This paper examines how group gender composition and decision rules influence women legislators' speech.

Research Context & Design: The study uses experimental methods randomizing both variables. It links individual predeliberation attitudes to post-deliberation outcomes by analyzing speech patterns in simulated deliberative groups.

Findings: Women's descriptive representation produces substantive representation, particularly when they constitute a numerical majority. Under majority rule, women more often voiced concerns about children and poverty while less referencing traditional male issues. The findings also show that group decisions under majority rule tend to be more generous toward the poor.

Why It Matters: Unanimous decision rules can actually weaken the impact of descriptive representation when women are numerically minority groups. These results highlight that gender composition matters in deliberation, but only in interaction with appropriate institutional arrangements.