Do the gender differences found when men and women maintain personal relationships in person and on the phone also emerge when they use electronic mail? Alternately, does e-mail change these ways of interacting? The authors explore the types of relationships women and men maintain by e-mail, differences in their e-mail use locally and at a distance, and differences in the contents of messages they send. The findings are based on qualitative and quantitative data collected during a 4-year period. These data suggest that using e-mail to communicate with relatives and friends replicates preexisting gender differences. Compared to men, women find e-mail contact with friends and family more gratifying. Women are more likely than men to maintain kin relationships by e-mail. They are more likely than men to use e-mail to keep in touch with people who live far away. Women's messages sent to people far away are more filled with personal content and are more likely to be exchanged in intense burst. The fit between women's expressive styles and the features of e-mail seems to be making it especially easy for women to expand their distant social networks.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Brandon, B. (1980). The effects of the demographics of individual households on their telephone usage. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
2.
Caldwell, M. A. , & Peplau, L. A. (1982). Sex differences in same-sex friendships. Sex Roles, 8, 721-732.
3.
Canary, D. J. , & Stafford, L. (1994). Maintaining relationships through strategic and routine interactions. In D. J. Canary & L. Stafford (Eds.), Communication and relationship maintenance (pp. 3-22). New York: Academic Press.
4.
Claes, M. E. (1992). Friendship and personal adjustment during adolescence. Journal of Adolescence, 15(1), 39-55.
5.
Cummings, J. N., Butler, B., & Kraut, R. (in press). The quality of online relationships. Communications of the ACM.
6.
Cummings, J., & Kraut, R. (in press). Domesticating computers and the Internet. Information Society.
7.
Davidson, L. R. , & Duberman, L. (1982). Friendship: Communication and interactional patterns in same-sex dyads. Sex Roles, 8, 809-822.
8.
Deaux, K. , & Major, B. (1987). Putting gender into context: An interactive model of gender-related behavior. Psychological Review, 94, 369-389.
9.
Di Leonardo, M. (1987). The female world of cards and holidays: Women, families and the work of kinship. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 12, 440-453.
10.
Duck, S. W. (1988). Relating to others. Chicago: Dorsey.
11.
Duck, S. , & Wright, P. H. (1993). Reexamining gender differences in friendships: A close look at two kinds of data. Sex Roles, 28, 709-727.
12.
Eagle, A. H. , & Steffen, V. J. (1984). Gender stereotypes stem from the distribution of women and men into social roles. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 735-754.
13.
Hauser, S. T., Powers, S. I., Weiss-Perry, B., Follansbee, D. J., Rajapak, D., & Greene, W. M. (1987). The constraining and enabling coding system manual. Unpublished manuscript.
14.
Kraut, R. , Kiesler, S., Boneva, B., Cummings, J., Helgeson, V., & Crawford, A. (in press). Internet paradox revisited. Journal of Social Issues.
15.
Kraut, R. , Mukhopadhyay, T., Szczypula, J., Kiesler, S., & Scherlis, W. (2000). Information and communication: Alternative uses of the Internet in households. Information Systems Research, 10, 287-303.
16.
Kraut, R. , Patterson, M., Lundmark, V., Kiesler, S., Mukopadhyay, T., & Scherlis, W. (1998). Internet paradox: A social technology that reduces social involvement and psychological well-being?American Psychologist, 53(9), 1017-1031.
17.
Lacohée, H. , & Anderson, B. (2001). Interacting with the telephone. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 54, 665-699.
18.
Maccoby, E. E. (1990). Gender and relationships: A developmental account. American Psychologist, 45(4), 513-520.
19.
Moore, G. (1990). Structural determinants of men's and women's personal networks. American Sociological Review, 55, 726-735.
20.
Noble, G. (1987). Individual differences, psychological neighbourhoods and use of the domestic telephone. Media Information Australia, 44, 37-41.
21.
Parker, S. , & de Vries, B. (1993). Patterns of friendship for women and men in same- and cross-sex relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 10(4), 617-626.
22.
Pew Internet and American Life Project. (2000a, May 10). Tracking online life: How women use the Internet to cultivate relationships with family and friends [Online]. Available: http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/
23.
Pew Internet and American Life Project. (2000b). Daily Internet activities [Online]. Available: http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/chart.asp?img=5_Daily_Activities.gif
24.
Rosenthal, C. (1985). Kinkeeping in the familial division of labor. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 47, 965-974.
25.
QSR . (1999). NUD*IST. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
26.
Schütze, Y. (1996). Relationships between adult children and their parents. In A. E. Auhagen & M. von Salisch (Eds.), The diversity of human relationships (pp. 106-119). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
27.
Silverman, D. (2000). Analyzing talk and text. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
28.
Spence, J. T. , & Buckner, C. (1995). Masculinity and femininity: Defining the undefinable. In P. J. Kalbfleisch & M. J. Cody (Eds.), Gender, power, and communication in human relationships (pp. 105-140). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
29.
Spence, J. T. , & Buckner, C. E. (2000). Instrumental and expressive traits, trait stereotypes, and sexist attitudes: What do they signify?Psychology of Women Quarterly, 24, 44-62.
30.
Spence, J. T. , & Helmreich, R. L. (1978). Masculinity and femininity: Their psychological dimensions, correlates, and antecedents. Austin: University of Texas Press.
31.
Sproull, L. , & Kiesler, S. (1986). Reducing social context cues: E-mail in organizational communication. Management Science, 32, 1492-1512.
32.
Stafford, L. , & Canary, D. J. (1991). Maintenance strategies and romantic relationship type, gender and relational characteristics. Journal of Social and Personal relationships, 8, 217-242.
33.
Stafford, L. , Kline, S. L., & Dimmick, J. (1999). Home e-mail: Relational maintenance and gratification opportunities. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 43(4), 659-669.
34.
Tannen, D. (1992). You just don't understand. Women and men in conversation. London: Virago.
35.
Twenge, J. M. (1997). Changes in masculine and feminine traits across time: A meta-analysis. Sex Roles, 36, 305-327.
36.
Walker, K. (1994). “I'm no friends the way she's friends”: Ideological and behavioral constructions of masculinity in men's friendships. Masculinities, 2, 38-55.
37.
Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23(1), 3-43.
38.
Wellman, B. (1992). Men in networks: Private communities, domestic friendships. In P. M. Nardi (Ed.), Men's friendships (pp. 74-114). London: Sage.
39.
Wright, P. H. , & Scanlon, M. B. (1991). Gender role orientations and friendship: Some attenuation but gender differences abound. Sex Roles, 24, 551-566.
