Stereotype Reactance at the Bargaining Table: The Effect of Stereotype Activation and Power on Claiming and Creating Value

Two experiments explored the hypothesis that the impact of activating gender stereotypes on negotiated agreements in mixed-gender negotiations depends on the manner in which the stereo-type is activated (explicitly vs. implicitly) and the content of the stereotype (linking negotiation performance to stereotypically male vs. stereotypically female traits). Specifically, two experiments investigated the generality and limits of stereotype reactance. The results of Experiment 1 suggest that negotiated outcomes become more one-sided in favor of the high power negotiator when masculine traits are explicitly linked to negotiator effectiveness. In contrast, the results of Experiment 2 suggest that negotiated outcomes are more integrative (win-win) when feminine traits are explicitly linked to negotiator effectiveness. In total, performance in mixed-gender negotiations is strongly affected by the cognitions and motivations that negotiators bring to the bargaining table.

[1]  T. Claire,et al.  Extending the Concept of Stereotype Threat to Social Class: The Intellectual Underperformance of Students from Low Socioeconomic Backgrounds , 1998 .

[2]  C. Steele.  The Psychology of Self-Affirmation: Sustaining the Integrity of the Self , 1988 .

[3]  Kim,et al.  Social conflict: Escalation, stalemate, and settlement , 1986 .

[4]  Sapna Cheryan,et al.  When Positive Stereotypes Threaten Intellectual Performance: The Psychological Hazards of “Model Minority” Status , 2000, Psychological science.

[5]  J. Bargh,et al.  Automaticity of social behavior: direct effects of trait construct and stereotype-activation on action. , 1996, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[6]  D. G. Pruitt,et al.  Development of integrative solutions in bilateral negotiation. , 1975 .

[7]  K. Fujita,et al.  Stereotype performance boosts: the impact of self-relevance and the manner of stereotype activation. , 2002, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[8]  N. Henley,et al.  Gender and Nonverbal Behavior , 1981 .

[9]  Kevin J. Williams,et al.  The Effects of Stereotype Threat and Double-Minority Status on the Test Performance of Latino Women , 2002 .

[10]  F. Geis,et al.  Women and Nonverbal Leadership Cues: When Seeing Is Not Believing , 1981 .

[11]  R. Petty,et al.  The effects of stereotype activation on behavior: a review of possible mechanisms. , 2001, Psychological bulletin.

[12]  Catherine Good,et al.  When White Men Can't Do Math: Necessary and Sufficient Factors in Stereotype Threat , 1999 .

[13]  Dorwin Cartwright,et al.  Studies in Social Power. , 1960 .

[14]  F. Strack,et al.  Awareness of the influence as a determinant of assimilation versus contrast , 1993 .

[15]  A. Marty.  Getting to YES. Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In , 1983 .

[16]  L. Thompson,et al.  Battle of the sexes: gender stereotype confirmation and reactance in negotiations. , 2001, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[17]  J. Brehm.  A theory of psychological reactance. , 1981 .

[18]  L. Thompson,et al.  The Mind and Heart of the Negotiator , 1997 .

[19]  Brian A. Nosek,et al.  A unified theory of implicit attitudes, stereotypes, self-esteem, and self-concept. , 2002, Psychological review.

[20]  John M. Darley,et al.  Stereotype Threat Effects on Black and White Athletic Performance , 1999 .

[21]  C. Steele.  A threat in the air. How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance. , 1997, The American psychologist.

[22]  Steven D. Seilheimer,et al.  Looking and Competing: Accountability and Visual Access in Integrative Bargaining , 1981 .

[23]  Alice F. Stuhlmacher,et al.  Gender and Negotiator Competitiveness: A Meta-analysis. , 1998, Organizational behavior and human decision processes.

[24]  Tom Postmes,et al.  Seeing One Thing and Doing Another : Contrast Effects in Automatic Behavior , 2004 .

[25]  C M Steele,et al.  Self-image resilience and dissonance: the role of affirmational resources. , 1993, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[26]  Lewis A. Froman,et al.  Research reports. Compromise and logroll: Comparing the efficiency of two bargaining processes , 1970 .

[27]  C. Steele,et al.  Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans. , 1995, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[28]  M. Banaji,et al.  Implicit social cognition: attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. , 1995, Psychological review.

[29]  L. Thompson,et al.  Reversing the Gender Gap in Negotiations: An Exploration of Stereotype Regeneration , 2002 .

[30]  L. L. Martin,et al.  Set/reset: use and disuse of concepts in impression formation. , 1986, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[31]  J. Croizet,et al.  Stereotype Threat: Are Lower Status and History of Stigmatization Preconditions of Stereotype Threat? , 2000 .

[32]  R. Josephs,et al.  A burden of proof: Stereotype relevance and gender differences in math performance. , 1999 .

[33]  Alice F. Stuhlmacher,et al.  GENDER DIFFERENCES IN NEGOTIATION OUTCOME: A META‐ANALYSIS , 1999 .

[34]  Debra L. Shapiro,et al.  Breaking the Bonds of Reciprocity in Negotiations , 1998 .

[35]  S. Spencer,et al.  Stereotype Threat and Women's Math Performance , 1999 .

[36]  Rebecca J. Bennett,et al.  The Impact of Alternatives to Settlement in Dyadic Negotiation , 1994 .