Effects of sex role in a two-person mixed-motive game.

Abstract

Male, female, and mixed-sex dyads played 100 trials of a two-choice, mixedmotive game that allows behavioral separation of the relative gain orientation (desire to win or not lose) from that of individualism. An additional variable, which showed no significant main effects, was manipulated: Half of the dyads were able to see the other player, while the other half were visually isolated. While females were consistently less relative gain oriented than males, this result was not strong enough to be significant. Hence, the prediction that females are more individualistically oriented than males rather than more "competitive" (as has been suggested by researchers employing the Prisoner's Dilemma game) was not strongly supported. In the mixed-sex dyads, it was expected that all of the subjects would show a decreased tendency to compete compared to like-sex dyads. However, only males showed a significant decrease in competition, and only when they had competed previously themselves. These differences were interpreted by suggesting that, for males, but not females, differentiation of sex roles in mixed-sex interactions reduces the likelihood and/or impact of comparison of outcomes.The fundamental thesis underlying the present research is that subjects' choice behavior in non-zero-sum games can be understood only by the development of an adequate theory of social motivation applicable to situations of outcome interdependence. The present study is one in a series designed to increase our understanding of the operation of three motives that past research (e.g.,

Explaining Differences in Men and Women's Use of Unethical Tactics in Negotiations

“…Competitiveness is the strength of belief that a negative correlation exists between one's well‐being and the outcomes of comparable others (Johnson, Maruyama, Johnson, Nelson, & Skon, ). As this belief strengthens, so does the priority one places on maximizing relative rather than absolute outcomes (McNeel, McClintock, & Nuttin, ) and thus willingness to violate ethical norms to maximize those relative outcomes (Pierce, Kilduff, Galinsky, & Sivonathan, ; Schweitzer et al., ). Because men consistently manifest more competitiveness in their attitudes (Lynn, ) and actions than women (Walters, Stuhlmacher, & Meyer, ), we expect that competitiveness partially mediates the relation between sex and willingness to use of unethical negotiation tactics.

Hypothesis 1: Competitiveness will partially mediate the effect of sex on willingness to use unethical tactics in negotiations.

…”

Power difference between players and level of matrix as determinants of competition in a MDG

“…al., , 1969(McClintock et. al., , 1970McNeel et al, 1972). The MGD, shown in matrix 6/6, is a game in which two persons, A and B, choose independently between two alternatives, C and D, knowing that, if they both choose C, they both gain 6 points, if they both choose D, they both gain nothing and, if one chooses D while the other one chooses C, the one choosing D gains 5 points against the one choosing C nothing.…”

Equity and individual preferences in an MDG

“…The picture emerging from studies about this relation is not consistent. McNeel, McClintock and Nutting (1972) show that males and females make as many competitive (D-)choices in an MDG. As in the present study, they also used all-male and all-female dyads.…”