This study investigates how the contribution, identification, and consideration of expertise within groups are affected by gender differences. The authors examined the effects of member expertise and gender on others’ perceptions of expertise, actual and own perceptions of influence, and group performance on a decision-making task. The authors’ findings are consistent with social role theory and expectation states theory. Women were less influential when they possessed expertise, and having expertise decreased how expert others perceived them to be. Conversely, having expertise was relatively positive for men. These differences were reflected in group performance, as groups with a female expert underperformed groups with a male expert. Thus, contrary to common expectations, possessing expertise did not ameliorate the gender effects often seen in workgroups. The findings are discussed in light of their implications for organizational workgroups in which contribution of expertise is critical to group performance.
Altemeyer, R. A., & Jones, K. (1974). Sexual identity, physical attractiveness, and seating position as determinants of influence in discussion groups. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 6, 357-375.
2.
Argyle, M., Lalljee, M., & Cook, M. (1968). The effects of visibility on interaction in a dyad. Human Relations, 21, 3-17.
3.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
4.
Berger, J., Conner, T., & Fisek, M. H. (Eds.). (1974). Expectations states theory: A theoretical research program. Cambridge, UK: Winthrop.
5.
Berger, J., Fisek, M. H., Norman, R. Z., & Zelditch, M., Jr. (1977). Status characteristics and social interaction. New York: Elsevier.
6.
Berger, J., Rosenholtz, S. J., & Zelditch, M. (1980). Status organizing processes. Annual Review of Sociology, 6, 479-508.
7.
Berscheid, E., & Walster, H. (1978). Interpersonal attraction. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
8.
Biernat, M., & Kobrynowicz, D. (1997). Gender and race-based standards of competence: Lower minimum standards but higher ability standards for devalued groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 544-557.
9.
Bonner, B. L., Baumann, M. R., & Dalal, R. S. (2002). The effects of member expertise on group decision-making and performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 88, 719-736.
10.
Bottger, P. C. (1984). Expertise and air time as bases of actual and perceived influence in problem-solving groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 214-221.
11.
Bottger, P. C., & Yetton, P. W. (1988). An integration of process and decision scheme explanations of group problem solving performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 42, 234-249.
12.
Broverman, I. K., Vogel, S. R., Broverman, D. M., Clarkson, F. E., & Rosenkrantz, P. S. (1972). Sex role stereotypes: A current appraisal. Journal of Social Issues, 28, 59-78.
13.
Buttner, E. H., & McEnally, M. (1996). The interactive effect of influence tactic, applicant gender, and type of job on hiring recommendations. Sex Roles, 34, 581-591.
14.
Byrne, D. E., Clore, P. L., & Worchel, P. (1966). The effect of economic similarity-dissimilarity as determinants of attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 220-224.
15.
Carli, L. L. (1991). Gender, status, and influence. In E. J. Lawler, B. Markovsky, C. Ridgeway, & H. A. Walker (Eds.), Advances in group processes: Theory and research(Vol. 8, pp. 89-113). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
16.
Carli, L. L. (1998, June). Gender effects in social influence. Paper presented at themeeting of the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues, Ann Arbor, MI.
17.
Carli, L. L. (2001). Gender and social influence. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 725-741.
18.
Carli, L. L., LaFleur, S. J.,& Loeber, C. C. (1995). Nonverbal behavior, gender, and influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 1030-1941.
19.
Chatman, J. A., Berdahl, J. L., Boisnier, A., Spataro, S. E., & Anderson, C. (2003). The typical, the rare, and the outnumbered: Distinguishing between historical typicality and numerical distinctiveness in work groups. Working paper, University of California at Berkeley.
20.
Crosby, F., & Nyquist, L. (1977). The female register: An empirical study of Lakoff’s hypothesis. Language in Society, 6, 313-322.
21.
Dovidio, J. F., Brown, C. E., Heltman, K., Ellyson, S. L., & Keating, C. F. (1988). Power displays between women and men in discussions of gender-linked tasks: A multichannel study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 580-587.
22.
Eagly, A. H. (1983). Gender and social influence: A social psychological analysis. American Psychologist, 38, 971-981.
23.
Eagly, A. H. (1987). Sex differences in social behavior: A social-role analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
24.
Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L (1981). Sex of researchers and sex-typed communications as determinants of sex differences in influenceability: A meta-analysis of social influence studies. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 1-20.
