No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
An Empirical Test of the Gender-Linked Language Effect in a Public Speaking Setting
Abstract
This study tested the gender-linked language effect in a public speaking setting by having university students and older non-students rate transcripts of beginning public speaking students' first in-class speech. The resulting Speech Dialect Attitudinal Scale (SDAS) data were of high reliability and across rater groups yielded a consistent factor structure: Socio-Intellectual Status, Aesthetic Quality, and Dynamism. The significant MANOVA and planned comparisons provided support for the gender-linked language effect and showed its dimensional makeup. On the basis of their language alone, female speakers were in general rated higher on both Socio-Intellectual Status and Aesthetic Quality, the former finding established for the first time. Males were in general rated higher on Dynamism. These judgments were similar for raters of both age groups, and for male and female raters alike. Results are discussed in terms of their support for the gender-linked language effect and their implications for further research.
... These conflicting findings regarding the most preferred language variety, i.e., French vs. Luxembourgish, might be a result of methodological differences, such as different semantic differential scales (i.e., modern, useful, pleasant) of the questionnaires. Only Lehnert (2018) used the Attitudes towards Language (AtoL) questionnaire (Schoel et al. 2012b), one among numerous standardised questionnaires in language attitudes research (Giles and Rakić 2014;Mulac and Lundell 1982;Zahn and Hopper 1985). By using the AtoL questionnaire, Lehnert (2018) aimed to measure language attitudes exclusively, as opposed to speaker evaluation. ...
... In further analyses, researchers aimed to contextualise the AtoL questionnaire within previous methodological and theorical approaches to language attitudes (Fiske et al. 2002;Mulac and Lundell 1982;Zahn and Hopper 1985). More specifically, the factor Sound was found to be potentially related to the attitude dimension of solidarity (integrative attitudes) (Gardner 1988;Lambert et al. 1968), since measures of warmth (Fiske et al. 2002) and aesthetic quality (Mulac and Lundell 1982) were moderately correlated with this factor. ...
... In further analyses, researchers aimed to contextualise the AtoL questionnaire within previous methodological and theorical approaches to language attitudes (Fiske et al. 2002;Mulac and Lundell 1982;Zahn and Hopper 1985). More specifically, the factor Sound was found to be potentially related to the attitude dimension of solidarity (integrative attitudes) (Gardner 1988;Lambert et al. 1968), since measures of warmth (Fiske et al. 2002) and aesthetic quality (Mulac and Lundell 1982) were moderately correlated with this factor. Conversely, Structure showed a stronger correlation to competence (Fiske et al. 2002) and socio-intellectual status measures (Mulac and Lundell 1982), indicating that this factor is related to the attitude dimension of status (Gardner 1988;Lambert et al. 1968). ...
Language maintenance efforts aim to bolster attitudes towards endangered languages by providing them with a standard variety as a means to raise their status and prestige. However, the introduced variety can vary in its degrees of standardisation. This paper investigates whether varying degrees of standardisation surface in explicit attitudes towards standard varieties in endangered vernacular speech communities. Following sociolinguistic models of standardisation, we suggest that explicit attitudes towards the standard variety indicate its acceptance in vernacular speech communities, reflecting its overall degree of standardisation. We use the standardised Attitudes towards Language (AtoL) questionnaire to investigate explicit attitudes towards the respective standard varieties in two related vernacular speech communities—the Belgische Eifel in Belgium and the Éislek in Luxembourg. The vernacular of these speech communities, Moselle Franconian, is considered generally vulnerable (UNESCO), and the two speech communities have opted to introduce different standard varieties: Standard Luxembourgish in Luxembourg shows lower degrees of standardisation and is only partially implemented. In contrast, Standard German in the Belgian speech community is highly standardised and completely implemented. Results show that degrees of standardisation surface in speakers’ explicit attitudes. Our findings have important implications for the role of standardisation in language maintenance efforts.
... Whereas inconsistent results in observational studies prohibit conclusive statements about gender differences, studies analyzing variables in combinations and studies of listener perception appear to be more congruent with conventional stereotypes of gendered language (Mulac, 2006;Mulac et al., 1988;Mulac & Lundell, 1982Quina, Wingard, & Bates, 1987). For example, reported significant correlations between perception of male speaker and use of direct and succinct language, as well as between perception of female speaker and use of indirect and elaborate language. ...
... Mulac and colleagues posit that gender is a cultural phenomenon and that gendered speech is similar to cultural linguistic variations and not necessarily a manifestation of dominance and subordination (Mulac, Bradac, & Gibbons, 2001;Mulac & Lundell, 1982. This cultural explanation is supported by a robust gender-linked language effect (GLLE), in which the so-called feminine language is associated with socio-intellectual status and aesthetic quality with intention to affiliate (i.e., affirm or engage the partner), and masculine language is associated with dynamism with intention to self-assert (Mulac, 2006). ...
Forty participants (20 male) had 3-minute conversations with trained male and female communication partners in a repeated-measures, within-subject design. Eighty 3-minute conversations were transcribed and coded for dependent clauses, fillers, tag questions, intensive adverbs, negations, hedges, personal pronouns, self-references, justifiers, and interruptions. Results suggest no significant changes in language based on speaker gender. However, when speaking with a female, participants interrupted more and used more dependent clauses than when speaking with a male. There was no significant interaction to suggest that the language differences based on communication partner was specific to one gender group. These results are discussed in context of previous research, communication accommodation theory, and general process model for gendered language.
... For example, the book Language and Women's Place written by Robin Lakoff (1975) is considered a landmark work which systematically describes the characteristics of women's language and the social reasons for the formation. Mulac (1981Mulac ( , 1982Mulac ( , 1985Mulac ( , 1986) and his co-researchers published a series of articles that analyzed "gender-linked language differences" in a quantitative study approach which provided more substantial evidence. Coates (2013) deeply researched the differences between men and women's language. ...
