This research examined how individuals’ gendered avatar might alter their use of gender-based language (i.e., references to emotion, apologies, and tentative language) in text-based computer-mediated communication. Specifically, the experiment tested if men and women would linguistically assimilate a virtual gender identity intimated by randomly assigned gendered avatars (either matched or mismatched to their true gender). Results supported the notion that gender-matched avatars increase the likelihood of gender-typical language use, whereas gender-mismatched avatars promoted countertypical language, especially among women. The gender of a partner’s avatar, however, did not influence participants’ language. Results generally comport with self-categorization theory’s gender salience explanation of gender-based language use.
Abrams, D., & Hogg, M.A. ( 1990). Social identification, self-categorization, and social influence. European Review of Social Psychology, 1, 195-228.
2.
Bechar-Israeli, H. ( 1995). From <Bonehead> to <cLoNehEAd>: Nicknames, play and identity on Internet Relay Chat. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 1(2), Article 2. Retrieved April 25, 2008, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol1/issue2/bechar.html
3.
Bente, G., Rüggenberg, S., Krämer, N.C., & Eschenburg, F. (2008). Avatar-mediated networking: Increasing social presence and interpersonal trust in net-based collaborations . Human Communication Research, 34, 287-318.
4.
Berman, J., & Bruckman, A.S. (2001). The Turing Game: Exploring identity in an online environment. Convergence, 7, 83-102.
5.
Blascovich, J., Loomis, J., Beall, A.C., Swinth, K.R., Hoyt, C.L., & Bailenson, J.N. (2002). Immersive virtual environment technology as a methodological tool for social psychology. Psychological Inquiry, 13, 103-124.
6.
Brouwer, D., Gerritsen, M.M., & De Haan, D. (1979). Speech differences between women and men: On the wrong track. Language in Society, 8, 33-50.
7.
Bruckman, A.S. ( 1993, August). Gender swapping on the Internet. Paper presented the meeting of the Internet Society, San Francisco, CA. Retrieved April 23, 2008, from http://www .cc.gatech.edu/~asb/papers/gender-swapping.txt
8.
Cameron, J.E., & Lalonde, R.N. ( 2001). Social identification and gender-related ideology in women and men. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 59-77.
9.
Carli, L.L. ( 1990). Gender, language, and influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 941-951.
10.
Colley, A., & Todd, Z. ( 2002). Gender-linked differences in the style and content of e-mails to friends. Journal of Language and Social Psychology , 21, 380-392.
11.
Danet, B. ( 1996, February). Text as mask: Gender and identity on the Internet . Paper presented at the conference on Masquerade and Gendered Identity, Venice, Italy. Retrieved April 25, 2008, from http://atar.mscc.huji.ac.il/~msdanet/mask.html
12.
Dindia, K. ( 2006). Men are from North Dakota, women are from South Dakota . In K. Dindia & D. J. Canary (Eds.), Sex differences and similarities in communication (2nd ed., pp. 3-20). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
13.
Donath, J.S. ( 1999). Identity and deception in the virtual community. In P. Kollock & M. Smith (Eds.), Communities in cyberspace (pp. 29-59). London : Routledge.
14.
Dotsch, R., & Wigboldus, D.H.J. (2008). Virtual prejudice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 1194-1198.
15.
Flanagin, A.J., Tiyaamornwong, V., O’Connor, J., & Seibold, D.R. ( 2002). Computer-mediated group work: The interaction of member sex and anonymity. Communication Research, 29, 66-93.
16.
Fox, A.B., Bukatko, D., Hallahan, M., & Crawford, M. ( 2007). The medium makes a difference: Gender similarities and differences in instant messaging. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 26, 389-397.
17.
Hall, J.A. ( 2006). How big are nonverbal sex differences? The case of smiling and nonverbal sensitivity. In K. Dindia & D. J. Canary (Eds.), Sex differences and similarities in communication (2nd ed., pp. 59-81). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
18.
Herring, S.C. ( 1993). Gender and democracy in computer-mediated communication . Electronic Journal of Communication, 3(2), Article 6. Retrieved June 11, 2008, from http://www.cios.org/www./ejc/v3n293.htm
19.
Herring, S.C., & Martinson, A. ( 2004). Assessing gender authenticity in computer-mediated language use: Evidence from an identity game. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 23, 424-446.
20.
Herrmann, A.F. ( 2007). "People get emotional about their money": Performing masculinity in a financial discussion board. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(2), Article 8. Retrieved April 18, 2008, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol12/issue2/herrmann.html
21.
Hills, M. ( 2000). You are what you type: Language and gender deception on the Internet. Unpublished bachelor’s honors thesis, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand. Retrieved April 17, 2008, from http://www.netsafe.org.nz/Doc_Library/Internet_language_dissertation.pdf
22.
