Gender and Negotiation in the Small: Are Women (Perceived to Be) More Cooperative than Men?

We surveyed research by experimental economists that examines gender differences in negotiation in the context of two simple, two-player games. Our purpose is to uncover empirical regularities in the results that might be useful to teachers or practitioners of negotiation. In the dictator game, one player unilaterally determines the division of a fixed amount of money. In the ultimatum game, one player offers a division and the other must accept or reject that offer; if rejected, both players receive a zero payoff. The results have shown that, on balance, women tend to be more egalitarian than men, to expect and ask for less in the negotiation. Women also seem to be more responsive to the context of a negotiation and are less likely to fail to reach an agreement than men. These differences are small, however, in comparison with differences in expectations about what women and men will do. We conclude that stereotyping is alive and well in negotiations and that this can help or hinder negotiation outcomes, depending on the context.     

Symposium on Replication in International Studies Research

The following symposium tackles an important debate in the field of international studies research and in social science research more broadly. Originating as presentations at the 2002 International Studies Association meetings in New Orleans, the following set of papers examines issues concerning the potential replication of research results from a number of different conceptual and technical perspectives. It also spans an array of journals and journal editors in our field that confront issues of replication on a regular basis. The interactions generated by this symposium have already led to the agreement, detailed at the end of the symposium among the four leading internations relations journals to adopt a single common replication policy. The editors of these journals challenge others to follow their lead. The Editors of ISP hope that this symposium begins a larger discussion on these issues and invites commentary from interested scholars. Lastly, I want to thank Nils Petter Gleditsch for soliciting, organizing, and coordinating the contributions to this symposium. Without his work, this project would not have come to fruition as quickly or in as insightful a fashion. Three anonymous reviewers also provided detailed comments on the entire set of articles in this symposium. We are indebted to the care and effort they gave to the project. Mark A. Boyer For the Editors of ISP     

National Human Rights Institutions in Europe

Since the 1990s, the number of national human rights institutions(NHRIs or ‘national institutions’) has been growingin Europe. The aim of these institutions is to help implementinternational human rights at the national level and narrowthe gap between government and civil society. After discussingthe history and role as well as the advantages of creating nationalinstitutions in European states, this article analyses the differentmodels of composition and the principal competences of NHRIsin light of the Paris Principles that provide guidelines forthese institutions. The NHRIs also create networks at nationaland regional levels. The article highlights how NHRIs in Europecan contribute to the implementation of human rights and whatstructure, functions and relationships they may adopt in orderto ensure their effectiveness.     

Opposition Discourses in European Democracies: A Rhetorical Approach

Through this article, I explore the issue of tolerance in the Western thought from a rhetorical perspective. I assume that the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights reflects the framework in which Europeans democracies argue and think today. Consequently, I analyze the Universal Declaration with the help of Toulmin’s model in order to put its backing into light, and compare it to the 1789 Declaration of the Rights of Man. This backing, I argue, echoes the contemporary vision of tolerance in Western democracies. Afterwards, I therefore analyze the concept of tolerance in a multicultural world. This reflection comes within the scope of the current researches in rhetoric as they were launched by Perelman’s Treatise on Argumentation first published in 1958. Having inherited from the 19th-century renewed interests in linguistics and semiotics, the contemporary researches assume an evolutionary and anthropological perspective on rhetoric and argumentation, seen as natural activities of human beings. This discipline, notably developing in the school of Brussels in argumentation [See Danblon, Emmanuelle, La Fonction Persuasive, Paris: Armand Colin, 2002], inspires itself both from Aristotle’s works and from the cognitive movement in contemporary linguistics. It seeks to establish a link between the emergence of rationality and rhetoric and takes its grounds in cognitive sciences as well as anthropological studies, philosophy, logics and theories of emotions. At present, it addresses several issues such as the status of rationality, persuasion and the place of rhetoric and argumentation in contemporary societies. Additional support was provided by the National Science Foundation.     

Judicial Decisions Involving Questions of Public International Law

Netherlands International Law Review -