suggesting that females may

have lower levels of self-compassion. while others have not found significant sex differences

(Iskender, 2009; Neff, Pisitsungkagarn, &Hseih, 2008; Raque-Bogdan, Ericson, Jackson, Martin,

& Bryan, 2011). Several studies have found that socialization process of women is based on the

norm of self-sacrifice, prioritizing the needs of others over their own, which may influence their

ability to give themselves compassion (Baker-Miller, 1986; Raffaelli &Ontai, 2004; Ruble &

Martin, 1998) along with this, it is also found that women are more involved in negative self-talk

Mukt Shabd Journal

Volume IX, Issue VII, JULY/2020

ISSN NO : 2347-3150

Page No : 1681

and to be more critical of themselves than males (Leadbeater, Kuperminc, Blatt, & Hertzog,

1999).

METHODOLOGY

Aim

The aim of this study to find gender difference in self-compassion among university students

(male and female).

Objectives

To study and compare the gender differences in different dimensions of self-compassion and

self-compassion among university students (male and female)

Hypothesis

1. There would be a significant difference in different dimensions (self-kindness, self-judgment,

common humanity, isolation, mindfulness, over-identification) of self-compassion among

university students (male and female).

2. There would be a significant difference in self-compassion among university students (male

and female).

Sample Total sample of 100 subjects (50 male and 50 female) university students was taken for

this study. The age range of the subjects was between 18 - 25 years. Data was collected from

Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi.

Tools

The investigator prepared the Socio-demographic data sheet for collecting information about

name, age, gender, and father’s education, mother’s education, and type of family.

Self-Compassion Scale (SCS): - It was developed by Neff (2003b) would be used to assess the

self-compassion of the students. It is a 26-item self report scale with six subscales would be used.

These subscales include- self – kindness, self–judgment, common humanity, isolation,

mindfulness, and over-identification. The scale aims to measure continual self-compassion. It is

Mukt Shabd Journal

Volume IX, Issue VII, JULY/2020

ISSN NO : 2347-3150

Page No : 1682

a five-point scale, and each item answered on a scale ranging from “almost never” to “almost

always”. Internal consistency of SCS is reported as .92, and internal consistency of the subscales

is range from .75 to .81. Test-retest reliability of self-compassion scale is reported as .93 (Neff,

2003b).

Procedure - Data collection started with a brief introduction to the purpose of the research.

Consent was obtained regarding the participant’s willingness to participate in the study. Before

collecting the data, instructions were given to the participant to fill the questionnaire. Before

responding to each statement,all participants were asked to read the instructions carefully.

Research Design It is a comparative study used to observe gender differences in different

dimensions of self-compassion and self – compassion among university students.

Statistical analysis All statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS software version 16.

Descriptive analyses of the data were done to obtain mean, standard deviation. Independent

samples t-tests were used to find the difference between university students (male and female) on

different dimensions of self-compassion and self-compassion.

RESULTS

Table 1: Socio-demographic details of university students (male and female)

Variable Male student (N =50) Female student (N =50)

Mean SD

Mean SD

Age 19.58 1.4 18.7 .83

Mother’s

education

.76 1.07 2.64 1.33

Father’s

education

2.12 1.23 3.22 .86

Types of family 1.74 .44 1.30 .46

Table 1 shows the socio-demographic details of university students (male and female). It shows

the Mean and Standard Deviation of university students (male and female) on general

Mukt Shabd Journal

Volume IX, Issue VII, JULY/2020

ISSN NO : 2347-3150

Page No : 1683

characteristics including age, mother’s education, father’s education, and types of family. The

descriptive analysis revealed that the Mean age of male students was 19.58 and female students

were 18.7. It also shows the Mean and S.D. of university students (male and female) of mother’s

education was .76 and 2.64 and Mean and S.D of university students (male and female) of

father’s education 2.12 and 3.22 and Mean and S.D of university students (male and female) of

types of the family was 1.74 and 1.30 respectively.

Table 2: Comparison of university students (male and female) on different dimensions of

Self-Compassion

S. No

Self-compassion

Dimensions

Male

students(N=50)

Female

Students(N=50)

t-test

Mean ± S.D.

