Gender, mood state, and justice preference: Do mood states moderate gender‐based norms of justice?

Abstract

The present study extends research on distributive justice by investigating whether a person's mood state moderates the robust effects of gender norms on allocation decisions. One hundred and eighty undergraduates (90 men: 90 women) were asked to undergo a mood induction procedure in which they were randomly assigned to a positive, negative, or neutral mood condition, and to work on a task with either a male or female co-worker (confederate). This resulted in a 2 (gender of participant) x 2 (gender of confederate) x 3 (positive vs. neutral vs. negative mood) between-subjects factorial design. Following completion of the task, participants were informed that they did 60% of the work and their co-worker did 40%. They were then asked to divide money between themselves and their co-worker in a way that they considered fair. The analysis revealed a three-way interaction in participants self-payment whereby men in a negative mood, working with other men took more pay for themselves than did participants in all other conditions. Specifically, 60% of the participants in this condition, allocated the payment either equitably or in a manner suggesting even greater self-interest. These results support the view that gender effects are strongly influenced by the presence of other relevant contextual cues.

Bodily Attractiveness and Egalitarianism are Negatively Related in Males

“…Other results reported above are notable as attempts to approximately replicate findings that had been reported previously (we say "approximately" replicate because we did not measure all variables in the same manner as in previous studies, as we discuss below). Some of these attempts were in agreement with earlier findings: Consistent with many previous studies (Baron-Cohen, 2008;Croson and Gneezy, 2009;Inness et al, 2004), we found evidence of higher observed egalitarianism among women than among men. Consistent with Price et al (2011) and Takahashi et al (2006), we found no evidence that observed egalitarianism was related to attractiveness (as assessed via anthropometric measures and/or the ratings of other people, as opposed to self-assessed attractiveness) among women.…”

“…Ancestral women may have instead used egalitarianism more to solve other kinds of adaptive problems, including problems related to motherhood and social-network building that require empathy as a solution (Baron-Cohen, 2008). The greater utility of egalitarianism in these contexts for women may help explain why, in many social situations, women tend to score higher than men on measures of egalitarianism and empathy (Croson and Gneezy, 2009;Inness, Desmarais, and Day, 2004).…”

Gender and Organizational Justice Preferences

“…Contextual factors also affect allocation patterns, which suggest that gender stereotypical allocations are not due to justice orientations (e.g., Inness et al ; Kahn et al ; Martin and Osmond ). For example, Kidder et al () found that men and women conformed to gender stereotypes, with women dividing resources equally and men equitably, when they believed that their allocation decisions would be made public.…”