Williams and O'Reilly (1998) published a seminal review of diversity research that has become a classic resource for researchers and practitioners alike. In the current review, we update the theoretical record by discussing traditional views of, as well as recent developments to, the 3 prominent frameworks used to understand diversity: social categorization, similarity‐attraction, and information and decision‐making. Furthermore, we propose a dual pathway model of diversity's effects that integrates all 3 frameworks. In our model, both positive and detrimental effects of diversity stem from processes of social categorization. Whereas these processes disrupt group functioning when intergroup bias is activated, when bias is not activated, we propose that social categorization and reduced attraction to dissimilar others will allow individuals in diverse rather than homogeneous groups to focus more on the task, anticipate differences in task‐relevant opinions and perspectives, and engage in more effortful information processing. Finding the balance is key.

No abstract

Gender disparities in negotiation outcomes contribute to inequality in the workplace and beyond. Explanations of gender gaps in negotiation often focus on internal barriers women face as a consequence of contending with stigma in the workplace and other historically male-dominated environments, such as stereotype threat and apprehension about negotiating. However, stigma is also associated with relational consequences that may influence success in negotiations. This research compared internal and relational mechanisms for gender disparities in negotiation performance. Seventy-seven MBA executives reported their apprehension about negotiating, stereotype threat in negotiations, mindset about negotiation-related stress, and class social networks. Participants were then randomly paired to complete a series of one-on-one negotiations based on real-world scenarios. Overall, men outperformed women in negotiations. Significant gender differences emerged in stereotype threat, stress mindset, and social network centrality. However, only network centralityspecifically number and strength of ties-significantly mediated the relationship between gender and negotiation performance. Position in informal social networks may play an important role in negotiation outcomes,