Research on gender disparities in negotiation often does not address the intersectional influence of other demographic categories. We tested the hypothesis that race intersects with gender to play a role in constraining assertive behavior in negotiations. In two studies, we examined White non-Latinx and Asian/Asian American women and men’s phrasing of requests for higher salaries (Study 1) and the amounts they requested (Study 2) in hypothetical salary negotiation scenarios. White women reported less confidence and less assertiveness in their salary requests and proposed lower first offers than did White men; Asian and Asian American participants did not show gender differences in these measures. Negotiation backlash, measured by the amount that participants felt they could request without being punished for being too demanding, mediated the relation between demographic factors and first offers. We explored outcomes in light of intersectionality theories and the status incongruity hypothesis of backlash. These results indicate that differences in negotiation are shaped not only by gender but also by racial category membership.
AmanatullahE. T.MorrisM. W. (2010). Negotiating gender roles: Gender differences in assertive negotiating are mediated by women’s fear of backlash and attenuated when negotiating on behalf of others. Journal of Social and Personality Psychology, 98, 256–267. doi:10.1037/a0017094
2.
AmesD. R.LeeA.WazlawekA. (2017). Interpersonal assertiveness: Inside the balancing act. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 11, 1–16. doi:10.1111/spc3.12317
3.
AmesD. R.WazlawekA. S. (2014). Pushing in the dark: Causes and consequences of limited self-awareness for interpersonal assertiveness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40, 775–790. doi:10.1177/0146167214525474
4.
BabbittL. G. (2013). An intersectional approach to black/white interracial interactions: The roles of gender and sexual orientation. Sex Roles, 68, 791–802. doi:10.1007/s11199-011-0104-4
5.
BabcockL.GelfandM.SmallD.StaynH. (2006). Gender differences in the propensity to initiate negotiations. In De CremerD.ZeelenbergM.MurnighanJ. K. (Eds.), Social psychology and economics (pp. 239–259). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
6.
BabcockL.LascheverS. (2003). Women don’t ask: Negotiation and the gender divide. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. doi:10.1515/9781400825691-002
7.
BarronL. A. (2003). Ask and you shall receive? Gender differences in negotiators’ beliefs about requests for a higher salary. Human Relations, 56, 635–662. doi:10.1177/00187267030566001
8.
BealeF. (1970). Double jeopardy: To be Black and female. In CadeT. (Ed.), The black woman: An anthology (pp. 90–100). New York, NY: New American Library.
9.
BearJ. B.BabcockL. (2012). Negotiation topic as a moderator of gender differences in negotiation. Psychological Science, 23, 743–744. doi:10.1177/0956797612442393
10.
BemS. L. (1981). Gender schema theory: A cognitive account of sex typing source. Psychological Review, 88, 354–364. doi:10.1037/0033-295x.88.4.354
11.
BerdahlJ. L.MinJ. A. (2012). Prescriptive stereotypes and workplace consequences for East Asians in North America. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 18, 141–152. doi:10.1037/a0027692
12.
BerdahlJ. L.MooreC. (2006). Workplace harassment: Double jeopardy for minority women. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 426–436. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.91.2.426
13.
BergerJ.WebsterM.JrRidgewayC. L.RosenholtzS. J. (1986). Status cues, expectations, and behaviors. In LawlerE. (Ed.), Advances in group processes (Vol. 3, pp. 1–22). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. doi:10.1016/s0882-6145(00)17004-3
14.
BiernatM.ManisM. (1994). Shifting standards and stereotype-based judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 5–20. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.66.1.5
15.
BiernatM.SeskoA. K. (2013). Evaluating the contributions of members of mixed-sex work teams: Race and gender matter. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49, 471–476. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2013.01.008
16.
Bonilla-SilvaE. (2006). Racism without racists: Color-blind racism and the persistence of racial inequality in the United States. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
17.
BowlesH. R.BabcockL. (2013). How can women escape the compensation negotiation dilemma? Relational accounts are one answer. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 37, 80–96. doi:10.1177/0361684312455524
18.
BowlesH. R.BabcockL.LaiL. (2007). Social incentives for gender differences in the propensity to initiate negotiation: Sometimes it does hurt to ask. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 103, 84–103. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.09.001
19.
BrescollV. L.UhlmannE. L.Moss RacusinC.SarnellL. (2012). Masculinity, status, and subordination: Why working for a gender stereotype violator causes men to lose status. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 354–357. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2011.06.005
20.
CheryanS.BodenhausenG. V. (2000). When positive stereotypes threaten intellectual performance: The psychological hazards of “model minority” status. Psychological Science, 11, 399–402. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00277
21.
