Explaining Differences in Men and Women's Use of Unethical Tactics in Negotiations

Abstract

Emerging evidence suggests that competitiveness and empathy explain men's greater willingness to use unethical tactics in negotiations. We tested whether and how robustly they do with three distinct studies, run with three distinct populations. Simultaneous mediation analyses generally, but not completely, confirmed our expectations. In Study 1, only competitiveness mediated sex differences in unethical negotiation tactics among Chilean business students. Although empathy also explained willingness to use unethical negotiation tactics, the Chilean men and women did not differ in this regard. In Study 2, competitiveness and empathy both mediated sex differences in American business students’ intentions to lie to a client, but competitiveness explained greater variance. In Study 3, both factors explained sex differences in lying to bargaining partners for real stakes by working‐age Americans. Our findings suggest that competitiveness and empathy each explain sex differences in willingness to use unethical tactics, but the former does so more consistently.

Feeling Competitiveness or Empathy Towards Negotiation Counterparts Mitigates Sex Differences in Lying

“…For instance, Kray and Haselhuhn (2012) and Lee et al (2017), despite basing their hypothesis on distinct theoretical perspectives-motivated cognition and evolutionary theory, respectively-both reported results suggesting that competitiveness explains men's willingness to lie and stretch other ethical bounds in negotiations. Pierce and Thompson (2018) directly tested this proposition and confirmed that competitiveness partly mediates this sex difference.…”

“…The Mediating Role of Gender McCabe et al (2006) theorized and provided preliminary evidence that psychological gender mediates the relation between biological sex and ethicality. Pierce and Thompson (2018) further qualified this mediating role of gender. More specifically, they proposed and confirmed hypotheses that two factors associated with psychological gender-competitiveness (expressed more strongly by men) and empathy (expressed more strongly by women)-provide a parsimonious explanation for men's greater willingness to stretch ethical boundaries in negotiations.…”

“…On balance, men express more willingness to lie and use other unethical negotiation tactics than women (e.g., Lewicki & Robinson, 1998;Ma & Parks, 2012;Perry & Nixon, 2005;Robinson et al, 2000). Though the approximate ratio of male to female liars observed in controlled research (e.g., Pierce & Thompson, 2018) closely matches the 2-to-1 ratio of fraud perpetrators reported by Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (2018), this finding in sex differences is less than universal. Researchers also often find women just as willing to lie (e.g., Childs, 2012;Schweitzer & Croson, 1999) or even more so (e.g., Vesely, 2014).…”

“…Both converging theory and emerging evidence provide a strong foundation for our research. The converging theory we draw on identifies psychological gender-dispositional traits (e.g., agreeableness, agency, communion) associated with the sexes-as mediating the relation between sex and ethicality (Pierce & Thompson, 2018). The emerging evidence points to the mitigating role of situational cues in that relation (e.g., Kennedy et al, 2017;Kray & Haselhuhn, 2012).…”

Dynamics of Gender-Specific Behaviors in the Digital Educational Environment

“…Remarkable research was conducted in the field of communication [10]. Explaining the differences between men and women in using unethical tactics for negotiation.…”