Why can’t a woman be more like a man? Female leaders in crisis bargaining

Post, Abigail S.; Sen, Paromita

doi:10.1080/03050629.2019.1683008

Cited by 45 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 86 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As a result, it takes more decisions to fight to bring observers around to the idea that a hawkish woman is, in fact, hawkish. Notably, where Post and Sen (2020) use the systematic underestimation of female leaders' resolve to explain higher rates of dispute escalation, we show that dispute escalation and the underestimation of women's resolve can have a common cause: the gendered war payoffs of hostile sexism.…”

Section: Disputes Escalation and Reputationsmentioning

confidence: 85%

“…Nonetheless, much quantitative IR work on gender rests on essentialist assumptions by examining differences between women and men, which are sex rather than gender categories (e.g., Horowitz et al, 2015, Koch andFulton, 2011; and see Cohen and Karim, 2021 for a critique). By contrast, we explore the effects of gender by modeling sexist attitudes among women's opponents (see also Post and Sen, 2020;Schramm and Stark, 2020).…”

Section: Gender Game Theory and Conflictmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Gender, sexism, and war

Reiter

Wolford

2021

Journal of Theoretical Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We analyze a model of leader gender and crisis bargaining under asymmetric information. There are no essential differences between the sexes in their willingness to use force, but sexist leaders receive a subjective boost for defeating female leaders in war and pay a subjective cost for defeat. We show that this hostile sexism can lead to war for two reasons, first by offering sufficient private benefits to make peace impossible and second by influencing an uninformed leader’s willingness to risk war. We also show that (a) the effect of leader sex on disputes and war depends on the distribution of power, (b) sexist leaders may initiate disputes at less favorable distributions of power than non-sexist leaders, and (c) sexist leaders adopt bargaining strategies that make it difficult for women to cultivate and benefit from reputations for resolve, even in the absence of sex differences in the willingness to use force.

show abstract

Section: Disputes Escalation and Reputationsmentioning

confidence: 85%

Section: Gender Game Theory and Conflictmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender, sexism, and war

Reiter

Wolford

2021

Journal of Theoretical Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…And despite little evidence that women are more “peaceful” foreign policymakers than men (one study found that Albright’s presence had no pacifying effect on U.S. foreign policy), there is a prevailing stereotype that female leaders will use less force (Lasher 2005). In fact, as two studies have found, the exact opposite may be true (Post and Sen 2020; Schramm and Stark 2020).…”

Section: Gender and Negotiationmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…2. 2. It is important to note that almost all the studies analyzed in these meta‐analyses, and mentioned in this section of the article, involve dyadic economic bargaining situations in Western contexts. There are very few studies on the role of gender in international dispute resolution (Post and Sen 2020; Schramm and Stark 2020). Some have noted the need to evaluate how gender has impacted the negotiation practices of Secretaries of State (Menkel‐Meadow 2019).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Madeleine Albright: Negotiating Gender at Home and Abroad

Davies¹

2022

Negotiation Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As the first female United States Secretary of State, Madeleine K. Albright redefined the role of America’s top diplomat. While Albright’s prolific foreign policy achievements are well documented, there has been little analysis of the negotiation style that contributed to her accomplishments. This article argues that Secretary Albright’s negotiation style was formed, at least in part, by the need to respond to her counterparts’ gender‐based stereotypes. Albright managed those stereotypes in two ways: by leveraging them in her negotiations, and by framing her assertiveness so as to avoid a counter stereotypic backlash. How exactly she did so is the focus of this article. Using two case studies from Albright’s tenure as Secretary of State, I draw generalizable lessons for other negotiators looking not only to mitigate, but also exploit, the gender‐based assumptions that they face.

show abstract

“…3.Alexander and Andersen 1993; Dolan 2014; Falk and Kenski 2006; Holman, Merolla, and Zechmeister 2011; Huddy and Terkildsen 1993; Kahn 1992; Lawless 2004; Post and Sen 2020; Rosenwasser and Dean 1989; Sanbonmatsu 2002.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Do Women Make More Credible Threats? Gender Stereotypes, Audience Costs, and Crisis Bargaining

Schwartz¹,

Blair²

2020

Int Org

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As more women attain executive office, it is important to understand how gender dynamics affect international politics. Toward this end, we present the first evidence that gender stereotypes affect leaders’ abilities to generate audience costs. Using survey experiments, we show that female leaders have political incentives to combat gender stereotypes that women are weak by acting “tough” during international military crises. Most prominently, we find evidence that female leaders, and male leaders facing female opponents, pay greater inconsistency costs for backing down from threats than male leaders do against fellow men. These findings point to particular advantages and disadvantages women have in international crises. Namely, female leaders are better able to tie hands—an efficient mechanism for establishing credibility in crises. However, this bargaining advantage means female leaders will also have a harder time backing down from threats. Our findings have critical implications for debates over the effects of greater gender equality in executive offices worldwide.

show abstract

Why can’t a woman be more like a man? Female leaders in crisis bargaining

Cited by 45 publications

References 86 publications

Gender, sexism, and war

Gender, sexism, and war

Madeleine Albright: Negotiating Gender at Home and Abroad

Do Women Make More Credible Threats? Gender Stereotypes, Audience Costs, and Crisis Bargaining

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About