Gender, Stereotypes, and Trust in Communication

被引:11
|
作者
Schniter, Eric [1 ,2 ]
Shields, Timothy W. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Chapman Univ, Econ Sci Inst, One Univ Dr, Orange, CA 92866 USA
[2] Chapman Univ, Argyros Sch Business & Econ, One Univ Dr, Orange, CA 92866 USA
关键词
Gender; Stereotype; Trust; Discrimination; Strategic communication; SEX-DIFFERENCES; BEHAVIOR; INFORMATION; ORIGINS; MONEY; EXPECTATIONS; ECONOMICS; HONESTY; MODEL; POWER;
D O I
10.1007/s12110-020-09376-3
中图分类号
Q98 [人类学];
学科分类号
030303 ;
摘要
Gender differences in dishonesty and mistrust have been reported across cultures and linked to stereotypes about females being more trustworthy and trusting. Here we focus on fundamental issues of trust-based communication that may be affected by gender: the decisions whether to honestly deliver private information and whether to trust that this delivered information is honest. Using laboratory experiments that model trust-based strategic communication and response, we examined the relationship between gender, gender stereotypes, and gender discriminative lies and challenges. Drawing from a student sample, we presented males and females (N = 80) with incentivized stereotype elicitation tasks that reveal their expectations of lies and challenges from each gender, followed by a series of strategic communication interactions within and between genders. Before interacting, both genders stereotyped females as more trustworthy (expected to send more honest messages) and more trusting (expected to accept and not challenge others' messages) than males, in accord with cross-cultural gender differences. In best response to these stereotypes, both genders discriminately accepted or challenged messages based on the sender's gender. However, we find no differences between males' and females' overall rates of lies and challenges. After learning the results of their strategic interactions, males and females revised their stereotypes about lies and challenges expected of each gender; these stereotype revisions resulted in greater predictive accuracy and less disparate gender discrimination. This suggests an important facultative feature of human trust-based communication and gender stereotyping: while the delivery and trust of private information is informed by gender stereotypes, these stereotypes are recalibrated with experience.
引用
收藏
页码:296 / 321
页数:26
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Gender Stereotypes at School
    Heyder, Anke
    Und, Ursula Kessels
    Retelsdorf, Jan
    ZEITSCHRIFT FUR ENTWICKLUNGSPSYCHOLOGIE UND PADAGOGISCHE PSYCHOLOGIE, 2019, 51 (02): : 69 - 70
  • [22] Unmasking Gender Stereotypes
    Erumit, Banu Avsar
    Topcu, Fazilet
    Koc, Rumeysa
    Gul, Omur
    Erdem, Burhan
    Kaya, Feray
    Acikgoz, Tuba
    SCIENCE & EDUCATION, 2024,
  • [23] EYEGLASSES AND GENDER STEREOTYPES
    TERRY, RL
    OPTOMETRY AND VISION SCIENCE, 1989, 66 (10) : 694 - 697
  • [24] Gender, risk and stereotypes
    Daruvala, Dinky
    JOURNAL OF RISK AND UNCERTAINTY, 2007, 35 (03) : 265 - 283
  • [25] Cartoons: Gender stereotypes
    Reig, Ramon
    Mancin Chavez, Rosalba
    CHASQUI-REVISTA LATINOAMERICANA DE COMUNICACION, 2010, (111): : 79 - 83
  • [26] Gender and ICT: school and gender stereotypes
    Ferreira, Eduarda
    2017 INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON COMPUTERS IN EDUCATION (SIIE), 2017,
  • [27] COMMUNICATION STEREOTYPES - IS INTERRACIAL COMMUNICATION POSSIBLE
    LEONARD, R
    LOCKE, DC
    JOURNAL OF BLACK STUDIES, 1993, 23 (03) : 332 - 343
  • [28] Using Tags To Bootstrap Stereotypes And Trust
    Player, Caroline
    Griffiths, Nathan
    AAMAS'17: PROCEEDINGS OF THE 16TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON AUTONOMOUS AGENTS AND MULTIAGENT SYSTEMS, 2017, : 1691 - 1693
  • [29] Musicians crossing musical instrument gender stereotypes: a study of computer-mediated communication
    Abeles, Harold F.
    Hafeli, Mary
    Sears, Colleen
    MUSIC EDUCATION RESEARCH, 2014, 16 (03) : 346 - 366
  • [30] THE ROLE OF GENDER IN RACIAL META-STEREOTYPES AND STEREOTYPES
    Babbitt, Laura G.
    Gaither, Sarah E.
    Toosi, Negin R.
    Sommers, Samuel R.
    SOCIAL COGNITION, 2018, 36 (05) : 589 - 601