Appeasement has been both beneficial and risky in asymmetrical conflicts. Appeasement as a response to the threat of aggression can be a successful strategy by containing aggression but can also be...Show moreAppeasement has been both beneficial and risky in asymmetrical conflicts. Appeasement as a response to the threat of aggression can be a successful strategy by containing aggression but can also be exploited by the opposing party. However, research is lacking in the field of whether gender differences influence behaviour towards appeasement. Males have been shown to be more risk-taking and use more costly aggression compared to females. Gender may therefore be influential to behaviour in conflicts involving appeasing effects. This paper explores the behaviour of male and female attackers' aggression in asymmetrical conflict through a transfer attacker-defender contest (TAD-C). We hypothesized that aggression would decrease with increasing levels of transfer, and that males would respond more aggressively to increasing levels of transfer than females. The strategy method was used where 279 participants were assigned an attacker or defender role. Attackers first received a transfer of Monetary Units (MU) at seven different levels from the defender, in addition to the initial 30 MU. Based on this, they decided on a conflict investment toward the defender. Lastly, attackers declared their expected investment from defenders. Attackers’ aggression was measured based on their conflict investment to seven levels of transfer. The repeated measures analysis of variance conveyed there were no significant differences between male and female attacker aggression toward increasing levels of transfers from the defending party. In conclusion, no significant gender differences in behaviour towards appeasement were found. Thus, the study questions whether gender differences exist in appeasement conflicts and decision making practices.Show less
