Abstract: 

Abstract: 

Abstract: In many organisational contexts, managers rely on limited information—such as employee self-evaluations or observable relative performance—when making decisions about task allocation, promotions, and compensation. While there is ample evidence on the role of individuals’ often-biased self-representations, much less is known about how such expressions are judged by others. This study examines how managers interpret signals of employee performance and self-confidence, focusing on whether these interpretations differ systematically by manager gender and whether certain self-assessment biases are perceived as typically male or female. To address these questions, I conduct a laboratory experiment with 192 employers evaluating 576 employees. The results reveal substantial gender differences: female employers consistently perceive employees—particularly high performers—as about 0.2–0.3 standard deviations less confident than male employers. Providing explicit information on self-confidence inaccuracies strongly activates gender stereotypes: principals predominantly associate underconfidence with female employees and overconfidence with male employees. These findings underscore the presence of social biases in interpreting performance and self-confidence, with potential implications for gender dynamics and managerial decisions in organisations that rely on employee self-evaluations.

Abstract: Using an interactive worker–employer salary negotiation for an incentivised laboratory job, this paper examines gender differences in negotiation behaviour and outcomes. Despite negotiating for the same position, women ask for less and display greater accommodative behaviour towards the counterpart. These strategies increase the likelihood of agreement but result in lower negotiated salaries. Conditional on initial asks, outcome differences largely disappear. The findings provide novel evidence on accommodation as a behavioural mechanism in negotiations and offer new insights into the origins of gender pay disparities in the labour market.

Abstract: Women are commonly found to negotiate differently from men, yet the mechanisms behind the gender gap are less known. By using a unique design of a wage-negotiation experiment in which participants bid against four others in a group and in which there are no concerns related to fear of social costs or discrimination, we show a persistent gender gap in requests—women bid too high and fail in the negotiation from doing so. While risk preferences, productivity and outside option account for some of the gap, the main reason is a large gender gap in beliefs on how others negotiate. The paper thus sheds light on the importance of policies targeting beliefs in helping to reduce gender gaps in economic outcomes resulting from negotiations.