Do Women Make More Credible Threats? Gender Stereotypes, Audience Costs, and Crisis Bargaining

Joshua A. Schwartz, Christopher W. Blair

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

15 Scopus citations


As more women attain executive office, it is important to understand how gender dynamics affect international politics. Toward this end, we present the first evidence that gender stereotypes affect leaders' abilities to generate audience costs. Using survey experiments, we show that female leaders have political incentives to combat gender stereotypes that women are weak by acting "tough"during international military crises. Most prominently, we find evidence that female leaders, and male leaders facing female opponents, pay greater inconsistency costs for backing down from threats than male leaders do against fellow men. These findings point to particular advantages and disadvantages women have in international crises. Namely, female leaders are better able to tie hands - an efficient mechanism for establishing credibility in crises. However, this bargaining advantage means female leaders will also have a harder time backing down from threats. Our findings have critical implications for debates over the effects of greater gender equality in executive offices worldwide.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)872-895
Number of pages24
JournalInternational Organization
Issue number4
StatePublished - Sep 1 2020
Externally publishedYes

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Political Science and International Relations
  • Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management
  • Law


  • Audience costs
  • credibility
  • crisis bargaining
  • female leaders
  • gender
  • inconsistency costs


Dive into the research topics of 'Do Women Make More Credible Threats? Gender Stereotypes, Audience Costs, and Crisis Bargaining'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this