Raising the Stakes: Target Face and Gender in Feedback Processes

Abstract

Candid evaluative feedback is critical for future performance, but speakers motivated by politeness concerns avoid providing negative feedback in a process termed negativity omission. The present research addresses a gap in the literature on the factors that influence this process, namely target stakes and target gender. Study 1 explores the hypothesis that speakers are more likely to engage in negativity omission for targets with high stakes than those with low stakes in the task under evaluation, but the results do not provide support for the hypothesis. Study 2 finds that speakers demonstrate significantly more negativity omission for female than male targets. Additionally, speakers omit more negative information related to female targets’ warmth than competence, but more negative information related to male targets’ competence than warmth—a pattern that reflects stereotypic beliefs about women’s stakes in communion (e.g., friendliness, trustworthiness) and men’s stakes in agency (e.g., intelligence, efficacy). These gender-biased patterns of omission emerge independently of speakers’ gender and endorsement of sexist beliefs. Findings from Study 2 have implications for gender inequality, especially in evaluative contexts such as the workplace, classroom, and academia. When women receive feedback that is less critical and addresses interpersonal qualities rather than technical skills, they are at a disadvantage for future advancement. These findings are applicable to other marginalized groups, such as racial minorities, who may receive similarly incomplete and biased feedback.