This article analyzed the characteristics of Chinese female college students’ English conversation from the perspective of second language acquisition by using some theories of sociolinguistics and discourse analysis. After analysis, it was found that female students used hedges and intensifiers extensively in second language conversations. Additionally, the participants consciously maintained the face of their peers and made the conversation take place in an atmosphere of equality and solidarity. Through the use of deixis, the conversation was well organized and carried out smoothly. The participants changed their roles, gave and took the floors, and offered new information to prolong the conversation. Although female language had many characteristics, it cannot be fully reflected in this sample conducted in a second language.
... To buttress this view the researches of Carli (1990;Lakoff, 1973;Mulac & Lundell, 1982;Quina, Wingard, & Bates, 1987) has found that women tend to speak more tentatively in persuasive communication than men (to use more hedges, question tags and disclaimers), particularly when they are communicating to a male audience, and female communicators are more persuasive with a male audience when they speak tentatively than when they speak assertively. Similarly, Burgoon and Stewart (1974) found that men who use fewer intensifiers and women who use more intensifiers are less persuasive than those who conform to the gender norms regarding language intensity. ...
1Introduction Psychology is a field that studies both human and animal behaviour in a scientific way and also embraces all aspects of conscious and unconscious experience as well as thought. Psychology equally attempts to make predictions based on the observable aspects of the human behaviour. As a field of study, it is gradually becoming more relevant to the understanding of human relations and interconnectivities among humans of various backgrounds for smooth co existence. One aspect of psychology that really explores language and communication is social psychology. It explains the areas of cultural knowledge, and the primary means by which we gain access to the contents of other peoples' mind. Language is implicated in most of the phenomena that lie at the core of social psychology: attitude change, social perception, personal identity, social interaction, intergroup bias and stereotyping, attribution, and so on. Moreover, for psychologists, language typically is the medium by which responses are elicited by individuals, and in which they also respond: in social psychological research, more often than not, language plays a role in both stimulus and response. Just as language use pervades social life, the elements of social life constitute an intrinsic part of the way language is used (Krauss and Chi-Yue, 1998). Language and its characteristics Wardhaugh (2002) defines language to be knowledge of rules and principles and of the ways of saying and doing things with sounds, words, and sentences rather than just knowledge of specific sounds, words, and sentences. Anjola (2013) while giving an overview of some of the characteristics of language pointed out that Language is the basic tool of effective communication and this is reinforced when users of language have a shared meaning which transcends the literal meaning of words. Keller (1994) reinforces this with his definition of natural languages as a product of social interaction created through a series of invisible processes whose main purpose is to get something. This, therefore, interrelates the field of psychology with that of language. Language is primarily made up of vocal sounds only produced by a physiological articulatory system in the human body. Initially, it comes as vocal sounds only which later transcended into
... To buttress this view the researches of Carli (1990;Lakoff, 1973;Mulac & Lundell, 1982;Quina, Wingard, & Bates, 1987) has found that women tend to speak more tentatively in persuasive communication than men (to use more hedges, question tags and disclaimers), particularly when they are communicating to a male audience, and female communicators are more persuasive with a male audience when they speak tentatively than when they speak assertively. Similarly, Burgoon and Stewart (1974) found that men who use fewer intensifiers and women who use more intensifiers are less persuasive than those who conform to the gender norms regarding language intensity. ...
... The effect had earlier been shown in a study of regional dialect in which transcripts of adults' descriptions of landscape photographs favored females on Aesthetic Quality and males on Dynamism (Mulac & Rudd, 1977). Further support for the effect on all three attributional dimensions (i.e., sociointellectual status, aesthetic quality, and dynamism) was found by Mulac and Lundell (1982) using transcripts of university students' first classroom speeches in an introductory public speaking course. ...
... These findings upheld the previously found pattern of the Gender-linked Language Effect in the new communication context of adult written discourse. These judgments demonstrated a substantial, positive relationship (r[4] = 0.81, p < 0.05 one-tailed) with an earlier study's ratings of university student public speakers (Mulac and Lundell, 1982). This indicates that the effects of men's and women's language choices are remarkably similar across the two modes of communicationwriting and speaking. ...
... "What features of language use are different between men and women speakers of American English?" and "Which of these features of language are the most salient to listeners when trying to identify the gender of a speaker?" Features of language that differ between men and female speakers of English are often called gender-preferential, gender-linked, or sex-linked features (Edelsky, 1976;Fitzpatrick, Mulac, & Dindia, 1995;Mulac & Lundell, 1982). This is because the features are not distinct to one sex or the other. ...
... Research supports this view. Carli (1990; see also Lakoff, 1973;Mulac & Lundell, 1982;Quina, Wingard, & Bates, 1987) has found that women tend to speak more tentatively in persuasive communication than men (to use more hedges, question tags and disclaimers), particularly when they are communicating to a male audience, and female communicators are more persuasive with a male audience when they speak tentatively than when they speak assertively. Similarly, Burgoon and Stewart (1974) found that men who use fewer intensifiers and women who use more intensifiers are less persuasive than those who conform to the gender norms regarding language intensity. ...
... Male superiority in stereotypically male activities such as math and female superiority in stereotypically female activities such as writing seem to decrease or disappear when gender-orientation is controlled (Pajares and Valiante 2001), suggesting that these observed differences are not purely based on biological sex but may be a function of gender orientation. Female speakers are rated more highly on aesthetic quality while male speakers are rated more highly on dynamism (Mulac and Lundell 1982), and women have a more extensive color vocabulary then men (Nowaczyk 1982). Men tend to score higher on most aggression tests and women tend to score higher on most aspects of interpersonal relationships (Costa, Terracciano, and McCrae 2001). ...
Gender 1 has been and continues to be one of the most common forms of segmentation used by marketers in general and advertisers in particular. To successfully implement such a segmentation strategy marketers and advertisers need to understand how men and women process marketing information, judge products, and behave in the marketplace. The purpose of this article is to explore the origins of the observed gender differences, provide a critical review of the literature on the information processing differences between males and females, and discuss the major implications of such gender differences for advertising message design.
