Gender and Negotiation in Model UN Role-Playing Simulations

Abstract

This article reports on the relationship between gender and participation at the 2010 Southwest Florida Model United Nations (SWFLMUN). Three major findings emerge from this research: (1) Even though more females participated in the SWFLMUN than males, males accounted for most of the speeches and played more decisive roles in the formulation of the committee resolutions; (2) male and female delegates employed similar negotiating styles; and (3) surveys administered to delegates suggest that males and females derived about the same amount of satisfaction from the conference but that males, paradoxically, were more likely to report barriers to participation than females. These results leave the impression that gender is a significant, but unremarked factor in shaping participation. These findings are discussed with respect to a normative conception of Model UN (MUN) as a mode of global citizenship. MUN is designed to overcome national ethnocentrism by affirming the existence of multiple perspectives on world issues and by establishing a deliberative process through which these different interests and perspectives can be negotiated. The results of this research, however, suggest that gender stereotypes may alter the kind of political socialization that is both expressed and reproduced through MUN. Substantive inequalities associated with these stereotypes may be infecting formally inclusive public spheres—such as MUN—with the effect of coding politics as a competitive, male domain.

Keywords:

• gender
• Model UN
• negotiation

Notes

Note: Words in quotations are direct quotes taken from the messages in the simulation (studied in Florea et al. 2003). All other points refer to the overall content, style, tactics, and tone of message.

Abbreviations used in Tables 4, 5, and 6 are as follows: SA = strongly agree, A = agree, N = neutral, D = disagree, and SD = strongly disagree.

The author acknowledges the valuable assistance he received in conducting this research from the following individuals: Tray Batchler, Brandon Stewart, Ajla Memic, Tamara Paquete, and Diana Peguese. The first three were students in the undergraduate Political Science program at Florida Gulf Coast University at the time of this research, the fourth was a graduate student in the Public Administration Program, and the fifth was an employee of the Florida Gulf Coast University library.

See Fraser (1992) for a discussion of how gender- and class-based forms of domination can operate subtextually within the context of the bourgeois public sphere.

The ICONs project has been operating out of the University of Maryland for the past 25 years, delivering computer-mediated simulations to participating middle schools, high schools, and universities. For more information about the ICONs project, see www.icons.umd.edu.

These affinities can be understood in terms of the distinction Fisher and Ury (1981) draw between position-based and principle-based bargaining. Conflictual bargaining is marked by asserting one's interests in terms of an inflexible bargaining position. A negotiation is won by extracting concessions from other participants and minimizing deviations from one's own position. Conflict, self-interest, and assertiveness are self-reinforcing. In contrast, collaborative negotiating styles view participants in a negotiation as a member of a problem-solving team rather than competitors. This approach to negotiation is marked by willingness to engage in reciprocal interactions and to explore creative solutions to problems.

Focus group discussions were conducted at Fort Myers High School and Gulf Coast High School on April 23, 2012.