CheryanS.MoninB. (2005). Where are you really from? Asian Americans and identity denial. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 717–730. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.89.5.717
22.
CohenA. B.VarnumM. E. (2016). Beyond east vs. west: Social class, region, and religion as forms of culture. Current Opinion in Psychology, 8, 5–9. doi:10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.09.006
23.
ColeE. R. (2009). Intersectionality and research in psychology. American Psychologist, 64, 170–180. doi:10.1037/a0014564
24.
CrenshawK. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1, 139–167.
25.
CuddyA. J. C.WolfE. B.GlickP.CrottyS.ChongJ.NortonM. I. (2015). Men as cultural ideals: Cultural values moderate gender stereotype content. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109, 622–635. doi:10.1037/pspi0000027
26.
DeauxK.LewisL. L. (1984). Structure of gender stereotypes: Interrelationships among components and gender label. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 991–1004. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.46.5.991
27.
EaglyA. H.KarauS. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109, 573–598. doi:10.1037/0033-295x.109.3.573
28.
EaglyA. H.WoodW. (1991). Explaining sex differences in social behavior: A meta-analytic perspective. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 306–315. doi:10.1177/0146167291173011
29.
Else-QuestN. M.HydeJ. S. (2016a). Intersectionality in quantitative psychological research: I. Theoretical and epistemological issues. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 40, 155–170. doi:10.1177/0361684316629797
30.
Else-QuestN. M.HydeJ. S. (2016b). Intersectionality in quantitative psychological research: II. Methods and techniques. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 40, 319–336. doi:10.1177/0361684316647953
31.
GalinskyA. D.HallE.V.CuddyA. C. (2013). Gendered races: Implications for interracial marriage, leadership selection, and athletic participation. Psychological Science, 24, 498–506. doi:10.1177/0956797612457783
32.
GhavamiN.PeplauL. A. (2012). An intersectional analysis of gender and ethnic stereotypes testing three hypotheses. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 37, 113–127. doi:10.1177/0361684312464203
33.
GoffP. A.ThomasM. A.JacksonM. C. (2008). “Ain’t I a woman?” Towards an intersectional approach to person perception and group-based harms. Sex Roles, 59, 392–403. doi:10.1007/s11199-008-9505-4
34.
HallE. V.GalinskyA. D.PhillipsK. W. (2015). Gender profiling: A gendered race perspective on person–position fit. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41, 853–868. doi:10.1177/0146167215580779
35.
HayesA. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: Guilford Press. doi:10.1111/jedm.12050
36.
HeilmanM. E.WallenA. S. (2010). Wimpy and undeserving of respect: Penalties for men’s gender-inconsistent success. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 664–667. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2010.01.008
ItoT. A.UrlandG. R. (2003). Race and gender on the brain: Electrocortical measures of attention to the race and gender of multiply categorizable individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 616–626. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.4.616
39.
JohnsonK. L.FreemanJ. B.PaukerK. (2012). Race is gendered: How covarying phenotypes and stereotypes bias sex categorization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102, 116–131. doi:10.1037/a0025335
40.
JudgeT. A.LivingstonB. A.HurstC. (2012). Do nice guys—and gals—really finish last? The joint effects of sex and agreeableness on income. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102, 390–407. doi:10.1037/a0026021
41.
KamanV. S.HartelC. E. (1994). Gender differences in anticipated pay negotiation strategies and outcomes. Journal of Business and Psychology, 9, 183–197. doi:10.1007/bf02230636
42.
KrayL. J.GalinskyA. D.ThompsonL. (2002). Reversing the gender gap in negotiations: An exploration of stereotype regeneration. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 87, 386–409. doi:10.1006/obhd.2001.2979
43.
KrayL. J.GelfandM. J. (2009). Relief versus regret: The effect of gender and negotiating norm ambiguity on reactions to having one’s first offer accepted. Social Cognition, 27, 418–436. doi:10.1521/soco.2009.27.3.418
44.
KrayL. J.LockeC. C.Van ZantA. B. (2012). Feminine charm: An experimental analysis of its costs and benefits in negotiations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 1343–1357. doi:10.1177/0146167212453074
45.
KuglerK. G.ReifJ. A. M.KaschnerT.BrodbeckF. C. (2017). Gender differences in the initiation of negotiations: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin. Advance online publication. doi:10.1037/bul0000135
46.
KulikC. T.OlekalnsM. (2012). Negotiating the gender divide: Lessons from the negotiation and organizational behavior literatures. Journal of Management, 38, 1387–1415. doi:10.1177/0149206311431307
47.
LinM. H.KwanV. S.CheungA.FiskeS. T. (2005). Stereotype content model explains prejudice for an envied outgroup: Scale of anti-Asian American stereotypes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 34–47. doi:10.1177/0146167204271320
48.