... Table 1 lists the gender-linked language variables. This differential language use has been demonstrated in oral language, such as public speeches (Mulac & Lundell, 1982) and same-sex dyads (Mulac, Wiemann, Widenmann, & Gibson, 1988), as well as in written language, such as impromptu essays (Mulac, Studley, & Blau, 1990). The majority of studies have examined university students' language; many, however, have examined the language of other age groups, such as fourthand fifth-grade students ( Mulac et al., 1990), and individuals in their 50s and 60s (Mulac & Lundell, 1994). ...
Using self-categorization theory, the effects of sex, chronic gender accessibility (i.e., gender schematicity), and gender identity salience on gender-linked language use in e-mail are examined. Results confirmed interactive effects only. Gender schematic men and women whose gender was salient used typical gender-linked language (e.g., men used male language). With low gender salience, schematic men and women used countertypical gender-linked language (e.g., men used female language). The language of nonschematics varied minimally. Results are discussed regarding previous research on gendered language, the nature of gender identity salience, and examining gendered language in computer-mediated communication.
Men and women are not from separate planets. Making an original and significant argument, Gendering Talk puts gendered communication in perspective by showing that the problem with male/female communication is not how men and women talk to each other, but in how they listen. By closely examining the details of actual conversations between women and men—particularly the conversations of people “coupling”—Hopper draws on theories of arousal, relationship development, and play to trace the ways in which romantic couplings begin. Gendering Talk provides an engaging, highly entertaining, and far-reaching analysis of the ways in which people actively gender their talk, each other, and the social world. From the children’s game “Farmer in the Dell” to excerpts from classic and modern literature, and the media Hopper convincingly argues that talk between women and men is more alike than different.
Research on language attitudes towards native and non-native varieties in Turkey is limited (Akçay, 2020) and the studies hitherto carried out generally assess only attitudes towards English (Karahan 2017). To my knowledge, no previous study has tried to analyse attitudes towards Spanish native and non-native varieties. Therefore, this research aims to contribute to the existing literature on language attitudes in the Turkish context by comparing the attitudes of 66 undergraduate students (23 males, 43 females) towards native varieties of Spanish and non-native Turkish varieties of Spanish in the department of Spanish Language and Literature at Ankara University. In addition, speaker and rater gender were considered as variables, and 4 audio recordings were used as materials: two male and female native speakers and 2 male and female non-native speakers. For the data collection, a background questionnaire, the Speech Dialect Attitudinal Scale (SDAS), and interviews were employed. Combining quantitative and qualitative methods, the data triangulation technique was used to provide greater credibility and confidence for research results. The results revealed Turkish students’ negative attitudes towards the Turkish variety of Spanish and the fact that they prefer the native variety over the non-native. While the findings depending on rater gender did not show any significant difference, the results for speaker gender were significant and students viewed female speakers as less desirable than their male counterparts. The study abroad variable did not affect the results. Last but not least, pedagogical implications and limitations of the study are discussed.
the present paper is to portrait the effects of the Village Knowledge Centre (VKC) in the rural Tamil Nadu. Main objective of the paper is to discuss the areas of influence of VKC on the livelihood of the rural communities. It is based on a micro level study conducted by the authors in Pillaiyarnatham, Dindigul district, Tamil Nadu. Also presents how the VKC has impacted upon the rural people in utilising the development initiatives of the government and non-governmental organisations (NGO). The paper also attempts to bring out the evidences for level of accessibility to the VKC by different section of the rural community. It helps to understand how the VKC is socially inclusive in its functioning. The major findings indicate that information resource has large extent empowered rural community by leverage the access to various services and resources. The paper also discuss operational problems in VKC, particularly in the remote area, even after having technological intervention.
On the subject of gender and communication, one question continues to excite popular passion and command scholarly discussion: “Are there meaningful gender differences in language behavior?” A popular book in the United States offers the simplistic answer that the two genders are worlds apart — Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus (Gray 1991). At the other extreme is one academic pronouncement that meaningful differences between the language of men and women may exist, but they have not yet been found (Canary/Hause 1993). My research on the Gender-Linked Language Effect suggests that, as is so often the case with questions that excite passion, the truth lies somewhere in between the two poles. And although the answer is far more complex than can be prescribed in an aphorism, I would suggest that the reality is closer to the following: “Men are from Schleswig-Holstein, Women are from Brandenburg.” That is, men and women speak the same language, but they do so in subtly different ways and with importantly different consequences.
A survey was administered to 451 undergraduate students at a private liberal arts Christian university to identify students’ perceptions of the ideal professor. The survey revealed that the ideal professor places great emphasis on the integration of faith and learning, is flexible (and even easy), maintains high academic standards, encourages students, and has an adaptive teaching style. Findings also highlighted gender differences in student perception of the ideal professor. Women perceived an adaptable teaching style, encouragement, and integration of faith and learning as slightly more important than men did in defining the characteristics of an ideal professor. Implications are framed in terms of student expectations for content and relationship dimensions of learning associated with Christian colleges and universities.
본 연구의 목적은 라디오 광고에서 정보원이 사용하는 언어 힘이 설득에 효과가 있는지를 관찰하고, 그 효과를 정보원의 성 그 자체의 효과와 비교해 봤을 때 과연 어떤 것이 설득올 결정하는 더 큰 요소 인지를 알아보는 데 있다. 이 문제와 관련하여 선행 연구들은 일관섬 없는 결과를 보여주었다- 어떤 연 구는 오디오 커뮤니케이션에서 언어 힘의 설득 효과는 화자의 성에 달려있다고 주장했괴Carli, 199이, 또 어떤 연구는 오디오 커뮤니케이션에서 언어 힘의 설득 효과는 화자의 섬에 관계없이 나타나는 굳건한 효과입을 주장했다(H이Igraves & Las애, 1 않19; Erickson, Ur떼1, Johnson, & 0’Barr, 1978). 이에 본 연구는 라 디오 광고에서 언어 힘과 정보원 성의 상호작용올 관찰함으로써 언어 힘의 셜득 효과에 정보원의 성이 어떤 영향을 미치는지에 대한 실험적 증거를 제시하고자 했다. 실험 결과, 라디오 광고에서 정보원이 사 용하는 언머 힘은 설득에 강한 효과가 있으며, 그 효과는 정보원 성의 영흥을 받지 않는다는 것이 밝혀 졌다. 이는 언어 힘의 지위 효과가 성의 지위 효과보다 더 강력하다는 것을 함축한다.