Hogg, M.A., & Turner, J.C. ( 1987). Intergroup behavior, self-stereotyping and the salience of social categories. British Journal of Social Psychology , 26, 325-340.
23.
Huffacker, D.A., & Calvert, S.L. ( 2005). Gender, identity, and language use in teenage blogs. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(2), Article 1. Retrieved October 9, 2008, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol10/issue2/huffaker.html
24.
Hyde, J.S. ( 2005). The gender similarities hypothesis. American Psychologist, 60, 581-592.
25.
Jaffee, J.M., Lee, Y.-E., Huang, L.-N., & Oshagan, H. ( 1995, May). Gender, pseudonyms, and CMC: Masking identities and baring souls. Paper presented at the annual conference of the International Communication Association, Albuquerque, New Mexico. Retrieved October 9, 2008 from http://research.haifa.ac.il/~jmjaffe/genderpseudocmc/
26.
Jazwinski, C.H. ( 2001). Gender identities on the World Wide Web. In C. R. Wolfe (Ed.), Learning and teaching on the World Wide Web: A volume in the educational psychology series (pp. 171-189). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
27.
Kendall, L. ( 2000). "Oh no! I’m a nerd!" Hegemonic masculinity on an online forum. Gender & Society, 14, 256-274.
28.
Koch, S.C., Mueller, B., Kruse, L., & Zumbach, J. ( 2005). Constructing gender in chat groups. Sex Roles, 53, 29-41.
29.
Lakoff, R. ( 1975). Language and women’s place. New York: Harper & Row.
30.
Langlois, J.H., Kalakanis, L., Rubenstein, A.J., Larson, A., Hallam, M., & Smoot, M. ( 2000). Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analytic and theoretical review. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 390-423.
31.
Lea, M., Spears, R., & De Groot, D. ( 2001). Knowing me, knowing you: Anonymity effects on social identity processes within groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 526-537.
32.
Leaper, C., & Ayres, M.M. ( 2007). A meta-analytic review of gender variations in adults’ language use: Talkativeness, affiliative speech, and assertive speech. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11, 328-363.
33.
Lee, E.-J. ( 2005). Effects of the influence agent’s sex and self-confidence on informational influence in computer-mediated communication: Quantitative vs. verbal presentation. Communication Research, 32, 29-58.
34.
Lee, E.-J. ( 2007a). Categorical person perception in computer-mediated communication: Effects of character representation and knowledge bias on sex inferences and informational social influence. Media Psychology, 9, 309-329.
35.
Lee, E.-J. ( 2007b). Character-based team identification and referent informational social influence in computer-mediated communication. Media Psychology, 9, 135-155.
36.
McRae, S. ( 1995). Coming apart at the seams: Sex, text and the virtual body. Retrieved April 23, 2008 from http://www.fragment.nl/mirror/McRae/vseams.htm
37.
Menon, G.M. ( 1998). Gender encounters in a virtual community: Identity formation and acceptance. Computers in Human Services, 15, 55-69.
38.
Mulac, A. ( 2006). The gender-linked language effect: Do language differences really make a difference? In K. Dindia & D. J. Canary (Eds.), Sex differences and similarities in communication (2nd ed., pp. 219-239). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
39.
Mulac, A., Bradac, J.J., & Gibbons, P. ( 2001). Empirical support for the gender-as-culture hypothesis: An intercultural analysis of male/female language differences. Human Communication Research, 27, 121-152.
40.
Mulac, A., Bradac, J.J., Palomares, N.A., & Giles, H. ( 2009). Exploring subjectivity in the gender-linked language effect: A process model. In F. Gregersen, J. N. Jørgensen, M. Maegaard, & P. Quist (Eds.), Language attitudes, standardization and language change (pp. 61-75). Copenhagen , Denmark: Novus.
41.
Mulac, A., & Lundell, T.L. ( 1980). Differences in perceptions created by syntactic-semantic productions of male and female speakers. Communication Monographs , 47, 111-118.
42.
Mulac, A., Seibold, D.R., & Farris, J.L. ( 2000). Female and male managers’ and professionals’ criticism giving: Differences in language use and effects. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 19, 389-415.
43.
Murachver, T., & Janssen, A. ( 2007). Gender and communication in context. In A. Weatherall, B. M. Watson, & C. Gallois (Eds.), Language, discourse and social psychology (pp. 185-205). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
44.
Nowak, K.L. ( 2003). Sex categorization in computer-mediated communication (CMC): Exploring the utopian promise. Media Psychology, 5, 83-103.
45.
Nowak, K.L., & Rauh, C. ( 2005). The influence of the avatar on online perceptions of anthropomorphism, androgyny, credibility, homophily, and attraction. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(1), Article 8. Retrieved April 30, 2008, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol11/issue1/nowak.html
46.
O’Neill, R., & Colley, A. ( 2006). Gender and status effects in student e-mails to staff . Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22, 360-367.