25.
Eagly, A. H., Karau, S. L., & Makhijani, M. G. (1995). Gender and the effectiveness of leaders: A meta-analysis. Psychological-Bulletin, 117, 125-145.
26.
Eagly, A. H., Makhijani, M. G., & Klonsky, B. G. (1992). Gender and the evaluation of leaders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 3-22.
27.
Eakins, B., & Eakins, R. G. (1978). Sex differences in human communication. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
28.
Edwards, W. (1968). Conservatism in human information processing. In B. Kleinmuntz (Ed.), Formal representations of human judgment (pp. 17-52). New York: John Wiley.
29.
Einhorn, H. J., Hogarth, R. M., & Klempner, E. (1977). Quality of group judgment. Psychological Bulletin, 84, 158-172.
30.
Fiske, S. T., & Ruscher, J. B. (1993). Negative interdependence and progress: Whence the affect? In D. M. Mackie &D. L. Hamilton (Eds.), Affect, cognition, and stereotyping: Interactive processes in group perception (pp. 239-268). New York: Springer-Verlag.
31.
Foschi, M. (1996). Double standards in the evaluation of men and women. Social Psychology Quarterly, 59, 237-254.
32.
Foschi, M. (2000). Double standards for competence: Theory and research. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 21-42.
33.
Foschi, M., Lai, L., & Sigerson, K. (1994). Gender and double standards in the assessment of job applicants. Social Psychology Quarterly, 57, 326-339.
34.
Gardner, W. L. (1992). Lessons in organizational dramaturgy: The art of impression management. Organizational Dynamics, 21, 33-46.
35.
Gigone, D., & Hastie, R. (1993). The common knowledge effect: Information sharing and group judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 959-974.
36.
Gourley, M. (1997). Bushfire survival situation. Plymouth, MI: Human Synergistics International.
37.
Gruenfeld, D. H, Mannix, E., Williams, K. Y., & Neale, M. A. (1996). Group composition and decision making: How member familiarity and information distribution affect process and performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67, 1-15.
38.
Henry, R. A. (1995). Improving group judgment accuracy: Information sharing determining the best member. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 62, 190-197.
39.
Hirschman, L. (1973, December). Female-male differences in conversational interaction. Paper presented at the meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, San Diego, CA.
40.
Hollingshead, A. B., & Fraidin, S. (2003). Gender stereotypes and assumptions about expertise in transactive memory. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 355-363.
41.
Horai, J., Naccari, N.,& Fattoullah, E. (1974). The effects of expertise and physical attractiveness on opinion agreement and liking. Sociometry, 37, 601-606.
42.
Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. L., & Kelley, H. H. (1953). Communication and persuasion: Psychological studies of opinion change. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
43.
Jackson, S. E. (Ed). (1992). Diversity in the workplace: Human resources initiatives. The professional practice series. New York: Guilford.
44.
Karakowsky, L.,& McBey, K. (2001). Domy contributions matter? The influence of imputed expertise on member involvement and selfevaluations in the work group. Group& Organization Management, 26, 70-92.
45.
Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Bolger, N. (1998). Data analysis in social psychology. In D. Gilbert, S. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology(Vol. 1, 4th ed., pp. 233-265). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
46.
Kenny, D. A., Manneti, L., Pierro, A., Livi, S., & Kashy, D. A. (2002). The statistical analysis of data fromsmall groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 126-137.
47.
Kreft, I., & De Leeuw, J. (1998). Introducing multilevel modeling. London: Sage.
48.
Lafferty, J. C., & Pond, A. W. (1974). Desert survival situation. Plymouth, MI: Human Synergistics.
49.
Larson, J. R., Foster-Fishman, P. G.,& Keys, C. B. (1994). Discussion of shared and unshared information in decision-making groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 446-461.
50.
Laughlin, P. R., & Ellis, A. L. (1986). Demonstrability and social combination processes on mathematical intellective tasks. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22, 177-189.
51.
Laughlin, P. R., VanderStoep, S. W., & Hollingshead, A. B. (1991). Collective versus individual induction: Recognition of truth, rejection of error, and collective information processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 50-67.
52.
Libby, R., Trotman, K. T.,& Zimmer, I. (1987). Member variation, recognition of expertise, and group performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 81-87.
