Support for Leader's Decisions in Conflict and Negotiation: Women Do Not Benefit From Relevant Expertise While Men Do

Moran Anisman-Razin*, Rami Rozen, Eran Halperin, Tamar Saguy

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

3 Scopus citations

Abstract

In the present research, we examined the role of leaders' domain-specific expertise and gender as affecting individuals' evaluation of proposals related to intergroup conflict. Across three studies, conducted in two different conflict-related contexts (Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the refugee crisis in Europe), we showed that men and women do not equally benefit from domain-specific expertise. Having high (compared to low) domain-specific expertise positively affected participants' attitudes towards the proposal when its author was a man but not when she was a woman. We further demonstrate that specific characteristics of the proposal (i.e., security relevance) and of the participants (i.e., level of sexism) affect reactions to different negotiation proposals. Our findings suggest that even when women acquire relevant knowledge and experience, they do not benefit from them as much as men. One implication of these findings is that training and enhancing women's expertise may not be enough to eliminate gender bias.

Original languageAmerican English
Pages (from-to)633-648
Number of pages16
JournalPolitical Psychology
Volume39
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 2018
Externally publishedYes

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 International Society of Political Psychology

Keywords

  • gender
  • gender bias
  • leadership
  • negotiation

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Support for Leader's Decisions in Conflict and Negotiation: Women Do Not Benefit From Relevant Expertise While Men Do'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this