Currently there is much interest in the research literature concerning sex differences for communicator style. This study investigated differences between males' and females' self‐perceptions on Norton's (1983) Communicator Style Construct and on the Social Style Profile (Buchholz, Lash brook & Wenberg, 1976). Forty‐three males and 42 females completed these measures as volunteers in a classroom setting. The results indicated that males' and females' self‐report responses do not differ significantly across these measures. An exploratory cluster analysis of communicator style provided a heuristic for future research.
Empirical studies of gender-based language differences have provided con flicting, discreet conclusions that have little relevance for business- communications instruction. This paper presents informally collected obser vations of male and female students in undergraduate and graduate business- and technical-communication courses. Calling for future formal studies to verify its findings, this study concludes that people-intensive work experience modifies gender-based language differences in written business communica tions of undergraduate and graduate students. However, instruction in audi ence analysis, tone, content design, and style also modify these gender differences. If formally supported, these observations would help teachers argue for the value of business-communications instruction in helping stu dents develop varied and androgynous communication styles important for job-related communications.
In this study, 108 university students (54 men and 54 women) were each videotaped in two 8-minute problem-solving dyadic interactions: (1) same-sex, and (2) mixed-sex. Trained observers coded the interactions for simultaneous, moment-to-moment gaze and talk behavior of both interactants. MANOVA results for three dyad types (male/male, female/female, and male/female) measured on 10 dyad gaze/talk variables showed that F/F dyads exhibited more mutual gaze/mutual talk and mutual gaze/mutual silence than either M/M or M/F dyads. F/F dyads exhibited less one gazes/same talks and mutual avert/one talks than either M/M or M/F dyads. No differences were found between M/M and M/F dyads on any variable. Analyses of individual change scores from same-sex to mixed-sex dyads indicated that the women in the M/F dyads converged to the male behavior in that dyad condition, whereas the men remained unchanged. The results are discussed in terms of speech accommodation theory.
Children's television programs from public and commercial networks were videotaped: PBS—Mr. Rogers's Neighborhood, Sesame Street, and Villa Alegra; Commercial—Action programs, Comedy/Adventure programs, and Commercials. Random 2–3 minute segments were transcribed and the dialogue of individual characters printed for analysis. In Analysis 1,11 trained linguistic coders assessed 48 transcripts (45–110 words) for 3 7 language variables previously found to differentiate speaker gender. A multiple discriminant analysis showed significant ability (94% accuracy) in predicting character sex from 13 linguistic variables. In Analysis 2, the transcripts were rated by 221 naive observers using the Speech Dialect Attitudinal Scale. MANOVA results indicated that, in general, the male and female characters' language led to character perceptions consistent with the Gender-Linked Language Effect: female characters rated higher on Socio-Intellectual Status and Aesthetic Quality; male characters rated higher on Dynamism. In Analysis 3, multiple regression analyses suggested a causal link between 9 of the 13 gender-discriminating variables from Analysis 1 and all three attributional dimensions in Analysis 2. Results are discussed in terms of sex-role stereotypes.
This study examined the effects of teachers' language on initial impressions and uncertainty reduction in the university classroom. Language was operationalized using powerful and powerless language forms. Teachers using powerful language were rated significantly higher by students on the dimensions of dynamism, status, and credibility in impression formation than were teachers using powerless language. Significant differences were also found for student perceptions of uncertainty. Students reported significantly higher levels of uncertainty when teachers used powerless language than when teachers used powerful language. The findings suggest that, based on the language teachers use, students form initial impressions which may contribute to subsequent classroom interaction.
To our knowledge, no data exist on attitudes toward speakers with Japanese accented varieties of American English, an area of profound significance given increasing American‐Japanese contacts across a wide range of applied contexts. This “matched‐guise” study provides such by eliciting Americans’ reactions to a Japanese male talking on two different topics (aggressive versus neutral) using four language varieties (viz., standard, moderate‐accented, heavy‐accented, and disfluent). Speaker evaluations on status, attractiveness, and dynamism traits confirmed certain predictions based on the literature, but some surprising, yet interpretable, patterns emerged in this new domain of American‐Japanese inquiry. Specifically, it was found that Japanese‐accented speakers were evaluated in manner unlike all other non‐standard accented speakers of American English, except those of British and Malaysian background. It is suggested that perceptions of social group competitiveness may be responsible for this pattern of results which, in turn, is discussed in terms of its applied ramifications.
Ninety‐six university students (48 males, 48 females) were randomly assigned a partner (whom they did not know well), forming two dyad conditions: (a) same‐sex, and (b) mixed‐sex. The 48 dyads were audiotape‐recorded in 20‐minute problem solving interactions, from which 300‐word language samples were transcribed for analysis. In Study 1, 9 trained observers coded 12 language variables previously shown to distinguish male from female language use. Discriminant analysis results demonstrated that a weighted combination of 8 variables could differentiate male from female interactants: male indicators—interruptions, directives, and conjunctions/ fillers begin sentence; female indicators—questions, justifiers, intensive adverbs, personal pronouns, and adverbials begin sentence. An analysis of variance of individuals’ gender discriminant function scores showed greater differences in gender‐linked language behavior in same‐sex than in mixed‐sex dyads. In Study 2, 231 naive observers rated the 96 interactants, using the Speech Dialect Attitudinal Scale. MANOVA results showed that in same‐sex dyads, female interactants were rated higher on Socio‐Intellectual Status and Aesthetic Quality, but no gender difference was found on Dynamism. However, in mixed‐sex dyads, men were rated higher on Aesthetic Quality, whereas women were rated higher on Dynamism. Taken together, the analyses of the objective language data and the subjective attributional data provide partial support for the Gender‐Linked Language Effect in same‐sex dyads and for the attenuation of that effect in mixed‐sex dyads.