Mean ± S.D.

1 Self-Kindness 16.48(3.11)

16.90(2.78) .71

2 Self-judgement 15.26(2.46) 14.38(2.60) 1.73

3 Common humanity 14.04(2.22) 13.22(2.54) 1.71

4 Isolation 12.04(3.26) 10.66(2.37) 2.42*

5 Mindfulness 14.48(2.33) 13.98(2.81) .97

6 Over-identification 11.84(2.08) 11.14(2.37) 1.57

*p<.05

Mukt Shabd Journal

Volume IX, Issue VII, JULY/2020

ISSN NO : 2347-3150

Page No : 1684

Note⁚ S-K – Self-kindness, S-J – Self-judgment, C-H –Common humanity, Iso – Isolation, M-

Mindfulness. O-I –Over-identification

Table 2 shows the comparison of mean scores of university students (male and female) on

different dimensions of self-compassion. The results presented in Table 2 shows that the mean

scores of male (m= 12.04) and female (m=10.66) significantly differ on the isolation dimension

of self-compassion (t=2.42, P<.05). In other words, higher mean scores in case of male indicate

that they have more sense of isolation when they face difficult situations than females. In case of

other different dimensions (i.e., self-kindness, self-judgment, common humanity, mindfulness,

and over-identification ), the mean scores don’t differ significantly between male and female

university students.

Table 3: Comparison of university students (male and female) on self-compassion

Variable Male student (n=50) Female student (n=50) t-test

Mean SD Mean SD

Self-

compassion

84.14 8.33 80.28 8.03 2.36*

*p<.05

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

S-K S-J C-H Iso M 0-I

Male

Female

Mukt Shabd Journal

Volume IX, Issue VII, JULY/2020

ISSN NO : 2347-3150

Page No : 1685

Table 4 shows the comparison of mean scores of university students (male and female) on the

composite score of self-compassion. The results presented in Table 3 shows that the mean scores

of male (m= 84.14) and female (m=80.28) significantly differ on self-compassion (t=2.36,

P<.05). In other words, higher mean scores in the case of male indicate that they are more self-

compassionate than female university students.

Discussion - The aim of this study was to compare the gender differences in a different

dimension of self-compassion and self-compassion among university students (male and female).

It was hypothesized that there would be a significant difference in different dimensions (self-

kindness, self-judgment, common humanity, isolation, mindfulness, over-identification) of self-

compassion and self-compassion among university students (male and female). Findings of this

study show that male and female university students differed in isolation (dimension of self-

compassion) and self-compassion. Studies related to gender differences in self-compassion have

been inconsistent, mixed, and have not been examined systematically. Some research-findings

have shown that adherence to masculine gender norms is associated with lower levels of self-

compassion (Reilly, Rochlen, &Awad, 2014). Besides this, many researches have indicated that

women have a greater tendency to judge themselves negatively so that women are more likely to

lack self-compassion than men. According to our hypothesis, there is a significant difference

between male and female university students in isolation dimension of self -compassion. People

in isolation, involves those who are likely to cut away from others when they experience feelings

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

Male Female

84.14

80.28

Mukt Shabd Journal

Volume IX, Issue VII, JULY/2020

ISSN NO : 2347-3150

Page No : 1686

of pain, shame, frustration, or inadequacy. Results of this study show that there is a significant

difference (t - value of 2.42 significant at 0.05 level of significance) between male and female

university students on isolation dimension. Thus, our hypothesis stands true and is approved by

the results of this study. It indicates that there has been difference among male and female

university students on the feeling of isolation or loneliness when they are suffering from painful

situations. This finding consistent with Mahon, Yarcheski, Yarcheski,Cannella and Hanks (2006)

found that out of 12 studies , nine studies showed boys were significantly lonelier than girls; only

two studies showed girls were significantly more alone than boys. Many studies indicated that

men are not as well socialized in the social-emotional area so they feel lonely more than women

( Bloom, Asher & White,1978; Hill, Rubin, & Peplau, 1976).

