Coalitions in Mixed-Sex Triads

Abstract

In the experimental study of small little attention has been paid to the problem of differences in behavior between groups homogeneous and heterogeneous with respect to sex. A typical procedure, in fact, is to control for the effect of sex, as by constituting groups all of the same sex. There are, of course, sound reasons for this strategy, since the aim of the experimenter is to manipulate some stated interaction variable, like cohesiveness, communication net, etc. Nevertheless, not only are mixed-sex groups just as natural in their occurrence as any other combination of persons, but there are ample grounds for supposing that mixed-sex groups will act differently from same-sex groups. Differences between the sexes in social interests and values are summarized in Anastasi (1), from which data it is evident that males and females ought to contribute, on the average, different traits to mixed interaction situations. More directly relevant to the present study, however, are the marked differences appearing in a simple game situation (10), leading to the formulation of contrasting sex roles. Males were found to play competitively, with strong motivation to win, whereas females were more concerned with social and ethical considerations, oriented towards arriving at an outcome in the game maximally satisfactory (or fair) to all three participants. It is interesting, then, to ask what happens when these two strategies are placed in contact with each other (that is, by composing groups of both sexes). A second issue in the present case has to do with the relations between majority and segments of the group. It is surprising that this matter, too, has received very little experimental treatment. Most of the literature available deals with minority groups, in the sense of racial or religious affiliations within the dominant white, Protestant society. Bierstedt (3) has remarked upon the significance of majority behavior as a research problem, but he, also, is preoccupied with the intergroup relations in the sense just mentioned. The most directly pertinent study is that by Asch (2), who showed the powerful influence exerted by a majority in bringing about erroneous judgments by a (of one). Among the critical subjects,there were distinguished a group of yielders, who readily followed the suggestion provided by the

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 137 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.