JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.Conversations both reflect and maintain social inequalities. They import hierarchical structures from larger society and help perpetuate them by creating inequalities in the ability to accomplish interactional goals. In this study of speaker transitions in six-person, task-oriented experimental groups, we explore the well-known finding that men interrupt women more frequently than women interrupt men. We ask three questions about the structure of interruptions. Who attempts to interrupt whom and under what conditions? How does the affective character of interruptions vary across speakers and groups? What determines whether an interruption succeeds? We find that gender inequality in these task-oriented discussions is created by a mixture of attempts to use power and of differential success. In their interruptions, men discriminate by sex in attempts and in yielding to interruptions by others. Women interrupt and yield the floor to males and females equally. The sex composition of the group affects interruption patterns in complex ways. Men interrupt men with supportive comments in all-male groups, but these supportive interruptions drop as the number of women in the group increases. Supportive interruptions also succeed in gaining the floor more often in single-sex groups. Taken together, the results suggest a mixture of status and conflict models and reaffirm the importance of group composition in interaction.Studies of group discussions reveal that status' has many effects on participation. High-status people are asked their opinions more often, talk more, receive more positive comments, are chosen as leader more frequently, are more likely to influence the groups' decisions, and in general dominate the conversation (see review in Ridgeway 1983, pp. 160-204). Status differentiation not only creates conversational dominance, but often legitimates it (Ridgeway and Berger 1986). Studies of conversations in dyads or families also frequently find status effects.High-status actors talk more, are more successful at introducing topics, interrupt more, and receive more positive feedback from their listeners.Conversation is an important domain for studying these status effects. Language use can tell us a great deal about the nature and extent of social inequality. It reflects the hierarchical social structure outside the group, while simultaneously providing the means through which that inequality is maintained. Differences by status in participation, conversational dominance, and adherence to turntaking norms create differences in our ability to get our ideas across to others. In a family this may mean control over decision making; in a work setting it may determine performance and promoti...
How can employers create conditions that foster satisfied, psychologically healthy, and committed employees? To answer that, the authors build on Hodson’s concept of management citizenship behavior (MCB). The authors incorporate managers’ ethical and family-supportive behaviors as essential components of MCB. The authors operationalize these constructs using data from the National Survey of the Changing Workforce. The study results demonstrate strong positive effects of MCB on employees’ commitment, job satisfaction, and mental health and support the inclusion of the additional components. This research contributes to the literature on worker attitudes and behaviors has clear implications for managers concerned with these enhancing the workplace.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.