Gender analysis has emerged as an important conceptual approach to the study of decision making and conflict resolution in the international arena. Although scholars and practitioners within the field of international relations have debated the effect of gender on the negotiation and decision-making process, little systematic evidence to support their assertions has taken place. This article examines a set of data from the GLOBALED PROJECT that provides insights into the different ways men and women perceive world affairs and interact in a negotiation setting. In particular, the authors examine differences in the negotiation styles of all-female, all-male, and mixed-gender groups when negotiating over international or global issues. Findings from the GLOBALED PROJECT, a computer-mediated study of gender differences in decision-making and negotiation skills, show that there are indeed significant differences between the approaches used by various gender groupings. Although much work remains to be done in this area, this research indicates that some of the impressionistic and anecdotal characterizations of the different ways men and women approach negotiations and decision making are indeed well-grounded when examined through systemic evidence.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Axelrod, R. (1984). The evolution of cooperation. New York: Basic Books.
2.
Bazerman, M. H. (1983). Negotiator judgment: A critical look at the rationality assumption. American Behavioral Scientist, 27(2), 211-228.
3.
Belenky, M. F., Clinchy, B. M., Goldberger, N. R., & Tarule, J. M. (1986). Women's ways of knowing: The development of self, voice and mind. New York: Basic Books.
4.
Berton, P., Kimura, H., & Zartmaneds, I. W. (Eds.). (1999). International negotiation: Actors, structure/process, values. New York: St. Martin's.
5.
Boyer, M. A., & Brown, S. W. (2001, October 11). What if women ran the world? Hartford Courant, p. A11.
6.
Boyer, M. A., et al. (2002, March). Interacting with globalization: Evidence from the next generation of citizens as policy-makers. Paper presented at the International Studies Association Conference, New Orleans, LA.
7.
Brown, S. W., & King, F. B. (2000). Constructivist pedagogy and how we learn: Educational psychology meets international studies. International Studies Perspectives, 1(3), 245-254.
8.
Brown, S. W., & Mayall, H. J. (2000). ICONS 2000: An evaluation. Unpublished manuscript, University of Connecticut, Storrs.
9.
Brown, S. W., & Mayall, H. J. (2001). ICONS 2001: An evaluation. Unpublished manuscript, University of Connecticut.
10.
Brown, S. W., et al. (2002, April). Gender differences in a problem-based learning environment: Do they exist? Paper presented at the 2002 American Educational Research Association Conference, New Orleans, LA.
11.
Chodorow, N. (1978). The reproduction of mothering. Berkeley: University of California Press.
12.
Deaux, K. K. (1984). From individual differences to social categories: Analysis of a decade's research on gender. American Psychologist, 39(2), 105-116.
13.
de Boer, C. (1985). The polls: The European peace movement and deployment of nuclear missiles. Public Opinion Quarterly, 49, 119-132.
14.
Eisenstein, H. (1984). Contemporary feminist thought. London: Unwin Paperbacks.
15.
Elshtain, J. B. (1987). Women and war. New York: Basic Books.
16.
Enloe, C. (1990). Bananas, beaches, and bases: Making feminist sense of international politics. London: Pandora.
17.
Enloe, C. (1993). The morning after: Sexual politics at the end of the cold war. Berkeley: University of California Press.
18.
Fite, D., Genest, M., & Wilcox, C. (1990, October). Gender differences in foreign policy attitudes. American Political Quarterly, 18, 492-513.
19.
Fisher, R., & Ury, W. (1981). Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
20.
Florea, N. B. (2003). The challenge of human security in the United Nations: A case for gender mainstreaming. Unpublished manuscript, University of Connecticut.
21.
Frankovic, K. (1982). Sex and politics: New alignments, old issues. Political Science and Politics, 15, 439-448.
22.
Gierycz, D. (2001). Women, peace and the United Nations: Beyond Beijing. In I. Skjelsbaek & D. Smith (Eds.), Gender, peace, and conflict (pp. 14-31). London: Sage.
23.
Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women's development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
24.
Goldstein, J. S. (2001). War and gender. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
25.
Greenhalgh, L., & Gilkey, R. W. (1986). Our game, your rules: Developing effective negotiating approaches. In L. Moore (Ed.), Not as far as you think: The realities of working women (pp. 135-148). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
26.
Harvey, F. P., & Brecher, M. (Eds.). (2002). Critical perspectives in international studies. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
27.
Hopmann, T. P. (1996). The negotiation process and the resolution of international conflicts. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.
28.
Jonsson, C., & Hall, M. (2003). Communication: An essential aspect of diplomacy. International Studies Perspective, 4(2), 194-209.
29.
Kardam, N. (2002). The emergence of a global gender equity regime. International Journal, 57, 409-438.
30.
