IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/amposc/v58y2014i2p291-306.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does Descriptive Representation Facilitate Women's Distinctive Voice? How Gender Composition and Decision Rules Affect Deliberation

Author

Listed:
  • Tali Mendelberg
  • Christopher F. Karpowitz
  • Nicholas Goedert

Abstract

Does low descriptive representation inhibit substantive representation for women in deliberating groups? We address this question and go beyond to ask if the effects of descriptive representation also depend on decision rule. We conducted an experiment on distributive decisions, randomizing the group's gender composition and decision rule, including many groups, and linking individuals’ predeliberation attitudes to their speech and to postdeliberation decisions. Women's descriptive representation does produce substantive representation, but primarily under majority rule—when women are many, they are more likely to voice women's distinctive concerns about children, family, the poor, and the needy, and less likely to voice men's distinctive concerns. Men's references shift similarly with women's numerical status. These effects are associated with group decisions that are more generous to the poor. Unanimous rule protects women in the numerical minority, mitigating some of the negative effects of low descriptive representation. Descriptive representation matters, but in interaction with the decision rule.

Suggested Citation

  • Tali Mendelberg & Christopher F. Karpowitz & Nicholas Goedert, 2014. "Does Descriptive Representation Facilitate Women's Distinctive Voice? How Gender Composition and Decision Rules Affect Deliberation," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 58(2), pages 291-306, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:amposc:v:58:y:2014:i:2:p:291-306
    DOI: 10.1111/ajps.12077
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12077
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ajps.12077?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Diego Werneck Arguelhes & Juliana Cesario Alvim & Rafaela Nogueira & Henrique Wang, 2024. "“They don't let us speak”: Gender, collegiality, and interruptions in deliberations in the Brazilian Supreme Court," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(1), pages 174-207, March.
    2. José J. Domínguez, 2021. "The Effectiveness of Committee Quotas; The Role of Group Dynamics," ThE Papers 21/12, Department of Economic Theory and Economic History of the University of Granada..
    3. Domínguez, José J., 2023. "Diversified committees in hiring processes: Lab evidence on group dynamics," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    4. Marie Courtemanche & Joanne Connor Green, 2017. "The Influence of Women Legislators on State Health Care Spending for the Poor," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-24, April.
    5. Migheli, Matteo, 2022. "Lost in election. How different electoral systems translate the voting gender gap into gender representation bias," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    6. Patrick E. Shea & Charlotte Christian, 2017. "The Impact of Women Legislators on Humanitarian Military Interventions," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 61(10), pages 2043-2073, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:amposc:v:58:y:2014:i:2:p:291-306. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1540-5907 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.