One Angry Woman: Anger Expression Increases Influence for Men, but Decreases Influence for Women, During Group Deliberation

Jessica Salerno, Liana C. Peter-Hagene

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    11 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    We investigated whether expressing anger increases social influence for men, but diminishes social influence for women, during group deliberation. In a deception paradigm, participants believed they were engaged in a computer-mediated mock jury deliberation about a murder case. In actuality, the interaction was scripted. The script included 5 other mock jurors who provided verdicts and comments in support of the verdicts; 4 agreed with the participant and 1 was a "holdout" dissenter. Holdouts expressed their opinions with no emotion, anger, or fear and had either male or female names. Holdouts exerted no influence on participants' opinions when they expressed no emotion or fear. Participants' confidence in their own verdict dropped significantly, however, after male holdouts expressed anger. Yet, anger expression undermined female holdouts: Participants became significantly more confident in their original verdicts after female holdouts expressed anger-even though they were expressing the exact same opinion and emotion as the male holdouts. Mediation analyses revealed that participants drew different inferences from male versus female anger, which created a gender gap in influence during group deliberation. The current study has implications for group decisions in general, and jury deliberations in particular, by suggesting that expressing anger might lead men to gain influence, but women to lose influence over others (even when making identical arguments). These diverging consequences might result in women potentially having less influence on societally important decisions than men, such as jury verdicts. (PsycINFO Database Record

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    JournalLaw and Human Behavior
    DOIs
    StateAccepted/In press - Aug 31 2015

    Fingerprint

    Anger
    anger
    deliberation
    Group
    emotion
    Fear
    Emotions
    Expressed Emotion
    anxiety
    group decision
    Homicide
    Deception
    Deliberation
    homicide
    Names
    mediation
    confidence
    Verdict
    paradigm
    gender

    Keywords

    • Emotion
    • Gender
    • Jury decision making
    • Persuasion
    • Social influence

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Law
    • Psychiatry and Mental health
    • Psychology(all)
    • Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)

    Cite this

    @article{c5025092ba7c4e4883dc288725756e29,
    title = "One Angry Woman: Anger Expression Increases Influence for Men, but Decreases Influence for Women, During Group Deliberation",
    abstract = "We investigated whether expressing anger increases social influence for men, but diminishes social influence for women, during group deliberation. In a deception paradigm, participants believed they were engaged in a computer-mediated mock jury deliberation about a murder case. In actuality, the interaction was scripted. The script included 5 other mock jurors who provided verdicts and comments in support of the verdicts; 4 agreed with the participant and 1 was a {"}holdout{"} dissenter. Holdouts expressed their opinions with no emotion, anger, or fear and had either male or female names. Holdouts exerted no influence on participants' opinions when they expressed no emotion or fear. Participants' confidence in their own verdict dropped significantly, however, after male holdouts expressed anger. Yet, anger expression undermined female holdouts: Participants became significantly more confident in their original verdicts after female holdouts expressed anger-even though they were expressing the exact same opinion and emotion as the male holdouts. Mediation analyses revealed that participants drew different inferences from male versus female anger, which created a gender gap in influence during group deliberation. The current study has implications for group decisions in general, and jury deliberations in particular, by suggesting that expressing anger might lead men to gain influence, but women to lose influence over others (even when making identical arguments). These diverging consequences might result in women potentially having less influence on societally important decisions than men, such as jury verdicts. (PsycINFO Database Record",
    keywords = "Emotion, Gender, Jury decision making, Persuasion, Social influence",
    author = "Jessica Salerno and Peter-Hagene, {Liana C.}",
    year = "2015",
    month = "8",
    day = "31",
    doi = "10.1037/lhb0000147",
    language = "English (US)",
    journal = "Law and Human Behavior",
    issn = "0147-7307",
    publisher = "Springer New York",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - One Angry Woman

    T2 - Anger Expression Increases Influence for Men, but Decreases Influence for Women, During Group Deliberation

    AU - Salerno, Jessica

    AU - Peter-Hagene, Liana C.

    PY - 2015/8/31

    Y1 - 2015/8/31

    N2 - We investigated whether expressing anger increases social influence for men, but diminishes social influence for women, during group deliberation. In a deception paradigm, participants believed they were engaged in a computer-mediated mock jury deliberation about a murder case. In actuality, the interaction was scripted. The script included 5 other mock jurors who provided verdicts and comments in support of the verdicts; 4 agreed with the participant and 1 was a "holdout" dissenter. Holdouts expressed their opinions with no emotion, anger, or fear and had either male or female names. Holdouts exerted no influence on participants' opinions when they expressed no emotion or fear. Participants' confidence in their own verdict dropped significantly, however, after male holdouts expressed anger. Yet, anger expression undermined female holdouts: Participants became significantly more confident in their original verdicts after female holdouts expressed anger-even though they were expressing the exact same opinion and emotion as the male holdouts. Mediation analyses revealed that participants drew different inferences from male versus female anger, which created a gender gap in influence during group deliberation. The current study has implications for group decisions in general, and jury deliberations in particular, by suggesting that expressing anger might lead men to gain influence, but women to lose influence over others (even when making identical arguments). These diverging consequences might result in women potentially having less influence on societally important decisions than men, such as jury verdicts. (PsycINFO Database Record

    AB - We investigated whether expressing anger increases social influence for men, but diminishes social influence for women, during group deliberation. In a deception paradigm, participants believed they were engaged in a computer-mediated mock jury deliberation about a murder case. In actuality, the interaction was scripted. The script included 5 other mock jurors who provided verdicts and comments in support of the verdicts; 4 agreed with the participant and 1 was a "holdout" dissenter. Holdouts expressed their opinions with no emotion, anger, or fear and had either male or female names. Holdouts exerted no influence on participants' opinions when they expressed no emotion or fear. Participants' confidence in their own verdict dropped significantly, however, after male holdouts expressed anger. Yet, anger expression undermined female holdouts: Participants became significantly more confident in their original verdicts after female holdouts expressed anger-even though they were expressing the exact same opinion and emotion as the male holdouts. Mediation analyses revealed that participants drew different inferences from male versus female anger, which created a gender gap in influence during group deliberation. The current study has implications for group decisions in general, and jury deliberations in particular, by suggesting that expressing anger might lead men to gain influence, but women to lose influence over others (even when making identical arguments). These diverging consequences might result in women potentially having less influence on societally important decisions than men, such as jury verdicts. (PsycINFO Database Record

    KW - Emotion

    KW - Gender

    KW - Jury decision making

    KW - Persuasion

    KW - Social influence

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84940504086&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84940504086&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1037/lhb0000147

    DO - 10.1037/lhb0000147

    M3 - Article

    JO - Law and Human Behavior

    JF - Law and Human Behavior

    SN - 0147-7307

    ER -