47.
Palomares, N.A. ( 2004). Gender schematicity, gender identity salience, and gender-linked language use. Human Communication Research, 30, 556-588.
48.
Palomares, N.A. ( 2008). Explaining gender-based language use: Effects of gender identity salience on references to emotion and tentative language in intra- and intergroup contexts. Human Communication Research, 34, 263-286.
49.
Palomares, N.A. ( 2009). Women are sort of more tentative than men, aren’t they? How men and women use tentative language differently, similarly, and counter-stereotypically as a function of gender salience. Communication Research, 36, 538-560.
50.
Palomares, N.A., Reid, S.A., & Bradac, J.J. ( 2004). A self-categorization perspective on gender and communication: Reconciling the gender-as-culture and dominance explanations. In S. H. Ng, C. N. Candlin & C. Y. Chiu (Eds.), Language matters: Communication, identity, and culture (pp. 85-109). Kowloon , Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong Press.
51.
Postmes, T., & Spears, R. ( 2002). Behavior online: Does anonymous computer communication reduce gender inequality? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1073-1083.
52.
Postmes, T., Spears, R., & Lea, M. ( 1998). Breaching or building social boundaries? SIDE-effects of computer-mediated communication. Communication Research , 25, 689-715.
53.
Postmes, T., Spears, R., & Lea, M. ( 2002). Intergroup differentiation in computer-mediated communication: Effects of depersonalization. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 6, 3-16.
54.
Reid, E.M. ( 1991). Electropolis: Communication and community on Internet relay chat. Unpublished manuscript, University of Melbourne . Retrieved April 25, 2008 from http://www.irchelp.org/irchelp/misc/electropolis.html
55.
Reid, E.M. ( 1995). Virtual worlds: Culture and Imagination. In S. Jones (Ed.), Cybersociety: Computer-mediated communication and community (pp. 164-183). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
56.
Reid, S.A., Keerie, N., & Palomares, N.A. (2003). Language, gender salience, and social influence. Journal of Language and Social Psychology , 22, 210-233.
57.
Rellstab, D.H. ( 2007). Staging gender online: Gender plays in Swiss Internet Relay Chats. Discourse & Society, 18, 765-787.
58.
Rheingold, H. ( 1993). Virtual community: Homesteading on the electronic frontier . Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
59.
Roberts, L.D., & Parks, M.R. ( 1999). The social geography of gender-switching in virtual environments on the Internet. Information, Communication & Society , 2, 521-540.
60.
Rodino, M. ( 1997) Breaking out of binaries: Reconceptualizing gender and its relationship to language in computer-mediated communication, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3(3), Article 3. Retrieved June 12, 2008, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol3/issue3/rodino.html
61.
Rosenthal, R., Rosnow, R.L., & Rubin, D.B. ( 2000). Contrasts and effect sizes in behavioral research: A correlational approach. New York: Cambridge University Press.
62.
Savicki, V., Kelley, M., & Ammon, B. ( 2002). Effects of training on computer-mediated communication in single or mixed gender small task groups. Computers in Human Behavior, 18, 257-269.
63.
Savicki, V., Lingenfelter, D., & Kelley, M. ( 1996). Gender language style and group composition in Internet discussion groups. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication , 2(3), Article 5. Retrieved June 12, 2008 from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol2/issue3/savicki.html
Tannen, D. ( 1990). You just don’t understand: Women and men in conversation . New York: William Morrow.
66.
Thomson, R. ( 2006). The effect of topic of discussion on gendered language in computer-mediated communication discussion. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 25, 167-178.
67.
Thomson, R., & Murachver, T. ( 2001). Predicting gender from electronic discourse. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 193-208.
68.
Thomson, R., Murachver, T., & Green, J. ( 2001). Where is the gender in gendered language? Psychological Science, 12, 171-175.
69.
Turkle, S. ( 1995). Life on the screen: Identity in the age of the Internet . New York: Simon & Schuster .
70.
Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (Eds.). (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. New York: Basil Blackwell.
71.
Van Gelder, L. ( 1996). The strange case of the electronic lover. In R. Kling (Ed.), Computerization and controversy (2nd ed., pp. 533-546). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
72.
Walther, J.B. ( 1993). Impression development in computer-mediated interaction . Western Journal of Communication, 57, 381-398.
73.
Walther, J.B. ( 1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23, 3-43.
74.
Wilkinson, L., & Task Force onStatistical Inference. (1999). Statistical methods in psychology journals: Guidelines and explanations. American Psychologist , 54, 594-604.
75.
Yee, N., & Bailenson, J. ( 2007). The Proteus effect: The effect of transformed self-representation on behavior. Human Communication Research, 33, 271-290.
76.
Young, T.J., & French, L.A. ( 1996). Height and perceived competence of U.S. Presidents. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 82, 1002.