It was also hypothesized at the beginning of this study that there would besignificant

difference between male and female university students in different dimension of self –

compassion (self-kindness, self-judgment, common humanity, mindfulness, and over-

identification). Results of this study show that there is no significant difference between male

and female university students in self-kindness, self-judgment, common humanity, mindfulness,

and over-identification. Thus, this hypothesis is not accepted. It indicates that there has been no

difference among male and female university students on their ability to being kind and

understanding them in a problematic situation and on their capacity to be hostile, demeaning, and

critical of one’s self. They are similar in their ability to be criticized in a difficult situation.

Findings also indicate that there is no difference among male and female students on their ability

to construct individual inferences and purpose in all the experiences of their life and they both

showed the similar capacity to create and master their life purpose.They are also identical in their

ability to be aware, attentive, and accepting their present situations without judging them and on

their ability to over-identification.

The findings of this present study consistent with the previous studies of, Neff, Hseih,

and Dejitthirat (2005) found that there was a significant difference between male and female on

self-compassion. Results from Table 3 shows that there is a significant difference (t - value of

2.36 significant at 0.05 level of significance) between male and female university students on

self-compassion. Therefore, it accepts our hypothesis. This indicate that there has been

difference among male and female university students on their ability to behave with self-

Mukt Shabd Journal

Volume IX, Issue VII, JULY/2020

ISSN NO : 2347-3150

Page No : 1687

compassion and male university students are to be more self –compassionate than female

university students. Similar to the present study Neff, (2003) found in their study that there was

significant difference between females and males in self-compassion. He found that females

have lower levels of self-compassion than males. The main reason is that socialization process of

women which is based on self-sacrifice, prioritizing the needs of others over their own, etc. They

are ignoring themselves unconsciously. Consistent with the present study, Leadbeater et al.,

(1999) also found that male have more self-compassionate than female because females are more

involved in negative self-talk and to be more critical of themselves. Self-compassion makes it

easy to adjust to the areas of academics. Self-compassionate students coping more adaptively

with academic failures. It is a stronger predictor of good mental health, and it includes more

stable and less anger, social comparison, and public self-consciousness.

Conclusion – Findings of this study shows that male university students are more self-

compassionate than female university students. It may be due to a child’s early upbringing

impact on development of sense of self-compassion as they grow up into adults. However, there

is a need for more exploration of different factors related to self-compassion.

References

Baker-Miller, J. (1986). Toward a new psychology of women. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.

Bloom, B. L., Asher, S. J., & White, S. W. (1978). Marital disruption as a stressor: A review and

analysis [Electronic version]. Psychological Bulletin, 85, 867-894.

Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2003). The benefits of being present: Mindfulness and its role in

psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 822-848.

Carmody, J., & Baer, R. A. (2008).Relationships between mindfulness practice and levels of

mindfulness, medical and psychological symptoms and well-being in a mindfulness-based

stress reduction program. Journal of Behavioural Medicine, 31, 23–33.

Cash, M., & Whittingham, K. (2010). What facets of mindfulness contribute to psychological

well-being and depressive, anxious, and stress-related symptomatology? Mindfulness, 1,

177–182.

Mukt Shabd Journal

Volume IX, Issue VII, JULY/2020

ISSN NO : 2347-3150

Page No : 1688

Cross, S. E., & Madson, L. (1997). Models of the self: Self-construals and gender. Psychological

Bulletin, 122, 5–37.

Eisenberg, N., & Lennon, R. (1983). Sex differences in empathy and related capacities.

Psychological Bulletin, 9, 100–131.

Gilligan, C. (1988). Remapping the moral domain: New images of self in relationship. In C.

Gilligan, J. Ward, & J. Taylor (Eds.), Mapping the moral domain (pp. 3–19). Cambridge,

MA: Harvard University Press.

Gunaratana, B. (1982). Mindfulness in plain English. Somerville, MA: Wisdom Publications.

Hill, C. T., Rubin, Z., & Peplau, L. A. (1976). Breakups before marriage: The end of 103 affairs

[Electronic version]. Journal of Social Issues, 32, 147-168.

Howell, A. J., Digdon, N. L., Buro, K., & Sheptycki, A. R. (2008). Relations among mindfulness,

well-being, and sleep. Personality and Individual Differences, 45, 773–777.

doi:10.1016/j.paid.2008.08.005.

