This article develops an integrative framework for understanding gender-based group dynamics based on sex composition. The authors study decisions made by male and female members of a group to eliminate or promote other male and female group members. Study 1 uses game simulations modeled on the television show The Weakest Link to show how male and female players trade off individual versus group utility in a group setting and how such trade-offs affect group dynamics. They identify four patterns of sex-based group dynamics: old boys’ club, queen bee, bounded rationality, and females as finalists but not winners. These patterns are part of a mosaic based on differences in sex composition and sex differences between male and female group members discriminating positively, negatively, or not at all against other male and female group members. The authors propose that differences in the degree of competition versus cooperation in the group, the initial sex composition, and the mean and variance of players’ abilities by sex interactively determine which pattern will be noted. Study 2 uses observational data from The Weakest Link to test these predictions in a field setting. Implications for the motivational, cognitive, and strategic antecedents of gender effects based on sex composition of the group are discussed.
Bettencourt, B., Miller, N., & Hume, D.L. ( 1999). Effects of numerical representation within cooperative settings: Examining the role of salience in in-group favoritism. British Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 265-287.
2.
Biernat, M., Manin, M., & Nelson, T.E. ( 1991). Stereotypes and standards of judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 485-499.
3.
Bray, R.M., Kerr, N.L., & Atkin, R.S. ( 1978). Effects of group size, problem difficulty, and sex on group performance and member reactions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 1224-1240.
4.
Brewer, M.B. ( 1979). Intergroup bias in the minimal intergroup situation: A cognitive-motivational analysis. Psychological Bulletin , 86, 307-324.
5.
Brophy, J. ( 1985). Interactions of male and female students with male and female teachers. In L. Wilkinson, & C. Marrett (Eds.), Gender influences in classroom interaction (pp. 115-142). Orlando, FL : Academic Press.
6.
Deaux, K., & Lewis, L.L. ( 1984). Structure of gender stereotypes: Interrelationships among components and gender label. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 991-1004.
7.
Doise, W., & Sinclair, A. ( 1973). The categorization process in intergroup relations. European Review of Social Psychology, 3, 145-153.
8.
Eagly, A.H., & Karau, S.J. ( 2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice towards female leaders . Psychological Review, 109, 573-598.
9.
Fiske, S.T., & Neuberg, S.L. ( 1990). A continuum model of impression formation from category-based to individuating processes: Influence of information and motivation on attention and interpretation. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 23, pp. 1-74). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
10.
Griffin, P.S. ( 1983). Gymnastics is a girl’s thing: Student participation and interaction patterns in a middle school gymnastics unit. In T. S. Templin & J. Olson (Eds.), Teaching physical education (pp. 71-85). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
11.
Heilman, M.E., & Kram, K.E. ( 1978). Self-derogating behavior in women-fixed or flexible: The effects of co-worker’s sex. Organizational Behavior & Human Performance, 22, 497-507.
12.
Jackson, J.W. ( 1997). Effects of socio-structural and psychological factors on five types of intergroup bias expressed by minority group members toward majority and minority out-group members. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
13.
Jackson, J.W. ( 1999). How variations in social structure affect different types of intergroup bias and different dimensions of social identity in a multi-intergroup setting. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 2, 145-173.
14.
John, O.P., & Robins, R.W. ( 1994). Accuracy and bias in self-perception: Individual differences in self-enhancement and the role of narcissism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 206-219.
15.
Karakowsky, L., & McBey, K. ( 2001). Do my contributions matter? The influence of imputed expertise on member involvement and self-evaluation in the work group. Group & Organization Management, 26, 70-92.
16.
Kerr, R., & Beh, H.C. ( 1995). Attributions of causality in different grades of Australian football league players. Australian Psychologist, 30, 102-108.
17.
Kruglanski, A.W., & Freund, T. ( 1983). The freezing and unfreezing of lay-inferences: Effects on impressional primacy ethnic stereotyping, and numerical anchoring. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 448-468.
18.
Levitt, S.D. ( 2004). Testing theories of discrimination: Evidence from the Weakest Link. Journal of Law & Economics, 47, 431-453
19.
Lippa, R.A., & Beauvais, C. ( 1983). Gender jeopardy: The effects of gender, assessed femininity, and masculinity, and false success/failure feedback on performance in an experimental quiz game. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 344-353.
20.
Lirgg, C.D. ( 1994). Environmental perceptions of students in same-sex and coeducational physical education classes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 183-192.
21.
Macrae, C.N., Hewstone, M., & Griffiths, R.J. (1993). Processing load and memory for stereotype-based information. European Journal of Social Psychology, 23, 77-87.
22.
Martell, R.F. ( 1991). Sex bias at work: The effects of attentional and memory demands on performance ratings of men and women. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21, 1939-1960.
23.
Martell, R.F. ( 1996). What mediates gender bias in work behavior ratings? Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 35, 153-170.
24.
Murray, C.B. ( 1996). Estimating achievement performance: A confirmation bias . Journal of Black Psychology, 22, 67-85.
25.
Otten, S., Mummendey, A., & Blanz, M. ( 1996). Inter-group discrimination in positive and negative outcome allocations: Impact of stimulus valence, relative group status, and relative group size. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 568-581.
26.
Pyszczynski, T., Greenberg, J., & LaPrelle, J. ( 1985). Social comparison after success and failure: Biased search for information consistent with a self-servicing conclusion. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 21, 195-211.
27.
Raghubir, P., & Valenzuela, A. (2006). Center of inattention: Position biases in decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 99, 66-80.
28.
Seta, C.E., & Seta, J.J. ( 1992). Observers and participants in an inter-group setting . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 629-643.
29.
Shaw, M.E. ( 1976). Group dynamics: The psychology of small group behavior . New York: McGraw-Hill.
30.
Sleeper, L.A., & Nigro, G.N. ( 1987). It’s not who you are but who you are with: Self-confidence in achievement settings. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research , 16, 57-69.
31.
Steiner, I.D. ( 1972). Group process and productivity. New York: Academic Press.
32.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. ( 1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Asustin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33-48). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
33.
Taylor, S.E., Fiske, S.T., Etcoff, N.L., & Ruderman, A.J. (1978). Categorical and contextual bases of person memory and stereotyping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 778-793.
34.
Valenzuela, A. & Raghubir, P. ( 2007). The role of strategy in mixed-gender group interactions: A study of the television show The Weakest Link. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 57, 293-303.
35.
Vancouver, J.B., & Ilgen, D.R. ( 1989). Effects of interpersonal orientation and the sex-type of the task on choosing to work alone or in groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 927-934.
36.
Wills, T.A. ( 1981). Downward comparison principles in social psychology. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 245-271.
37.
Woeher, D.J., & Roch, S.G. ( 1996). Context effects in performance evaluations: The impact of rated sex and performance level on performance ratings and behavioral recall . Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 66, 31-41.
