The (great) Persuasion Divide? Gender Disparities in Debate Speeches & Evaluations
Abstract: Do men and women persuade differently? Are they evaluated differently? Using a novel data set of 1517 speech transcripts, evaluation scores and demographic data from highest-profile intervarsity debate tournaments, this research investigates spoken verbal tactics across genders and any ensuing impacts on their performance evaluations. I find significant variation in speech patterns across genders. Female speakers use more personal and disclosing speaking style, with more hedging phrases and disfluencies in their speeches. In their answers to questions from opponents during their speeches, they negate less while having notably longer and more vague answers. Evaluation-wise, across debates, having less analytical speaking style and more positive sentiment is associated with higher scores for female speeches. Within debates, except for disfluencies, there is no robust evidence of gender-specific evaluation standards. These findings suggest that women receive lower scores than men because their speeches contain more score-reducing and fewer score-enhancing features, rather than discrimination.