LivingstonR. W.RosetteA. S.WashingtonE. F. (2012). Can an agentic Black woman get ahead? The impact of race and interpersonal dominance on perceptions of female leaders. Psychological Science, 23, 354–358. doi:10.1177/0956797611428079
49.
MahalingamR.LeuJ. (2005) Culture, essentialism, immigration and representations of gender. Theory & Psychology, 15, 841–862. doi:10.1177/0959354305059335
50.
MartinA. E.NorthM. N.PhillipsK. W. (2018). Intersectional escape: Older women elude agentic prescriptions more than older men. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/0146167218784895
51.
MazeiJ.HüffmeierJ.FreundP. A.StuhlmacherA. F.BilkeL.HertelG. (2015). A meta-analysis on gender differences in negotiation outcomes and their moderators. Psychological Bulletin, 141, 85–104. doi:10.1037/a0038184
52.
MilesE. W. (2010). Gender differences in distributive negotiation: When in the negotiation process do the differences occur?European Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 1200–1211. doi:10.1002/ejsp.714
53.
Moss-RacusinC. A.PhelanJ. E.RudmanL. A. (2010). When men break the gender rules: Status incongruity and backlash toward modest men. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 11, 140–151. doi:10.1037/a0018093
54.
OnoK. A.PhamV. (2009). Asian Americans and the media. Cambridge, England: Polity.
55.
PengT. K. (2006). Construct validation of the Bem Sex Role Inventory in Taiwan. Sex Roles, 55, 843–851. doi:10.1007/s11199-006-9136-6
56.
PhelanJ. E.RudmanL. A. (2010). Reactions to ethnic deviance: The role of backlash in racial stereotype maintenance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99, 265–281. doi:10.1037/a0018304
57.
PrenticeD. A.CarranzaE. (2002). What women and men should be, shouldn’t be, are allowed to be, and don’t have to be: The contents of prescriptive gender stereotypes. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26, 269–281. doi:10.1111/1471-6402.t01-1-00066
58.
Purdie-VaughnsV.EibachR. P. (2008). Intersectional invisibility: The distinctive advantages and disadvantages of multiple subordinate-group identities. Sex Roles, 59, 377–391. doi:10.1007/s11199-008-9424-4
59.
RichardsonE.PhillipsK. W.RudmanL. A.GlickP. (2011). Double jeopardy or greater latitude: Do Black women escape backlash for dominance displays? (Working Paper). New York, NY: Columbia Business School. Retrieved fromhttps://www8.gsb.columbia.edu/researcharchive/articles/5586
60.
RidgewayC. L. (2001). Gender, status, and leadership. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 627–655.
61.
RosenthalL. (2016). Incorporating intersectionality into psychology: An opportunity to promote social justice and equity. American Psychologist, 71, 474–485. doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00233
62.
RosetteA. S.KovalC. Z.MaA.LivingstonR. (2016). Race matters for women leaders: Intersectional effects on agentic deficiencies and penalties. The Leadership Quarterly, 27, 429–445. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2016.01.008
63.
RosetteA. S.LivingstonR. W. (2012). Failure is not an option for black women: Effects of organizational performance on leaders with single versus dual-subordinate identities. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 1162–1167. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2012.05.002
64.
RudmanL. A.GlickP. (1999). Feminized management and backlash toward agentic women: The hidden costs to women of a kinder, gentler image of middle-managers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1004–1010. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.77.5.1004
65.
RudmanL. A.GlickP. (2001). Prescriptive gender stereotypes and backlash toward agentic women. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 743–762. doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00239
66.
RudmanL. A.MescherK. (2013). Penalizing men who request a family leave: Is flexibility stigma a femininity stigma?Journal of Social Issues, 69, 322–340. doi:10.1111/josi.12017
67.
RudmanL. A.MescherK.Moss-RacusinC. A. (2013). Reactions to gender egalitarian men: Perceived feminization due to stigma-by-association. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 16, 572–599. doi:10.1177/1368430212461160
68.
RudmanL. A.Moss-RacusinC. A.GlickP.PhelanJ. E. (2012). Reactions to vanguards: Advances in backlash theory. In DevineP. G.PlantE. A. (Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology, 45, 167–227. doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-394286-9.00004-4
69.
RudmanL. A.Moss-RacusinC. A.PhelanJ. E.NautsS. (2012). Status incongruity and backlash effects: Defending the gender hierarchy motivates prejudice toward female leaders. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 48, pp. 165–179). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2011.10.008
70.
