3 ms·

Source?

TulliusCicero 7y ago
https://www.newyorker.com/science/maria-konnikova/lean-out-the-dangers-for-women-who-negotiate# https://www.newyorker.com/science/maria-konnikova/lean-out-t... > In four studies, Bowles and collaborators from Carnegie Mellon found that people penalized women who initiated negotiations for higher compensation more than they did men. The effect held whether they saw the negotiation on video or read about it on paper, whether they viewed it from a disinterested third-party perspective or imagined themselves as senior managers in a corporation evaluating an internal candidate. Even women penalized the women who initiated the conversation, though they also penalized the men who did so. They just didn’t seem to like seeing someone ask for more money. The paper: https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/cfawis/bowles.pdf https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/cfawis/bowles.pdf
- Thorentis 7y ago
  Rubbish "study". Nothing in there is based on reality, but people put in a test environment and asked to try and behave how they would in the real world. Reading written accounts of people asking for a pay rise and deciding what to do? How does that in any way mirror an face to face interaction? All 4 experiments are either on paper, or using video recordings. No statistics, very few people. Just another "gender gap" study that the media can cite to push the narrative.
  - TulliusCicero 7y ago
    How exactly would you measure social 'punishment' in response to negotiating in the real world? Contact random women's bosses right after they attempt to negotiate and ask them how they felt about it? You could set up interviews with real companies using your own candidates who will negotiate or not negotiate as you direct them, but then how do you gather data on the feelings of the bosses? Some things can only really be tested in artificial environments.
    - dahauns 7y ago
      >Some things can only really be tested in artificial environments. What exactly do you think will be tested in that artificial environment when the environment itself (with what I'd hazard to guess quite a list of specifics, many of the "subtle and implicit, but influential" kind) is a central variable of the test? If an observational study of this kind is deemed hard/improbable/impossible to set up - how hard do you think it is to get the artificial setup right? To account for - or even identify - all variables and preconditions? This is so easy to mess up and end up with basically meaningless data. (Yeah, I know - that doesn't mean it won't be published. Everybody raise your hands and shout "Replication Crisis"! :) )

Source?

https://www.newyorker.com/science/maria-konnikova/lean-out-the-dangers-for-women-who-negotiate# https://www.newyorker.com/science/maria-konnikova/lean-out-t... > In four studies, Bowles and collaborators from Carnegie Mellon found that people penalized women who initiated negotiations for higher compensation more than they did men. The effect held whether they saw the negotiation on video or read about it on paper, whether they viewed it from a disinterested third-party perspective or imagined themselves as senior managers in a corporation evaluating an internal candidate. Even women penalized the women who initiated the conversation, though they also penalized the men who did so. They just didn’t seem to like seeing someone ask for more money. The paper: https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/cfawis/bowles.pdf https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/cfawis/bowles.pdf

Thorentis 7y ago
Rubbish "study". Nothing in there is based on reality, but people put in a test environment and asked to try and behave how they would in the real world. Reading written accounts of people asking for a pay rise and deciding what to do? How does that in any way mirror an face to face interaction? All 4 experiments are either on paper, or using video recordings. No statistics, very few people. Just another "gender gap" study that the media can cite to push the narrative.
- TulliusCicero 7y ago
  How exactly would you measure social 'punishment' in response to negotiating in the real world? Contact random women's bosses right after they attempt to negotiate and ask them how they felt about it? You could set up interviews with real companies using your own candidates who will negotiate or not negotiate as you direct them, but then how do you gather data on the feelings of the bosses? Some things can only really be tested in artificial environments.
  - dahauns 7y ago
    >Some things can only really be tested in artificial environments. What exactly do you think will be tested in that artificial environment when the environment itself (with what I'd hazard to guess quite a list of specifics, many of the "subtle and implicit, but influential" kind) is a central variable of the test? If an observational study of this kind is deemed hard/improbable/impossible to set up - how hard do you think it is to get the artificial setup right? To account for - or even identify - all variables and preconditions? This is so easy to mess up and end up with basically meaningless data. (Yeah, I know - that doesn't mean it won't be published. Everybody raise your hands and shout "Replication Crisis"! :) )