Two studies are reported. The first study examined the extent to which seven forms of language were perceived as powerful and effective when used by an interviewee in a hypothetical job interview. Results suggested a five‐level model of linguistic power and effectiveness, which is independent of communicator sex. The second study examined the same seven linguistic features but in this case two dissimilar intentions were attributed to the interviewee: desire to appear sociable versus desire to appear authoritative. Results indicated that power of style interacted with communicator intention, qualifying to an extent the five‐level model suggested by Study 7. Again, effects were independent of communicator sex. Results of both studies showed that respondents made rather fine discriminations among powerful and powerless language forms, that these discriminations were quite stable, and that some ostensibly powerless forms were judged to be relatively powerful in fact.
Study 1 investigated differences in the language used by 86 female and male middle managers and career professionals during role plays of criticism that they had recently voiced to a colleague. Discriminant analysis revealed significant differences in language use, permitting 72% accurate gender reclassification. The language features more indicative of men were number of words, negations, questions, judgmental adjectives, references to emotion, and oppositions. Those more predictive of women were intensive adverbs, longer mean length sentences, hedges, directives, dependent clauses, and sentence initial adverbials. However, nearly one half of these gender indicators had been found in previous research to be predictive of the opposite gender. In Study 2, effects of these language differences on third-party observers’ judgments were assessed. Contrary to earlier research in nonorganizational settings, no differences were found on Socio-Intellectual Status, Aesthetic Quality, or Dynamism. Results indicated a gender-differentiating, but counterstereotypical, language use of female and male managers and career professionals in criticism giving.
This paper describes investigations in the measurement of listeners' evaluations of spoken language. Lack of integration in research in this area has been due in part to the numerous measurement instruments used to assess such evaluative reactions. The paper reviews the development of past instruments, describes the design, analysis, and implementation of an omnibus measure, the Speech Evaluation Instrument (SEI), and interprets these findings in light of past research. The use of the SEI is recommended to researchers as a way to make findings of various studies more comparable. Although the development of the SEI was based on evaluation of linguistic diversity, its applicability to a wider range of speech phenomena is suggested.
Research on sex differences in the communication practices of men and women often ignores the contexts in which communication takes place. By comparing women and men as they interact with both strangers and spouses, the authors present a more nuanced view of gender differences in social interaction. The authors discuss gender-preferential language and present data on social interaction in same-sex, mixed-sex and marital dialogues. Results of a round-robin analysis of variance indicate that same-sex dyadic conversations, but not mixed-sex dyadic conversations, are marked by a strong display of stereotypical gender-preferential linguistic use. Husbands tend to adopt a female-preferential linguistic style when speaking to their wives.
One hundred and eight university students (54 men and 54 women) were recorded in 108, eight-minute, problem-solving interactions under two dyadic conditions: (a) same-gender, and (b) mixed-gender. Interactants were coded during each minute for: (a) amount of Talk, (b) Mean Length Utterance (MLU) and (c) Rate. MANOVA results for Talk indicated that men in mixedgender dyads talked more than did men and women in same-gender dyads, and they in turn talked more than women in mixed-gender dyads. For MLU, men consistently spoke in longer utterances, regardless of gender of their partner. No Rate differences were found involving gender. Additionally, when there was a control for interactant gender, individuals who talked more and in longer utterances were rated by their partners as higher in Dynamism, an operationalisation of power. Finally, multiple regression analyses indicated that the Talk and MLU differences found were more predictable on the basis of gender than Androgyny, Empathy or Social Desirability. The findings suggest that gender leads to differences in talk behaviour that are consistent with the appearance, but not necessarily the actual implementation, of power.
Forty Speakers (20 male, 20 female), ranging from 11 to 69 years of age, described landscape photographs orally to a researcher. Orthographic transcripts were analysed for 31 linguistic variables. A discriminant analysis showed that a combination of 17 variables predicted speaker gender with 87.5% accuracy. The 17 gender-discriminating language variables were used in multiple regression analyses to predict previously found (Mulac & Lundell, 1980) speaker attribution ratings for these speakers. Results showed significant predictive ability for all three attributional dimensions: Socio-Intellectual Status (R 2= 0.53), Aesthetic Quality (R² =0.43), and Dynamism (R²=0.33). Of the 14 language variables displaying effects consistent with the Gender-Linked Language Effect, seven were more indicative of male speakers: impersonals, fillers, elliptical sentences, units, justifiers, geographical references, and spatial references. Greater use of the other seven variables was more indicative of female speakers: intensive adverbs, personal pronouns, negations, verbs of cognition, dependent clauses with subordinating conjunctions understood, oppositions, and pauses. These clusters of male and female contributors to the effect are discussed in terms of potential underlying communication strategies.
Two studies examined the effects of male and female 'dialects' and sex stereotypes on speech evaluations. Although sex-linked language effects have explained more evaluative variance than stereotypes, the persistence of these effects across a range of conversational contexts is uncertain. Study 1 supported the dialect hypothesis across two stimulus conversations but did not support the stereotype hypothesis. Study 2 found dialect and stereotype effects to be conversation-specific. Men's speech was rated higher in dynamism and socio-intellectual status than women's speech in only one of four conversations. Attributed male speakers were rated as more dynamic than attributed female speakers in two work settings. The conversation-specific nature of dialect and stereotype effects suggested a reconceptualisation of men's and women's speech as interactional achievements and a need for research on contextual cues in work environments that evoke stereotyping.