Iskender, M. (2009).The relationship between self-compassion, self-efficacy, and control belief

about learning in Turkish university students. Social Behavior and Personality, 37, 711–

720.

Leadbeater, B., Kuperminc, G., Blatt, S., & Hertzog, C. (1999). A multivariate model of gender

differences in adolescents’ internalizing and externalizing problems. Developmental

Psychology, 35, 1268– 1282.

Levant, R. F. (2011). Research in the psychology of men and masculinity using the gender role

strain paradigm as a framework. American Psychologist, 66, 765– 776.

Lightsey, O. R., & Barnes, P. W. (2007). Discrimination, attributional tendencies, generalized

self-efficacy, and assertiveness as predictors of psychological distress among African

Americans. Journal of Black Psychology, 33, 27–50. doi:10.1177/0095798406295098.

Mukt Shabd Journal

Volume IX, Issue VII, JULY/2020

ISSN NO : 2347-3150

Page No : 1689

Mahon, N. E., Yarcheski, A., Yarcheski, T. J., Cannella, B. L., & Hanks, M. M. (2006). A meta-

analytic study of predictors for loneliness during adolescence [Electronic version]. Nursing

Research, 55, 308-315.

Martin, J. R. (1997). Mindfulness: A proposed common factor. Journal of Psychotherapy

Integration, 7, 291–312.

Neely, M.E., Schallert, D.L., Mohammed, S.S., Roberts, R.M., & Chen, Y. (2009). Self-kindness

when facing stress: The role of self-compassion, goal regulation, and support in college

students’ well-being. Motivation and Emotion, 33, 88-97.

Neff, K. D. (2003). Development and validation of a scale to measure self-compassion. Self and

Identity, 2, 223-250.

Neff, K. D. (2003b). Self-compassion: An alternative conceptualization of a healthy attitude

toward oneself. Self and Identity, 2, 85-102.

Neff, K. D. (2009). Self-Compassion. In M. R. Leary & R. H. Hoyle (Eds.), Handbook of

Individual Differences in Social Behavior, 561-573, Guilford Press.

Neff, K. D., Kirkpatrick, K. & Rude, S. S. (2007).Self-compassion and its link to adaptive

psychological functioning. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 139-154.

Neff, K. D., Pisitsungkagarn, K., & Hsieh, Y. (2008). Self-compassion and self-construal in the

United States, Thailand, and Taiwan. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 39, 267– 285.

Nisker, W. (1998). Buddha’s nature. New York: Bantam.

Nolen-Hoeksema, S., Larson, J., & Grayson, C. (1999). Explaining the gender difference in

depressive symptoms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1061–1072.

Raque-Bogdan, T., Ericson, S. K., Jackson, J., Martin, H. M., & Bryan, N. A. (2011).

Attachment and mental and physical health: Self-compassion and mattering as mediators.

Journal of Counseling Psychology, 58, 272 –278.

Mukt Shabd Journal

Volume IX, Issue VII, JULY/2020

ISSN NO : 2347-3150

Page No : 1690

Reilly, E. D., Rochlen, A. B., &Awad, G. H. (2014). Men’s self-compassion and self-esteem:

The moderating roles of shame and masculine norm adherence. Psychology of Men &

Masculinity,15, 22 – 28.

Riggs, J. M. (1997). Mandates for mothers and fathers: Perceptions of breadwinners and care

givers. Sex Roles, 37, 565– 580.

Rosenberg, L. (1999). Breath by breath: The liberating practice of insight meditation.

Boston:Shambala.

Ruble, D. N., & Martin, C. L. (1998). Gender development. In W. Damon (Series Ed.) & N.

Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.) (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and

personality development (5th ed., pp. 933– 1016). New York: Wiley.

Zahn-Waxler, C., Cole, P. M., & Barrett, K. C. (1991). Guilt and empathy: Sex differences and

implications for the development of depression. In J. Garber & K. A. Dodge (Eds.), The

development of emotion regulation and dysregulation (pp. 243–272). New York:

Cambridge University Press.

Mukt Shabd Journal

Volume IX, Issue VII, JULY/2020

ISSN NO : 2347-3150

Page No : 1691