Taking sides: Gender and third‐party partisanship in disputes

• Author: Andrew Krajewski,Ethan M. Rogers,Mark T. Berg,Richard B. Felson
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12215
• Date: 01 November 2019
• Published date: 01 November 2019

Received: 8 October 2018 Revised: 29 April 2019 Accepted: 1 May 2019

DOI: 10.1111/1745-9125.12215

ARTICLE

Taking sides: Gender and third-party partisanship

in disputes∗

Ethan M. Rogers1Richard B. Felson2Mark T. Berg1

Andrew Krajewski2

1Department of Sociology, University of Iowa

Public Policy Center, University of Iowa

2Department of Sociology and Criminology,

Pennsylvania State University

Correspondence

Ethan M. Rogers,Public Policy Center, Uni-

versityof Iowa, 207 South Quadrangle, 310 S.

GrandAvenue, Iowa City,IA 52242.

Email:ethan-rogers@uiowa.edu

Fundinginformation

NationalInstitute of Justice, Grant/Award

Number:#2012-91288-PA-IJ

∗Theaut horswould like to thank the anony-

mousreviewers and Janet Lauritsen for their

constructivefeedback during the review

process.

Abstract

We examine the role of a norm protecting womenin under-

standing third-party partisanship in verbal and violent dis-

putes. Our analyses are based on reports provided by male

inmates and men they know who have never been arrested.

The results show that third parties are more likely to sup-

port female adversaries than male adversaries. The gender

effect is stronger when we control for the relational dis-

tance between adversaries, which indicates that a privacy

norm might inhibit this normative protection. The gender

effect is somewhat weaker when we control for the relative

physical size of the adversaries, which indicates that a

general norm protecting vulnerable people partly explains

the gender effect. The strong gender effect that remains,

however, demonstrates the importance of the normative

protection of women, regardless of relative size, during

disputes. The results have implications for research on

situational factors in violence and violence against women.

KEYWORDS

conflict, gender, partisanship, third parties, violence

Whether a dispute culminates in physical violence depends, in part, on social norms. Some scholars

have argued that when the dispute is between a man and a woman, a norm protecting women (NPW)

inhibits the man from attacking the woman and motivates third parties to protect her (Felson, 2002;

Pinker, 2011; Straus, 2006). Researchers suggest this norm might explain why men commit less

physical and verbal aggression against women than against other men (Archer, 2000, 2006; Cross &

Campbell, 2011, 2012; Cross, Tee, & Campbell, 2011). Support for the NPW’s effects on third parties

comes from a broad body of research findings indicating that third parties are more likely to condemn

Criminology. 2019;57:579–602. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/crim © 2019 American Society of Criminology 579

580 ROGERS ET AL.

male aggression against women than male aggression against men. Evidence reviewed in this article

shows that third parties evaluate it more negatively, punish it more harshly, and report it to legal

authorities more frequently. The effectof gender on third-par ty partisanship during disputes, however,

has never been studied. In addition, researchers have not studied why gender influences partisanship

or other third-party involvement in disputes. Understanding the nature of these effects is important in

the study of gender violence and dispute escalation.

Partisans refer to third parties who provide support to one adversary in a dispute over another by

acting as informers, advisers, advocates, allies, or surrogates (Black & Baumgartner, 1983). They can

influence whether altercations become violent, whether an adversary is injured, and whether one adver-

sary prevails over the other (Cooney, 1998; Felson & Steadman, 1983; Pruitt & Rubin, 1986). Partisans

may play a particularly important role in intergender disputes if the NPW leads them to intervene on

behalf of women.

Social norms, however, vary in their degree of application and enforcement (Morris, 1956). When

witnessing interpersonal disputes, third parties may not protect women when they think it might be

costly or they do not feel personallyresponsible for handling the situation (Schwartz, 1968). They may

find it dangerous to support women during their altercations with men, particularly when those men are

violent offenders. High costs have been shown toi nterfere with the tendency to protect women during

disasters. For instance, evidence suggests that men are more likely to survive maritime disasters than

women in spite of the NPW (Elinder & Erixson, 2012). Apparently, the tendency of men to prioritize

women’s access to lifeboats on the Titanic was an exception to this pattern (Frey, Savage, & Torgler,

2011; Hall, 1986).

In addition, scholars havenot sufficiently evaluated whether other conflict-related norms have impli-

cations for the association between gender and third-party partisanship. First, the impact of the NPW

may be offset by the norm of privacy. A privacy norm may inhibit partisanship on behalf of women

during intergender disputes because disputes between men and women tend to involve people in close

relationships. Second, a vulnerability norm, rather than the NPW, may explain why third parties are

more supportive of women. It may be that support for women reflects a tendency to protect persons

who are perceived as more physically vulnerable. This norm is not exclusive to women but applies to

anyone who is perceived to have a weak coercive capacity (Pruitt & Rubin, 1986). Scholars have not

examined the vulnerability norm as an alternative explanation of gender effects on partisanship.

In this research, we assess whether the gender of adversaries is associated with third-party

partisanship in violent and nonviolent disputes reported by men. We base our analyses on a survey of

recently admitted male prison inmates and their male contacts in the community who had never been

arrested. Each respondent was asked to describe a verbal and a physically violent dispute that they

had been involved in while living in the community. These data contain information on the situational

characteristics of disputes that is not available in most other studies (cf. Phillips & Cooney, 2005).

Moreover, our use of a sample of inmates and their community contacts, rather than a sample of the

general population, allows for us to obtain information on a sufficient number of violent incidents

(see Lauritsen & Laub, 2007).

We examine three issues in this research. First, we investigate whether third parties are more likely

to support female adversaries than male adversaries. Second, we examine whether the effect of the

adversary’s gender on third-party support for adversaries increases when we control for the relational

distance between adversaries. A suppressor effect would indicate that a privacy norm offsets the

effects of the NPW. Finally, we test whether the effect of the adversary’s gender decreases when we

control for the relative physical size of adversaries. Evidence of mediation would mean that gender

effects are a result of a vulnerability norm, in which people intervene on behalf of physically weaker

parties.