Tables
Table 3.1.
Main Hypotheses about Gender Composition and Decision Rules of Small Groups 75
Table 4.1.
Experimental Conditions and Sample Size 109
Table 5.1.
Average Individual Proportion Talk by Gender and Experimental Condition 120
Table 5.2.
Determinants of the Gender Gap in Speech Participation in Mixed-Gender Groups (Group-Level Analysis) 123
Table 5.3.
Determinants of Speech Participation in Mixed-Gender Groups (Individual-Level Analysis) 125
Table 5.4.
Effects of Gender and Decision Rule on Token Speech Participation (Group-Level Analysis) 128
Table 5.5.
The Effect of Proportion Talk on Self-Efficacy, Mixed-Gender Groups Only (Individual-Level Analysis) 131
Table 5.6.
Determinants of Gender Gap in Influence (Group-Level Analysis) 136
Table 5.7.
Results of Mediation Analysis 138
Table 6.1.
Mean Differences between Men and Women 150
Table 6.2.
Mechanisms Explaining Proportion Talk across Experimental Conditions, Women Only 153
Table 6.3.
Mechanisms Explaining Proportion Talk across Experimental Conditions, Men Only 154
Table 7.1.
Frequency of Care Issue Mentions among Women: Egalitarianism Controls vs. Preference Controls 183
Table 7.2.
Probability of First Mention of Care Category among Women 185
Table 7.3.
Effects of Person’s Frequency of Care Issues on Evaluations of Group Functioning 192
Table 8.1.
Negative Proportion of Men’s and Women’s Interruptions Received, Separately by Male and Female Interrupters, Mixed-Gender Groups Only 210
Table 8.2.
Proportion of Turns Receiving Positive and Negative Interruptions, Mixed-Gender Groups Only 216
Table 8.3.
Elaborated Proportion of Positive Interruptions to Women from Men, Mixed-Gender Groups Only 221
Table 8.4.
Panel A: Effect of Negative Proportion of Interruptions Received on Others’ Ratings of Speaker’s Influence, All Groups Panel B: Effect of Negative Proportion of Interruptions Received on Self-Rating of Speaker’s Influence, All Groups 224
Table 8.5.
Effect of the Proportion of Speaking Turns Receiving Positive Interruptions on Women’s Proportion Talk 228
Table 8.6.
Group-Level Effects on Total Number of Interruptions, Mixed-Gender and Enclave Groups 230
Table 9.1.
Effects of Experimental Conditions on Male and Female Certainty about Postdeliberation Preferences, Mixed-Gender Groups Only 247
Table 9.2.
Effect of Experimental Conditions on Maximum Endorsed Floor Amount by Gender, Mixed-Gender Groups Only 252
Table 9.3.
Endorsement of or Opposition to Principles Other than Most Preferred 258
Table 9.4.
Women’s Preference Expression and Group Generosity toward the Poor, Mixed-Gender Groups Only 265
Table 10.1.
Ratio of Proportion of Turns Taken by Women to Proportion of Women Attending, Mixed-Gender Groups Only 285
Table 10.2.
Effect of Female Board Chairs on the Ratio of Proportion of Turns Taken by Women to Proportion of Women, Mixed-Gender Groups Only 289
Table 10.3.
Effect of Gender Composition of the Proportion Recorded Comments among Nonchair Women, Mixed-Gender Boards Only (Individual-Level Analysis) 291
Table A5.1.
Equality of the Distribution of Proportion Talk 371
Table A5.2.
Effect of Rule and Composition on Feeling that “My Voice Was Heard” during Group Discussion, Mixed-Gender Groups Only 372
Table A5.3.
Determinants of the Gender Gap in Influence with Interactions between Decision Rule and Controls, Mixed-Gender Groups Only 373
Table A6.1.
Mean Characteristics across Conditions, Women Only 374
Table A7.1.
Regression Models Generating Predicted Probabilities of Mention/Frequency 378
Table A7.2.
Regression Models Generating Predicted Probabilities of Mention/Frequency for Summary Measure of Care and Financial Issues 386
Table A7.3.
Frequency of Care Issue Mentions among Women: Replication of Linear Model with TM 388
Table A8.1.
Elaborated Proportion of Positive or Negative Interruptions, Mixed-Gender Groups Only 396
Table A9.1.
Individual-Level Distribution of Redistribution Preferences before and after Deliberation (%) 397
Table A9.2.
Effect of Experimental Conditions on the Likelihood of Having a Female Agenda Setter, Mixed-Gender Groups Only 398
Table A9.3.
Effect of Experimental Conditions on Average Maximum Endorsed Safety Net Amount by Women, Group-Level Analysis, Mixed-Gender Groups Only 399
Table A9.4.
Effect of Speaking Time and Gender on Expressions of Safety Net Generosity, by Gender Composition, Mixed-Gender/Majority Rule Groups Only 400
Table A9.5.
Effect of Majority Female Groups on Group’s Safety Net Generosity, by Decision Rule, All Groups 400
Table A9.6.
Effect of Gender Composition and Rule on Safety Net Generosity, Mixed-Gender Groups Only 401
Table A9.7.
Relationship between Endorsed Preferences and Group’s Safety Net Generosity, Group-Level Analysis, Mixed-Gender Groups Only 402
Table A9.8.
Effect of Endorsed Preferences, Gender Composition and Rule on Safety Net Generosity, Mixed-Gender Groups Only 404
Table A9.9.
Relationship between Care Issues and Group’s Safety Net Generosity 405
Table A10.1.
Equality Ratio, by Gender Composition and Female Leadership 406
Table A10.2.
Determinants of Female Chairs 407
Table A10.3.
Ratio of Proportion of Turns Taken by Women to Proportion of Women Attending, Civic Dialogue Groups 408
