Editing Negotiation (section)

=== Women ===
Women often excel in collaborative and integrative negotiations, where they can leverage their strong communication skills and empathy to find mutually beneficial solutions. However, they may face challenges in competitive or distributive negotiations, where a more assertive and confrontational approach is typically required. Many of the implications of these findings have strong financial impacts in addition to the social backlash faced by self-advocating women in negotiations, as compared to other advocating women, self-advocating men, and other advocating men. Research in this area has been studied across platforms, in addition to more specific areas like women as physician assistants.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Brianne|first1=Hall|last2=Tracy|first2=Hoelting|date=2015-04-24|title=Influence of negotiation and practice setting on salary disparities between male and female physician assistants|url=http://soar.wichita.edu/handle/10057/11423|language=en-US}}</ref> The backlash associated with this type of behavior is attributed to the fact that to be self-advocated is considered masculine, whereas the alternative, being accommodating, is considered more feminine.<ref name="Gladstone 18–25">{{Cite journal|last1=Gladstone|first1=Eric|last2=O'Connor|first2=Kathleen M.|date=2014-09-01|title=A counterpart's feminine face signals cooperativeness and encourages negotiators to compete|journal=Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes|volume=125|issue=1|pages=18–25|doi=10.1016/j.obhdp.2014.05.001}}</ref> Males, however, do not appear to face any type of backlash for not being self-advocating.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Amanatullah|first1=Emily T.|last2=Tinsley|first2=Catherine H.|date=2013-01-01|title=Punishing female negotiators for asserting too much…or not enough: Exploring why advocacy moderates backlash against assertive female negotiators|journal=Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes|volume=120|issue=1|pages=110–122|doi=10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.03.006|s2cid=14837583 }}</ref>

This research has been supported by multiple studies, including one which evaluated candidates participating in a negotiation regarding compensation. This study showed that women who initiated negotiations were evaluated more poorly than men who initiated negotiations. In another variation of this particular setup, men and women evaluated videos of men and women either accepting a compensation package or initiating negotiations. Men evaluated women more poorly for initiating negotiations, while women evaluated both men and women more poorly for initiating negotiations. In this particular experiment, women were less likely to initiate a negotiation with a male, citing nervousness, but there was no variation with the negotiation initiated with another female.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Bowles|first1=Hannah|last2=Babcock|first2=Linda|last3=Lai|first3=Lei|year=2006|title=Social incentives for gender diVerences in the propensity to initiate negotiations: Sometimes it does hurt to ask|url=https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/cfawis/bowles.pdf|journal= Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes|volume=103|pages=84–103|doi=10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.09.001|s2cid=18202551 }}</ref>

Research also supports the notion that the way individuals respond in a negotiation varies depending on the gender of the opposite party. In all-male groups, the use of deception showed no variation in the level of trust between negotiating parties, however in mixed-sex groups, there was an increase in deceptive tactics when it was perceived that the opposite party was using an accommodating strategy. In all-female groups, there were many shifts in when individuals did and did not employ deception in their negotiation tactics.<ref name="Gladstone 18–25" />