Discussion
incongruity
Gender gaps in interpersonal influence are far more complex than many theories account for. Using a field experiment on an anonymous chat platform created to simulate social media conversations during the 2020 presidential primaries, we randomized people to talk with partners of different genders while being represented by avatars that were either consistent or inconsistent with their self-identified gender. This design allowed us to study how expectations of lower political competence among women (gender stereotypes) and differences in the actual text of language used by men and women (gendered performance) interact to create gender inequality in interpersonal political influence. A gender stereotype explanation would have predicted that mislabeling women as men would improve their influence in the conversation, whereas men’s influence would be lower when they were mislabeled as women. By contrast, a gendered behavior explanation would have expected no impact of mislabeling on the persuasiveness of the mislabeled individual. What we found is not consistent with either hypothesis, and instead points to the interaction of both mechanisms via role incongruity.Using multiple metrics of influence in the conversation, we find evidence of a clear gender gap in influence in cross-gender control conversations. However, when women in the conversation are mislabeled as men, their influence does not improve, and instead may actually decrease. Likewise, mislabeling men as women reduces men’s influence and may even reverse the gender gap in influence. We use individual-level metrics of influence, accounting for the partner’s gender, and find that the gender gap seems to exist more because of the perception of the partner’s propensity to be influenced than any gender difference in the subject’s persuasiveness.Men, in general, are much less likely to Additionally, we find gender differences in language use, and evidence that people change their language in response to both the perceived and actual gender and language use of the other person. Men and women use distinct vocabularies in political conversations, which communicate their gender to others. Additionally, men and—especially—women seem to adapt their behavior in response to the perceived gender of the person with whom they are talking. This suggests that performances of gender in political conversation are relational, constructed in response to both stereotypes attached to a conversation partner’s gender presentation and observations of their gender performance.Thus, the complex and dynamic interpersonal construction of gender cannot be easily or durably manipulated using a single, static intervention. Proposed practical solutions and future research on women’s influence must take into account a more complex model than can be achieved by relying on just one of these explanations while holding other features constant. Allowing for this complexity in research designs is particularly important when studying conversation in online spaces, where gender cues are often more easily controlled and more often misinterpreted than in face-to-face discussion. Unfortunately, this also implies that the solutions to improving women’s influence are inherently difficult. Women cannot improve their levels of influence simply by talking more like men or “leaning in.” But neither can women become more influential without accounting for different perceptions of the persuasiveness and persuadability of both men and women.There are several important limitations to this study. First, the discussions are limited to the realm of American politics, which is a highly gendered domain for interpersonal interactionFurthermore, we only looked at Democrats. Gender in politics functions differently across partiesAlso, we considered a single, uniquely gendered primary election cycle. It is possible that our results were affected by gendered differences in candidate support and enthusiasm. In Supplemental Materials Sect. Additionally, our sample is relatively White, highly educated, and excludes people who identify outside the gender binary.  When combined with the “normative” nature of these identities in unmarked situationsFinally, while we provide evidence that gender is communicated and constructed between partners using language, future research should further investigate those dynamics. Additionally, gender is performed in many ways that go beyond language. In in-person interactions, differences in vocal tone, appearance, or body language may additionally contribute to gender differences