One‐minute transcripts of 30 university students' first in‐class public speeches earlier (Mulac & Lundell, 1982a) demonstrated the Gender‐Linked Language Effect: females rated higher on Socio‐Intellectual Status and Aesthetic Quality; males higher on Dynamism. For the present study, these transcripts were analyzed linguistically by 11 trained coders for 35 language features selected as potential discriminators of speaker gender. Discriminant analysis results showed that a combination of 20 of these features could account for 99% of the between‐gender variance, permitting 100% accuracy of gender prediction. Multiple regression analyses demonstrated that 13 of the gender‐discriminating language features predicted the three attributional dimensions in ways consistent with the Gender‐Linked Language Effect.
This study was designed to investigate the predictive validity of a measure of speech evaluation, the Speech Evaluation Instrument (SEI) (Zahn & Hopper, 1985). More specifically, while the predictive validity of two dimensions of the measure, attractiveness and dynamism has been demonstrated, no studies to date have addressed the validity of the superiority dimension. In the present study, a variation on the known‐groups method was used in which respondents evaluated speakers likely to elicit differing reactions on this dimension, standard speaking adults and nonstandard speaking children. As hypothesized, the standard speaking adults were rated much higher on superiority than the nonstandard speaking children. The speech groups accounted for 36% of the variance in superiority evaluations. Speech groups also accounted for a significant proportion of the variance in attractiveness ratings. Implications of these results for the validity of the SEI are discussed.
Investigated orthographic transcripts of 6 male and 6 female adults' (aged 26–37 yrs) spontaneous oral descriptions of landscape photographs taken from a study by the 1st author and M. J. Rudd (see record
1979-10636-001). These stimulus language samples were rated by 264 university students and 239 33–54 yr old nonstudents who used a speech dialect attitudinal scale, a 12-item semantic differential. Ratings showed high reliability and yielded a consistent factor structure: Socio-Intellectual Status, Aesthetic Quality, and Dynamism. Transcripts were presented in 4 language-stereotype conditions: (a) gender-linked language effect only (speaker sex not identified), (b) language effect plus stereotype (speaker sex correctly identified), (c) sex-role stereotype effect only (language effect nullified), and (d) language effect vs stereotype (speaker sex incorrectly identified). MANOVA results indicate that the gender-linked language effect and sex-role stereotypes operated independently. A correlation of the pattern of effects resulting from the gender-linked language effect with the pattern resulting from sex-role stereotypes revealed a striking similarity. Findings are discussed in terms of the effects' additivity and mutual reinforcement. (42 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
This investigation provided a test of the gender-as-culture, or ‘two cultures’, hypothesis proposed by Maltz and Borker (1982) to explain male/female differences in language use. Analysis of previous empirical investigations located 16 language features that had consistently been shown to indicate communicator gender and these were tested within the framework of the four dimensions of intercultural style proposed by Gudykunst and Ting-Toomey (1998): direct versus indirect, succinct versus elaborate, personal versus contextual and instrumental versus affective. Study 1 provided preliminary evidence supporting the hypothesized language-feature-by-dimension relationships (e.g., male directives were rated more direct and female uncertainty verbs more indirect). In Study 2, respondents rated multiple exemplars of the 16 language features, as well as 16 contrasting foil sentences, on all four dimensions, finding that nearly all of the variables fell on the hypothesized intercultural dimensions. In Study 3, respondents rated four sets of naturally occurring target sentences and matching foil sentences, representing all language variables, on their appropriate intercultural dimensions in order to establish dimensional polarity. Results across the three studies supported the hypothesized language feature-by-stylistic dimension relationship for 15 of the 16 variables: The 6 male language features were rated as more direct, succinct, personal, and instrumental, whereas 9 of the 10 female features were perceived as more indirect, elaborate, and affective. The findings demonstrate that gender preferences for language use function in ways that are consistent with stylistic preferences that distinguish national cultures.
Impromptu essays were written by 96 primary- and secondary-school students (48 males and 48 females) from three grades: fourth, eighth, and twelfth. In Analysis 1, printed transcripts of the essays were coded for 19 language features by trained observers. Discriminant analyses showed language differences between the male and the female writers at all three grade levels, differences that permitted 84 to 87% accuracy of gender prediction. In Analysis 2, the same transcripts were rated on three attributional dimensions by untrained university students and older individuals. Differences were found for all three grades: fourth-grade females were rated higher on Socio-Intellectual Status and Aesthetic Quality, but corresponding males were rated higher on Dynamism; eighth- and twelfth-grade males were rated higher on Dynamism. In Analysis 3, multiple regression analyses demonstrated a predictive link between objective language use and subjective attributional ratings. The findings are generally consistent with sex role stereotypes and fully support the existence of the Gender-Linked Language Effect in the writing of fourth graders.
We study the geometry of 2-step nilpotent Lie groups endowed with left-invariant Lorentz metrics. After integrating explicitly the geodesic equations, we discuss the problem of the existence of translated geodesics in those groups. A good part of the paper focuses on the existence of closed timelike geodesics in compact Lorentz 2-step nilmanifolds. Other related results, corollaries, and examples are also presented.
In this study we investigated the relationship between college students' perceptions of professors' expressiveness and implicit age and gender stereotypes. Three hundred and fifty-two male and female students watched slides of an age- and gender-neutral stick figure and listened to a neutral voice presenting a lecture, and then evaluated it on teacher evaluation forms that indicated 1 of 4 different age and gender conditions (male, female, old, and young). Main and interaction effects indicated that students rated the young male professor higher than they did the young female, old male, and old female professors on speaking enthusiastically and using a meaningful voice tone during the class lecture regardless of the identical manner in which the material was presented. Implications of biased teacher-expressiveness items on student evaluations are discussed.