Kissinger, H. (1969). The Vietnam negotiations. Foreign Affairs, 47(2), 211-234.
31.
Kolb, D. M., & Coolidge, G. G. (1995). Her place at the table: A consideration of gender issues in negotiation. In J. W. Breslin & J. Z. Rubin (Eds.), Negotiation theory and practice (pp. 261-277). Cambridge, MA: Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School.
32.
Kremenyuk, V. M. (Ed.). (1991). International negotiation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
33.
Lerner, G. (1986). The creation of patriarchy. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
34.
Maccoby, E. E., & Jacklin, C. N. (1974). The psychology of sex differences. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
35.
Mayall, H. J. (2002). An exploratory/descriptive look at gender differences in technology self-efficacy and academic self-efficacy in the GLOBALED PROJECT. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut.
36.
McGlen, N. E., & Sarkees, M. R. (1993). Women in foreign policy: The insiders. New York: Routledge.
37.
Miller, E. (1991). Men at risk. Kingston: Jamaica Publishing House.
38.
Miller, E. (2001). Gender, power, and politics: An alternative perspective. In I. Skjelsbaek & D. Smith (Eds.), Gender, peace, and conflict (pp. 80-103). London: Sage.
39.
Miller, J. B. (1976). Toward the new psychology of women. Boston: Beacon.
40.
Mueller, J. (1973). War, presidents, and public opinion. New York: John Wiley.
41.
Mueller, J. (1994). Policy and opinion in the Gulf War. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
42.
Rubin, J. Z., & Brown, B. R. (1975). The psychology of bargaining and negotiation. New York: Academic Press.
43.
Salla, M. (2001). Women and war, men and pacifism. In I. Skjelsbaek & D. Smith (Eds.), Gender, peace, and conflict (pp. 68-79). London: Sage.
44.
Sampson, E. E. (1988). The debate on individualism: Indigenous psychologies of the individual and their role in personal and societal functioning. American Psychologist, 43(1), 15-22.
45.
Sharp, P. (1999). For diplomacy: Representation and the study of international relations. International Studies Review, 1(1), 33-58.
46.
Skjelsbaek, I., & Smith, D. (Eds.). (2001). Gender, peace, and conflict. London: Sage.
47.
Smith, D. (2001). The problem of essentialism. In I. Skjelsbaek & D. Smith (Eds.), Gender, peace, and conflict (pp. 32-46). London: Sage.
48.
Snyder, S. (1999). Negotiating on the edge: North Korean negotiating behavior. Washington, DC: U.S. Institute for Peace Press.
49.
Solomon, R. H. (1999). Chinese negotiating behavior: Pursuing interests through “old friends”. Washington, DC: U.S. Institute for Peace Press.
50.
Tickner, J. A. (1992). Gender in international relations. New York: Columbia University Press.
51.
Tickner, J. A. (1994). Feminist perspectives on peace and world security in the post-cold war era. In M. T. Klare (Ed.), Peace and world security studies: A curriculum guide. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
52.
Tickner, J. A. (2001). Gendering world politics. New York: Columbia University Press.
53.
Tickner, J. A. (2002). Feminist perspectives on 9/11. International Studies Perspectives, 3(4), 333-350.
54.
United Nations (UN). (1995a, September). The Beijing Declaration and the platform for action (Fourth World Conference on Women, Beijing, China, 4015, DPI/1766/Wom). New York: United Nations, Department of Public Information.
55.
United Nations (UN). (1995b). Participation of women in political life and decision-making (No. E/CN.6/1995/12). New York: Author.
56.
United Nations (UN). (1995c). Women 2000: The role of women in the United Nations peacekeeping (No. 1). New York: Author.
57.
United Nations (UN). (1996). Implementation of the outcome of the Fourth World Conference on Women (Report of the Secretary-General, No. A/51/322). New York: Author.
58.
United Nations Development Program. (2001). Human Development Report. New York: United Nations.
59.
United Nations Division for the Advancement of Women. (1994). Gender and the agenda for peace (Report of the Secretary-General, No. GAP/1994/1). New York: Author.
60.
Watson, C., & Kasten, B. (1988). Separate strengths? How women and men negotiate. Newark, NJ: Center for Negotiation and Conflict Resolution at Rutgers University.
61.
Yamada, E. M., Tjosvold, D., & Draguns, G. J. (1983). Effects of sex-linked situations and sex composition on cooperation and style of interaction. Sex Roles, 9(4), 541-553.
62.
Zartman, W. I. (Ed.). (1976). The 50% solution: How to bargain successfully with hijackers, strikers, bosses, oil magnates, Arabs, Russians, and other worthy opponents in this modern world. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
63.
Zartman, W. I., & Rubin, J. Z. (2000). Power and negotiation. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
