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.
BeckK. (1978). Sex differentiated speech codes. International Journal of Women’s Studies, 1, 566-572.
2.
BilousF. R.KraussR. M. (1988). Dominance and accommodation in the conversational behaviours of same- and mixed-gender dyads. Language & Communication, 8, 183-194.
3.
CargileA. C.BradacJ. J. (2001). Attitudes toward language: A review of speaker-evaluation research and a general process model. In GudykunstW. B. (Ed.), Communication yearbook 25 (pp. 347-382). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
4.
CrosbyF.NyquistL. (1977). The female register: An empirical study of Lakoff’s hypothesis. Language in Society, 6, 313-322.
5.
DuboisB. L.CrouchI. (1975). The question of tag questions in women’s speech: They don’t really use more of them, do they?Language in Society, 4, 289-294.
6.
GasiorekJ.GilesH. (2012). Effects of inferred motive on evaluations on nonaccommodative communication. Human Communication Research, 38, 309-331.
7.
GilesH. (2008). Accommodating translational research. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 36, 121-127.
8.
GilesH.GasiorekJ. (2013). Parameters of non-accommodation: Refining and elaborating communication accommodation theory. In ForgasJ.LászlóJ.Orsolya VinczeV. (Eds.), Social cognition and communication (pp. 155-172). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
9.
GilesH.MarlowM. (2011). Theorizing language attitudes: Existing frameworks, an integrative model, and new directions. In SalmonC. (Ed.), Communication yearbook 35 (pp. 161-198). New York, NY: Routledge.
10.
GilesH.OgayT. (2006). Communication accommodation theory. In WhaleyB. B.SamterW. (Eds.), Explaining communication: Contemporary theories and exemplars (pp. 293-310). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
11.
GleserG. C.GottschalkL. A.JohnW. (1959). The relationship of sex and intelligence to choice of words: A normative study of verbal behavior. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 15, 182-191.
12.
HannahA.MurachverT. (1999). Gender and conversational style as predictors of conversational behavior. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 18, 153-174.
13.
Helweg-LarsenM.CunninghamS. J.CarricoA.PergramA. M. (2004). To nod or not to nod: An observational study of nonverbal communication and status in female and male college students. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 28, 358-361.
14.
HirschmanL. (1994). Female-male differences in conversational interaction. Language in Society, 23, 427-442.
15.
LakoffR. (1975). Language and woman’s place. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
16.
LeaperC.AyresM. 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, 328-362.
17.
MacWhinneyB. (2000). The CHILDES project: Tools for analyzing talk (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
18.
MartinJ. N.CraigR. T. (1983). Selected linguistic sex differences during initial social interactions of same-sex and mixed-sex student dyads. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 47, 16-28.
19.
McMillanJ. R.CliftonA. K.McGrathD.GaleW. S. (1977). Women’s language: Uncertainty or interpersonal sensitivity and emotionality?Sex Roles, 3, 545-559.
20.
MulacA. (2006). The gender-linked language effect: Do language differences really make a difference? In DindiaK.CanaryD. (Eds.), Sex differences and similarities in communication (2nd ed., pp. 219-239). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
21.
MulacA.BradacJ. J.GibbonsP. (2001). Empirical support for the gender-as-culture hypothesis: An intercultural analysis of male/female language differences. Human Communication Research, 27, 121-152.
22.
MulacA.GilesH.BradacJ. J.PalomaresN. (2013). The gender-linked language effect: An empirical test of a gender process model. Language Sciences, 38, 22-31.
23.
MulacA.LundellT. L. (1982). An empirical test of the gender-linked language effect in a public speaking setting. Language and Speech, 25, 243-256.
24.
MulacA.LundellT. L. (1986). Linguistic contributors to the gender-linked language effect. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 5, 81-101.
25.
MulacA.LundellT. L.BradacJ. J. (1986). Male/female language differences and attributional consequences in a public speaking situation: Toward an explanation of the gender-linked language effect. Communication Monographs, 53, 115-129.
26.
MulacA.WiemannJ. M.WidenmannS. J.GibsonT. W. (1988). Male/female language differences and effects in same-sex and mixed-sex dyads: The gender-linked language effect. Communication Monographs, 55, 315-335.
27.
PalomaresN. A. (2004). Gender schematicity, gender identity salience, and gender-linked language use. Human Communication Research, 30, 556-588.
28.
PalomaresN. 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.
29.
PalomaresN. A. (2009). Women are sort of more tentative than men, aren’t they? How men and women use tentative language differently, similarly, and counterstereotypically as a function of gender salience. Communication Research, 36, 538-560.
30.
PalomaresN. A. (2010). Virtual gender identity: The linguistic assimilation to gendered avatars in computer-mediated communication. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 29, 5-23.
31.
PooleM. E. (1979). Social class, sex, and linguistic coding. Language and Speech, 22(1), 49-67.
32.
QuinaK.WingardJ. A.BatesH. G. (1987). Language style and gender stereotypes in person perception. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 11, 111-122.
33.
TannenD. (1990). You just don’t understand: Women and men in conversation. New York, NY: Morrow.
34.
YeZ.PalomaresN. A. (2013). Effects of conversation partners’ gender-language consistency on references to emotion, tentative language, and gender salience. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 32, 433-451.