Studies of sex‐linked language variation devised to test Lakoff's genderlect theory have yielded inconsistent findings. Yet studies of evaluative reactions to the speech forms she hypothesized as “male”; and “female”; have consistently yielded preferential reactions to the male language. A series of studies by Mulac and his colleagues assessing evaluative reactions to the language used by actual speakers has found higher ratings of the dynamism of male speakers but also higher ratings of the aesthetic quality of female speakers. These evaluations occur despite raters’ inability to identify the sex of speakers from transcripts of their language productions. Most recently, Mulac, Incontro, and James (1985) found both gender‐linked language and stereotypes independently to produce such evaluations, language differences accounting for more of the variance in evaluations than stereotypes. The present study sought to compare effects of the two variables on a more even footing by assessing evaluative reactions to transcripts of men and women engaging in naturally‐occurring conversation. Also assessed was the impact of language variation within the sexes on evaluations. Only language effects were found. Within‐sex‐of‐speaker effects were considerably larger than those resulting from sex differences. These results form the basis of a reconceptualization of the processes underlying variation in the speech of men and women as well as the cognitive influences on evaluations of such variation.
R. T. Lakoff (1975) has suggested that men and women use different speech styles, with women's speech more polite but less assertive than men's. The assumption that 3 of Lakoff's linguistic variables (tag questions, qualifiers, and compound requests) affect person perception in these ways was tested. Sex of speaker was also varied. In Exp I, 80 undergraduates rated the assertiveness, warmth, and politeness of 2 male and 2 female speakers who used or did not use the 3 linguistic forms. All 3 "female" linguistic forms were rated less assertive than corresponding "male" forms; qualified speech and compound requests were rated warmer and compound requests more polite. Sex of speaker was a significant factor in only one possible comparison. These results were substantially replicated in Exp II, in which older and/or less educated women (32 18–58 yr olds) acted as judges. Findings suggest that Lakoff's intuitions concerning effects of speech styles on person perception are largely correct and that modification of speech styles could allow men and women to affect how they are perceived. (23 ref)
Over the last few years the methods and techniques used in sociolinguistics have aroused keen interest and have continually been improved. Yet the claims that have been made about differences of degree between the language used by women and that used by men are often based on research methods which seem to be anything but reliable. On the basis of a corpus of 587 utterances produced in buying a train ticket, an investigation was made of whether there is a statistically significant difference between women and men in certain aspects of their language use which have been mentioned in the literature: the number of words used to deal with a set task, diminutives, civilities, forms of language expressing insecurity (repetitions, hesitations, self-corrections, requests for information). In addition to the independent variable of sex of speaker, three other variables were introduced: sex of addressee, age of speaker, and time of ticket purchase (rush-hour or normal). The results of our investigation indicate that there are few significant differences between the language used by women and that used by men in this particular situation, with regard to the variables mentioned above. As a consequence, this investigation has demonstrated once again that intuitions should be considered critically. It is remarkable, however, that sex of addressee seems to affect almost all of the variables under consideration. Consequently, the results strongly suggest that anyone who wants to investigate language by means of interviews must take into account the fact that the kind of language used does not depend only on the informant, but just as much on the addressee. (Language and sex, investigation methods, influence of addressee on speaker.)
It was hypothesized that specific styles of linguistic coding would be evident along the dimensions of both social class and sex. Individual structured interviews were undertaken with 96 sixteen-year-olds, divided into equal social class/sex groups. The verbatim transcripts were examined along selected aspects of linguistic coding: structure, elaboration, prepositional and pronominal usage, and speech disruptions. Discriminant function analysis, extended and supplemented by analysis of variance, was used to test the hypothesis of differential coding patterns for the social class/sex groups. The discriminant analysis showed that the 28 linguistic variables, in combination, distinctly separated the social classes on Discriminant Function I and that Discriminant Function II separated the groups in terms of the sex dimension.
Sex-linked lexical forms were presented in writing to 41 female and 21 male white, middle class, adult Ss who were attending a PTA meeting. Ss were asked to associate the forms with 10 attributes represented by adjective scales, each scale having a male and a female pole. It was found that female and male language evoked associations of stereotypic female and male traits respectively. Both men and women harbored similar associations for a given language form. If language is actually produced by the two sexes in accord with peoples' beliefs about the sex appropriateness of certain linguistic forms, then the two sexes as speakers, through their respective gender-based linguistic varieties (their gender-dialects), may be elicitng perceptions of dominance or subordination from their listeners, thus perpetuating their societally defined roles.
Folk‐linguists have advanced the claim that women's speech differs from men's in several significant ways that serve to reflect and reinforce the lower status of women in this society. This study examined this claim by focusing on reactions to male and female discussants who used varying linguistic and substantive strategies to express positions of dissent in small decision‐making groups. Specifically, the study compared the presence and absence of qualifying phrases (tag questions and disclaimers) and of supporting evidence.Results indicated that both males and females were more influential and perceived more positively when they used well supported arguments than when they advanced their assertions without support. The use of qualifying phrases only had an adverse affect, however, when they were used by women in the investigation. Females who advanced their arguments with tag questions and disclaimers exerted little influence and were viewed as having little knowledge and intelligence. Moreover, regardless of structural or substantive techniques, women were not as well liked as men. These findings suggest that linguistic devices used by women in this society are devalued, not because they are inherently weak or inappropriate, but because of the lower status of their female source.
Speakers displaying three regional dialects (General American, Appalachian, and Bostonian) were recorded during spontaneous monologues. These speech samples were presented by transcript or audiotape to audiences drawn from each of the speakers’ regions, and rated on the Speech Dialect Attitudinal Scale‐21. Transcript scores, although showing some dialect differences, failed to demonstrate substantial trends favoring the syntax and semantics of any of the three dialects. Listener ratings placed General American phonology highest on Socio‐Intellectual Status and Aesthetic Quality, with Bostonians highest on Dynamism. However, significant interactions between rater region and speaker dialect suggest that no single set of norms applies equally to audience members from all regions of the United States.
The Developmental Sentence Scoring (DSS) procedure was used to collect normative information about the syntax development of male and female children. Verbal samples in response to a variety of stimulus materials were collected from 20 male and 20 female normally developing children at 5 age levels (2, 3, 4, 5, 6 years). On several measures of sentence length and syntax maturity, girls averaged significantly higher scores than boys. Specific grammatical categories were also identified as important sex discriminators at different age levels. Significant female advantages began showing at the 4-year-old level, and became more evident with increasing age.