SandbergS. (2013). Lean in: Women, work, and the will to lead. New York, NY: Random House. doi:10.21095/ajmr/2016/v9/i2/108463
71.
SchugJ.AltN. P.KlauerK. C. (2015). Gendered race prototypes: Evidence for the nonprototypicality of Asian men and black women. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 56, 121–125. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2014.09.012
72.
SchugJ.AltN. P.LuP. S.GosinM.FayJ. (2017). Gendered race in mass media: Invisibility of Asian men and black women in popular magazines. Psychology of Popular Media, 6, 222–236. doi:10.1037/ppm0000096
73.
Semnani-AzadZ.AdairW. L. (2011). The display of “dominant” nonverbal cues in negotiation: The role of culture and gender. International Negotiation, 16, 451–479. doi:10.1163157180611: x592950
74.
SeskoA. K.BiernatM. (2010). Prototypes of race and gender: The invisibility of Black women. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 356–360. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2009.10.016
75.
SettlesI. H. (2006). Use of an intersectional framework to understand black women’s racial and gender identities. Sex Roles, 54, 589–601. doi:10.1007/s11199-006-9029-8
76.
ShanW.KellerJ.ImaiL. (2016). What’s a masculine negotiator? What’s a feminine negotiator? It depends on the cultural and situational contexts. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 9, 22–43. doi:10.1111/ncmr.12065
77.
ShekY. L. (2006). Asian American masculinity: A review of the literature. The Journal of Men’s Studies, 14, 379–391. doi:10.3149/jms.1403.379
78.
ShihM.PittinskyT. L.AmbadyN. (1999). Stereotype susceptibility: Identity salience and shifts in quantitative performance. Psychological Science, 10, 80–83. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00111
79.
SmallD. A.GelfandM.BabcockL.GettmanH. (2007). Who goes to the bargaining table? The influence of gender and framing on the initiation of negotiation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 600–613. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.93.4.600
80.
StevensC. K.BavettaA. G.GistM. E. (1993). Gender differences in the acquisition of salary negotiation skills: The role of goals, self-efficacy, and perceived control. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 723–735. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.78.5.723
81.
TajfelH.TurnerJ. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In AustinW. G.WorchelS. (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Monterey, CA: Brooks-Cole.
82.
ThomasK. M.Johnson-BaileyJ.PhelpsR. E.TranN. M.JohnsonL. (2013). Women of color at mid-career: Moving from pet to threat. In Comas-DiazL.GreenB. (Eds.), The psychological health of women of color (pp. 275–286). Westport, CT: Praeger.
83.
TinsleyC.CheldelinS.SchneiderA. K.AmanatullahE. T. (2009). Women at the bargaining table: Pitfalls and prospects. Negotiation Journal, 25, 233–248. doi:10.1111/j.1571-9979.2009.00222.x
84.
ToosiN. R.SommersS. R.AmbadyN. (2012). Getting a word in group-wise: Effects of racial diversity on gender dynamics. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 1150–1155. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2012.04.015
85.
VandelloJ. A.HettingerV. E.BossonJ. K.SiddiqiJ. (2013). When equal isn’t really equal: The masculine dilemma of seeking work flexibility. Journal of Social Issues, 69, 303–321. doi:10.1111/josi.12016
86.
WanousJ. P.ReichersA. E.HudyM. J. (1997). Overall job satisfaction: How good are single-item measures?Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 247–252. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.82.2.247
87.
WarnerL. R.SettlesI. H.ShieldsS. A. (2016). Invited reflection: Intersectionality as an epistemological challenge to psychology. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 40, 171–176. doi:10.1177/0361684316641384
88.
WarnerL. R.ShieldsS. A. (2013). The intersections of sexuality, gender, and race: Identity research at the crossroads. Sex Roles, 68, 803–810. doi:10.1007/s11199-013-0281-4
89.
WilliamsJ. E.BestD. L. (1982). Measuring sex stereotypes: A thirty-nation study. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
90.
WongF.HalginR. (2006). The “model minority”: Bane or blessing for Asian Americans?Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 34, 38–49. doi:10.1002/j.2161-1912.2006.tb00025.x
91.
WongY. J.HornA. J.ChenS. (2013). Perceived masculinity: The potential influence of race, racial essentialist beliefs, and stereotypes. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 14, 452–464. doi:10.1037/a0030100
92.
ZhangJ.NorvilitisJ. M.JinS. (2001). Measuring gender orientation with the Bem Sex Role Inventory in Chinese culture. Sex Roles, 44, 237–251. doi:10.1023/a:1010911305338
93.
ZouL. X.CheryanS. (2017). Two axes of subordination: A new model of racial position. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 112, 696–717. doi:10.1037/pspa0000080