53.
Littlepage, G. E., & Mueller, A. L. (1997). Recognition and utilization of expertise in problem-solving groups: Expert characteristics and behavior. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 1, 324-328.
54.
Littlepage, G. E., Robison, W.,& Reddington, K. (1997). Effect of task experience and group experience on group performance, member ability, and recognition of expertise. Organizational Behavior& Human Decision Processes, 69, 133-147.
55.
Littlepage, G. E., Schmidt, G. W., Whisler, E. W.,& Frost, A. G. (1995). An input-process-output analysis of influence and performance in problem-solving groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 877-889.
56.
Lockheed, M. E., & Hall, K. P. (1976). Conceptualizing sex as a status characteristic: Application to leadership training strategies. Journal of Social Issues, 32, 111-124.
57.
Meeker, B. F., & Weitzel-O’Neil, P. A. (1977). Sex roles and interpersonal behavior in task-oriented groups. American Sociological Review, 42, 91-105.
58.
Meeker, B. F., & Weitzel-O’Neil, P. A. (1985). Sex roles and interpersonal behavior in task-oriented groups. In J. Berger &M. Zelditch (Eds.), Status, reward, and influence (pp. 379-405). Washington, DC: Jossey-Bass.
59.
Miner, C. F. (1984). Group versus individual decision making: An investigation of performance measures, decision strategies, and process losses/gains. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 33, 112-124.
60.
Moscovici, S., Lage, E., & Naffrechoux, M. (1969). Influence of a consistent minority on the responses of a majority in a color perception task. Sociometry, 32, 365-380.
61.
Mulac, A., Wiemann, J. M., Widenmann, S. J., & Gibson, T. W. (1988). Male/female language differences in same-sex and mixed-sex dyads: The gender-linked language effect. Communication Monographs, 55, 315-335.
62.
Olivera, F., & Argote, L. A. (1999). Organizational learning and new product development: CORE processes. In L. L. Thompson, J. M. Levine, & D. Messick (Eds.), Shared cognition in organizations: The management of knowledge (pp. 297-325). Mahwah, NJ: LEA.
63.
O’Reilly, C. A, Caldwell, D. F., & Barnett, W. P. (1989). Work group demography, social integration, and turnover. Administrative Science Quarterly, 34, 21-37.
64.
Pilavin, J. A., & Martin, R. R. (1978). The effects of sex composition of groups on style of social interaction. Sex Roles, 4, 281-296.
65.
Propp, K. M. (1995). An experimental examination of biological sex as a status cue in decision making groups and its influence on information use. Small Group Research, 26, 451-474.
66.
Pugh, M. D., & Wahrman, R. (1983). Neutralizing sexism in mixedsex groups: Do women have to be better than men?American Journal of Sociology, 88, 746-762.
67.
Ridgeway, C. L. (1982). Status in groups: The importance of motivation. American Sociological Review, 47, 76-88.
68.
Ridgeway, C. L. (1987). Nonverbal behavior, dominance, and the basis of status in task groups. American Sociological Review, 52, 683-694.
69.
Ridgeway, C. L. (2001). Gender, status, and leadership. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 637-655.
70.
Ridgeway, C. L., & Berger, J. (1986). Expectations, legitimation, and dominance behavior in task groups. American Sociological Review, 51, 603-617.
71.
Ridgeway, C. L., Berger, J., & Smith, L. (1985). Nonverbal cues and status: An expectation states approach. American Journal of Sociology, 90, 955-978.
72.
Ridgeway, C. L., & Diekema, D. (1989). Dominance and collective hierarchy formation in male and female task groups. American Sociological Review, 54, 79-93.
73.
Ridgeway, C. L., & Smith-Lovin, L. (1999). The gender system and interaction. Annual Review of Sociology, 25, 191-216.
74.
Rosenthal, R., & Jacobson, L. (1968). Pygmalion in the classroom. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
75.
Shackelford, S., Wood, W., & Worchel, S. (1996). Behavioral styles and the influence of women in mixed-sex groups. Social Psychology Quarterly, 59, 284-293.
76.
Singer, J. D. (1998). Using SAS PROCMIXED to fitmultilevelmodels, hierarchical models, and individual growthmodels. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 23, 323-355.
77.
Smith-Lovin, L., & Brody, C. (1989). Interruptions in group discussions: The effects of gender and group composition. American Sociological Review, 54, 424-435.
