Gender inequality in deliberation: Unpacking the black box of interaction

Tali Mendelberg, Christopher F. Karpowitz, J. Baxter Oliphant

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

76 Scopus citations


When and why do women gain from increased descriptive representation in deliberating bodies? Using a large randomized experiment, and linking individual-level speech with assessments of speaker authority, we find that decision rules interact with the number of women in the group to shape the conversation dynamics and deliberative authority, an important form of influence. With majority rule and few women, women experience a negative balance of interruptions when speaking, and these women then lose influence in their own eyes and in others'. But when the group is assigned to unanimous rule, or when women are many, women experience a positive balance of interruptions, mitigating the deleterious effect of small numbers. Men do not experience this pattern. We draw implications for a type of representation that we call authoritative representation, and for democratic deliberation.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)18-44
Number of pages27
JournalPerspectives on Politics
Issue number1
StatePublished - Mar 2014

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Political Science and International Relations


Dive into the research topics of 'Gender inequality in deliberation: Unpacking the black box of interaction'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this