IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jscscx/v13y2024i3p152-d1352889.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When Women Ask, Does Curiosity Help?

Author

Listed:
  • Alexandra Mislin

    (Kogod School of Business, American University, 4400 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20016, USA
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Ece Tuncel

    (George Herbert Walker School of Business and Technology, Webster University, Webster Groves, MO 63119, USA
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Lucie Prewitt

    (Institute for Policy & Social Research, The University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66045, USA)

Abstract

This research examines the potential social benefits of displaying curiosity during a negotiation. Past research has found women who ask directly in distributive agentic settings can suffer negative social consequences and obtain worse objective outcomes compared to men. In three experiments (N = 600) using different negotiation contexts, we found men and women who approach negotiations with curiosity reap the same economic benefits of asking directly but without incurring a social cost. We also found that perceived warmth partially accounts for the positive effects of curiosity (vs. asking directly) on negotiators’ social outcomes. Finally, our results reveal women feel more comfortable conveying curiosity compared to using a direct approach in their negotiations. We discuss the implications of these findings in enhancing negotiation effectiveness for both women and men.

Suggested Citation

  • Alexandra Mislin & Ece Tuncel & Lucie Prewitt, 2024. "When Women Ask, Does Curiosity Help?," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-24, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:13:y:2024:i:3:p:152-:d:1352889
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/13/3/152/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/13/3/152/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paula England & Andrew Levine & Emma Mishel, 2020. "Progress toward gender equality in the United States has slowed or stalled," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 117(13), pages 6990-6997, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zuazu-Bermejo, Izaskun, 2022. "Robots and women in manufacturing employment," ifso working paper series 19, University of Duisburg-Essen, Institute for Socioeconomics (ifso).
    2. Daniela Grunow & Torsten Lietzmann, 2021. "Women's employment transitions: The influence of her, his, and joint gender ideologies," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 45(3), pages 55-86.
    3. Buhai, I. Sebastian & van der Leij, Marco J., 2023. "A Social Network Analysis of Occupational Segregation," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    4. Mensah, Aziz & Toivanen, Susanna & Diewald, Martin & Ul Hassan, Mahmood & Nyberg, Anna, 2022. "Workplace gender harassment, illegitimate tasks, and poor mental health: Hypothesized associations in a Swedish cohort," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 315(C).
    5. Zhang, Qi-nan & Zhang, Fan-fan & Mai, Qiang, 2023. "Robot adoption and labor demand: A new interpretation from external competition," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    6. Friedrich, Teresa Sophie & Laible, Marie-Christine & Pollak, Reinhard & Schongen, Sebastian & Schulz, Benjamin & Vicari, Basha, 2021. "Grasping Digitalization in the Working World: An Example From the German National Educational Panel Study [Die Erfassung von Digitalisierung in der Arbeitswelt: Ein Beispiel aus dem Nationalen Bild," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 72(4), pages 415-452.
    7. Charvonne N. Holliday & Kristin Bevilacqua & Karen Trister Grace & Langan Denhard & Arshdeep Kaur & Janice Miller & Michele R. Decker, 2021. "Examining the Neighborhood Attributes of Recently Housed Partner Violence Survivors in Rapid Rehousing," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(8), pages 1-22, April.
    8. Livia Sz. Oláh & Rudolf Richter & Irena Kotowska, 2023. "Introduction to the Special Collection on The new roles of women and men and implications for families and societies," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 48(29), pages 849-866.
    9. Demirović, Melisa & Rogers, Jonathan & Robbins, Blaine G, 2022. "Gender and Gender Role Attitudes in Wage Negotiations: Evidence from an Online Experiment," SocArXiv 7esb9, Center for Open Science.
    10. Jennifer L. Hook & Eunjeong Paek, 2020. "A Stalled Revolution? Change in Women's Labor Force Participation during Child‐Rearing Years, Europe and the United States 1996–2016," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 46(4), pages 677-708, December.
    11. Guangye He & Xiaogang Wu, 2021. "Family status and women’s career mobility during urban China’s economic transition," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 44(8), pages 189-224.
    12. Yue Qian & Yang Hu, 2021. "Couples' changing work patterns in the United Kingdom and the United States during the COVID‐19 pandemic," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(S2), pages 535-553, July.

    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:gam:jscscx:v:13:y:2024:i:3:p:152-:d:1352889. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.