78.
Stasser, G., & Stewart, D. (1992). Discovery of hidden profiles by decision making groups: Solving a problem versus making a judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 426-434.
79.
Stasser, G., Stewart, D. D., & Wittenbaum, G. M. (1995). Expert roles and information exchange during discussion: The importance of knowing who knows what. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 31, 244-265.
80.
Stasser, G., Taylor, L. A., & Hanna, C. (1989). Information sampling in structured and unstructured discussions of three-and sixperson groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 67-78.
81.
Stasser, G., & Titus, W. (1985). Pooling unshared information in group decision making: Biased information sampling during discussion. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 48, 1467-1478.
82.
Stein, R. T., & Heller, T. (1979). Performance self-esteem and dominance behavior inmixed-sex dyads. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1993-2002.
83.
Stewart, D. D., & Stasser, G. (1995). Expert role assignment and information sampling during collective recall and decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 619-628.
84.
Tedeschi, J. T. (1972). The social influence processes. Oxford, UK: Aldine-Atherton.
85.
Tepper, B., Brown, S., & Hunt, M. D. (1993). Strength of subordinates’ upward influence tactics and gender congruency effects. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23, 1903-1919.
86.
Thomas-Hunt, M. C., & Phillips, K. W. (2003). Managing teams in the dynamic organization: The effects of revolving membership and changing task demands on expertise and status in groups. In R. Peterson &E. Mannix (Eds.), Leading and managing people in the dynamic organization (pp. 115-134). Mahwah, NJ: LEA.
87.
Trotman, K. T., Yetton, P. W., & Zimmer, I. R. (1983). Individual and group judgments of internal control systems. Journal of Accounting Research, 21, 286-292.
88.
Troyer, L., & Yount, C. W. (1997). Whose expectations matter? The relative power of first-and second-order expectations in determining social influence. American Journal of Sociology, 103, 692-732.
89.
Tsui, A., Egan, E., & O’Reilly, C. (1992). Being different: Relational demography and organizational attachment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 549-579.
90.
Vancouver, J. B., & Ilgen, D. R. (1989). Effects of interpersonal orientation and the sex-type of the task on choosing to work alone or in groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 927-934.
91.
Veiga, J. I. (1991). The frequency of self-limiting behavior in groups: A measure and an explanation. Human Relations, 44, 877-895.
92.
Wagner, D. G., Ford, R. S., & Ford, T. W. (1986). Can gender inequalities be reduced?American Sociological Review, 51, 47-61.
93.
Wagner, W. G., Pfeffer, J., & O’Reilly, C. A. (1984). Organizational demography and turnover in top-management groups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 74-92.
94.
Williams, K. Y., & O’Reilly, C. A. (1998). Demography and diversity in organizations: A review of 40 years of research. In B. Staw &R. Sutton (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior(Vol. 20, pp. 77-140). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
95.
Wittenbaum, G. M. (1998). Information sampling in decisionmaking groups: The impact of members’ task-relevant status. Small Group Research, 29, 57-84.
96.
Wittenbaum, G. M., Hubbell, A. P., & Zuckerman, C. (1999). Mutual enhancement: Toward an understanding of the collective preference for shared information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 967-978.
97.
Wittenbaum, G. M., Vaughan, S. I., & Stasser, G. (1998). Coordination in task-performing groups. In R. S. Tindale, L. Heath, J. Edwards, E. J. Posvoc, F. B. Bryant, Y. Suarez-Balcazar, et al. (Eds.), Applications of theory and research on groups to social issues(Vol. 4, pp. 177-204). New York: Plenum.
98.
Wood, W., & Karten, S. J. (1986). Sex differences in interaction style as a product of perceived sex differences in competence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 341-347.
99.
Yetton, P. W.,& Bottger, P. C. (1982). Individual versus group problem solving: An empirical test of a best-member strategy. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 29, 307-321.
100.
Yoder, J. D., Schleicher, T. L.,& McDonald, T. W. (1998). Empowering token women leaders: The importance of organizationally legitimated credibility. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 22, 209-222.
101.
Zimmerman, D. H., & West, C. (1975). Sex roles, interruptions, and silences in conversation. In B. Thorne &N. Henley (Eds.), Language and sex: Difference and Dominance (pp. 105-129). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
