Collaborative Research in Decision, Risk, and Management Science: Understanding Gender Inequality: The Relative Influence of Institutional Power and Gender Consiousness

决策、风险和管理科学领域的合作研究：理解性别不平等：制度权力和性别意识的相对影响

• 批准号: 9321129
• 负责人: Peregrine Schwartz-Shea
• 金额: $ 1.01万
• 依托单位: University of Utah
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Standard Grant
• 财政年份: 1994
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 1994-08-01 至 1996-07-31
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=9321129&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: Collaborative; Research; Decision; Risk; Management

Game theorists and some feminist scholars would predict that individuals with asymmetric access to institutional power (such as an exit opportunity) should claim more resources than those without such access--regardless of the sex of the individual. Other feminist scholars, in contrast, emphasize the ways in which socialization and other mechanisms can produce gender-role internalization such that men and women of equal power behave differently. Based on this latter research, we would predict interactions between sex and institutional power. To sort out these different arguments, this research pilot tests an experimental study of two-person prisoners' dilemma (PD) games in which an asymmetric exit opportunity is crossed with sex-of-subject. In some conditions, only men will have the exit opportunity while in others only women will have the exit opportunity. (Same-sex conditions are also explored.) The sex of an individual's body, however, does not necessarily match the "sex" of his or her psyche. Thus, in order to understand individual differences among women (and among men) the research explores correlation between behavior and measures of gender-role internalization (i.e., the "sex" of one's psyche) and "gender" consciousness," (i.e., beliefs about proper gender roles). The results of the longer term research program may have important implications for the broader policy question of how to lessen gender inequality. Can gender inequality be corrected by changing the balance of institutional power (in this case access to an exit option)? Or, are changes in the socialization process also necessary before equal outcomes can be expected?

博弈理论家和一些女权主义学者会预测，拥有不对称的制度权力（如退出机会）的个人应该比没有这种权力的人要求更多的资源-无论个人的性别如何。 与此相反，其他女性主义学者则强调社会化和其他机制可以产生性别角色内化的方式，从而使权力平等的男性和女性表现不同。 基于后一项研究，我们可以预测性别与制度权力之间的相互作用。 为了理清这些不同的论点，本研究的试点测试的实验研究的两个人的囚徒困境（PD）游戏中，一个不对称的退出机会是交叉与性别的主题。 在某些情况下，只有男性才有退出机会，而在其他情况下，只有女性才有退出机会。 （同性恋的情况也被探索。 然而，一个人身体的性别并不一定与他或她心灵的“性别”相匹配。 因此，为了了解女性（和男性）之间的个体差异，本研究探讨了行为与性别角色内化（即，一个人心灵的“性”）和“性别”意识，”（即，正确的性别角色）。 长期研究方案的结果可能对如何减少性别不平等这一更广泛的政策问题产生重要影响。 能否通过改变体制权力的平衡（在这种情况下，获得退出选择）来纠正性别不平等？ 或者，社会化过程中的变化是否也是实现平等结果的必要条件？