Male and female university students and non‐students heard audiotapes containing a combination of two antagonistic persuasive speeches on the energy crisis: one with 12 obscene phrases, one with 12 parallel, non‐obscene phrases; one by a male speaker, one by a female; one pro‐environmentalists, one pro‐oil companies. Listener attitude was assessed on three dimensions using the Speech Dialect Attitudinal Scale. Analyses indicated that speakers were rated lower on Socio‐Intellectual Status and Aesthetic Quality when they used obscene language than when they did not; however, no difference was found on Dynamism. Other findings regarding speaker sex, listener group, and listener sex are discussed.
In a series of seven experiments, audience members employed the Speech Dialect Attitudinal Scale (SDAS) in its revised, 12‐item form to rate speakers presented via several media. Speakers were selected for their differences in dialectal variates. Evidence of construct validity was provided by factor analyses, yielding a remarkably consistent three‐factor solution: Socio‐Intellectual Status, Aesthetic Quality, and Dynamism. Concurrent validity was supported by results from analysis of variance and covariance on SDAS dimension scores, which in every experiment discriminated among speakers of differing dialectal characteristics.
Listener groups employed the Speech Dialect Attitudinal Scale (SDAS) to rate speakers in a variety of situations. These involved: (A) foreign accent, (B) regional dialect, (C) speech pathology, (D) broadcast news reporting, and (E) use of obscene language. Reliability of ratings was consistently high, with a median of .98. Evidence of construct validity was provided by the factor structures of SDAS item scores. Except in the case of the speech pathology experiment, the factor analyses yielded a remarkably consistent three‐factor structure: Socio‐Intellectual Status, Aesthetic Quality, and Dynamism. In each case, analyses of variance and covariance of SDAS scores discriminated among speakers differentiated by linguistic variation, further supporting the validity of SDAS data.
Speakers from four age groups—sixth graders, university freshmen and sophomores, graduate teaching assistants, and people in their 50's and 60's—were audiotape recorded during spontaneous photograph‐elicited monologues, with 45‐second segments transcribed for later rating. University students read the anonymous transcripts and indicated their perceptions of the speakers on the Speech Dialect Attitudinal Scale. (SDAS). Data were of high reliability and consistent factor structure. Analyses of the three SDAS dimensions revealed: (1) no difference between male and female speakers on socio‐intellectual status; (2) female speakers rated substantially higher on aesthetic quality than male speakers, with the disparity greater in the two older groups of speakers; (3) on dynamism, male speakers rated higher than female speakers.
Sociolinguists (e.g. Swacker 1975) and anthropologists (e.g. Hall 1959) are increasingly aware of the fact that sex, like social class or subcultural group, is a variable which strongly affects speech (Thorne & Henley 1975). While sexexclusive differentiation (i.e. separate male and female languages) now appears to be an almost nonexistent phenomenon, sex-preferred differentiation seems to be widespread across a number of languages and language families (Bodine 1975). In particular, recent studies indicate that syntax (Labov 1966), intonation (Brend 1972), and pronunciation(Trudgill 1972) in spoken English all vary as a function of the sex of the speaker.
This study identified children's perception of sex differences in the areas of language usage and occupational roles. The survey instrument used consisted of 28 items. Each item was a pair of statements identical except for one word or phrase. One statement was definitely male or female according to the literature. The other statement was either neutral or one that would be said by the other sex. Subjects were asked to identify statements that would be said by a man on one section of the instrument. They were asked to identify statements that would be said by a woman on the other section. Subjects consisted of 121 children from an inner city school in a low socio-economic area in north central Florida. The children composed five classrooms in grades one through five. One classroom was randomly selected from each grade level. The results indicate that children perceive differences both between the language usage of men and women, and between the conception of occupational roles traditionally assigned to each sex.
Six differences in linguistic behavior in same-sex and mixed-sex problem-solving groups were explored. Small groups of all women, all men, and mixed sex were run and videotaped. Linguistic behavior was assessed through a content analysis of four syntactic categories: intensifiers, modal constructions, tag questions, and imperative constructions in question form. Support was found for the hypothesis of Key (1975) and Lakoff (1975) that women, as compared with men, use more linguistic categories that connote uncertainty. Support was also found for these authors' hypotheses that (1) women use more linguistic forms that connote uncertainty when men are present than when men are absent, and (2) men are more likely to interrupt women than women are likely to interrupt men. The results are discussed from the perspectives of women's role (supportive behavior and minority status) and women's culture (interpersonal sensitivity and emotionality).
A procedure for estimating the reliability of sets of ratings, test scores, or other measures is described and illustrated. This procedure, based upon analysis of variance, may be applied both in the special case where a complete set of ratings from each ofk sources is available for each ofn subjects, and in the general case wherek
1,k
2, ...,k
n ratings are available for each of then subjects. It may be used to obtain either a unique estimate or a confidence interval for the reliability of either the component ratings or their averages. The relations of this procedure to others intended to serve the same purpose are considered algebraically and illustrated numerically.
This study presents empirical procedures for the collection and content analysis of the oral language of kindergarten children. The analysis technique used material and machines available to most researchers. The results of the analysis of language samples of 144 randomly selected children from the entire kindergarten class of the Ithaca, New York, school system showed that boys produced significantly more language than did the girls as well as significantly more references to aggression, self, time, space, quantity, fears, good, act of oral communication, negation, and affirmation, and asked more questions of the examiner than did the girls. The girls made significantly more female references than did the boys. Implications for future research are discussed.
A social psychological model of speech diversity
- H Giles
The sex of the speaker as a sociolinguistic variable
- M Swacker
Linguistic determinants of the gender-linked language effect in spoken discourse
- A Mulac
- T L Lundell
The relationship of sex and intelligence to choice of words: A normative study of verbal behavior
- G C Gleser
- L A Gottschalk
- W John
The Foundations of Factor Analysis
- S A Malaik
Attitudes toward male and female sex-appropriate and sex-inappropriate language
- C L Berryman