A Comparison of Some Characteristics of Male and Female Speech

Brotherton, Patricia L.; Penman, Robyn

doi:10.1080/00224545.1977.9713310

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Topics discussed during service conversations did not appear gender specific. Brotherton and Penman (1977) suggest the topic of conversation in which two individuals engage is more important than gender of the speaker. Two people may speak more words about a topic when it is of mutual interest, not necessarily if it is a “male” or “female” topic (Brotherton and Penman, 1977).…”

Section: Discussion Implications and Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Brotherton and Penman (1977) suggest the topic of conversation in which two individuals engage is more important than gender of the speaker. Two people may speak more words about a topic when it is of mutual interest, not necessarily if it is a “male” or “female” topic (Brotherton and Penman, 1977). Slight differences in the types of topics discussed were observed in mixed gender encounters.…”

Section: Discussion Implications and Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The variables that defined the quota categories were gender and patronage length. Gender was chosen because the gender composition of the client‐service employee pairing was likely to influence the nature and possible role of conversation (Brotherton and Penman, 1977; Hall and Braunwald, 1981). Length of patronage by the client was also selected because it may influence the intimacy of the conversation (Altman and Taylor, 1973).…”

Section: Study Context and Samplementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Building friendships and relationships

Garzaniti

Pearce

Stanton

2011

Managing Service Quality: An International Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to explore the contribution of conversation as an element of interaction that occurs in a hairdressing service encounter with the aim of seeking to understand variations in conversation between “short” and “long‐term” clients; how conversation contributes to the development of “commercial friendships”; and how relationships develop through conversation.Design/methodology/approachQuota sampling is used to select eight hairdressing service encounters in one Australian salon for recording and subsequent interviews with clients. Quotas address gender and duration of continued patronage. Conversations and interviews were analysed thematically and using conversation analysis.FindingsThe progress and evolution of conversations varied between short and long‐term customers; topics also varied by this classification as well as gender. Conversation played an important function with respect to building friendship with the service provider; conversation also assisted in the development of long‐term relationships.Research limitations/implicationsApart from the small sample, the study was highly contextualised because it investigated encounters in a single hairdressing salon and explored perceptions of the service conversation from the perspective of only one party to the conversation, the client.Practical implicationsThe findings point out the important role non‐task conversation can play in retaining customers in people‐processing services. Service providers perhaps can achieve more to improve the service experience and satisfaction of customers by placing less emphasis on the need for physical resources or promotion, instead focussing on the intangible of improving the conversation skills of their providers. More non‐task conversation and less task‐related talk may also facilitate a closer relationship between hairdresser and client. Further research on the nature and role of conversation during service encounters should offer guidance for improving the conversation skills of service providers and in improving customer retention.Originality/valueThis study specifically focuses on the role and nature of non‐task conversation as a specific aspect contributing to a customer's service encounter experience in a people processing service.

show abstract

Section: Discussion Implications and Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussion Implications and Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Study Context and Samplementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Building friendships and relationships

Garzaniti

Pearce

Stanton

2011

Managing Service Quality: An International Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Indeed, Kramer (1977), who studied stereotypes relating to speech, found that not only was "talking a lot" reported to be a characteristic of women, but so was "talking fast." There is no evidence that the second stereotype is any truer than the first; none of the studies reviewed above found any evidence of sex-related differences in the rate of production of words (Brotherton & Penman, 1977;Markel, Long, & Saine, 1976;Swacker, 1975, all explicitly measured this factor). Possibly, then, women are judged to speak faster simply because they have higher pitched voices.…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

Speaker sex and perceived apportionment of talk

Cutler¹,

Scott

1990

Applied Psycholinguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is a widely held belief that women talk more than men; but experimental evidence has suggested that this belief is mistaken. The present study investigated whether listener bias contributes to this mistake. Dialogues were recorded in mixed-sex and single-sex versions, and male and female listeners judged the proportions of talk contributed to the dialogues by each participant. Female contributions to mixed-sex dialogues were rated as greater than male contributions by both male and female listeners. Female contributions were more likely to be overestimated when they were speaking a dialogue part perceived as probably female than when they were speaking a dialogue part perceived as probably male. It is suggested that the misestimates are due to a complex of factors that may involve both perceptual effects such as misjudgment of rates of speech and sociological effects such as attitudes to social roles and perception of power relations

show abstract

“…There is other evidence which appears to contradict these findings however. A more symmetrical distribution has been reported in a number of laboratory studies, (Hirschman 1973, 1974, Brotherton and Penman 1977, Bilous and Krauss 1988, as w~il as in studies of married couples (Kenkel 1963, Strodtbeck 1975. There is also evidence that females can be more talkative than males in these less formal contexts.…”

Section: Amount Of Talkmentioning

confidence: 64%

Talking at cross-purposes?: the effect of gender on New Zealand primary schoolchildren's interaction strategies in pair discussions

Stubbe¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

<p>This thesis explores one aspect of the relationship between sex and language. Twenty pairs of eleven and twelve year old children were tape-recorded during two discussion tasks. Quantitative and qualitative analyses of the data were carried out to investigate to what extent previously reported sex differences in interactional style could be observed in this group of New Zealand school children. Particular attention was paid to the relationship between such differences and the way in which children learn through talk in peer discussion. Two general hypotheses were tested: (i) that girls would tend to use a more collaborative, polite, and affiliative style of interaction, while boys would tend to use a more competitive, task-oriented style, paying less attention to the processes of interaction, and (ii) that the style of interaction associated with females would be more conducive to effective discussion from a pedagogical point of view. There were no significant sex differences in the use of interruptive forms and overlaps. However, the girls produced more talk relative to the boys in the mixed-sex context, supportive minimal responses were distributed differently, suggesting different norms as to their use and function, and there was a marked sex difference in the use of strategies for expressing disagreement: the boys were over four times more likely than the girls to produce bald, unmodified disagreements (approximately half of their total disagreement responses), while over 90% of the girls' disagreement responses were qualified in some way. These differences in style were linked to the results of the qualitative analysis of the data which provided clear evidence that the sex composition of the dyads was an important variable in determining the overall quality of discussion, with the girls more likely to facilitate effective, open-ended, elaborated discussion than the boys.</p>

show abstract

A Comparison of Some Characteristics of Male and Female Speech

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Building friendships and relationships

Building friendships and relationships

Speaker sex and perceived apportionment of talk

Talking at cross-purposes?: the effect of gender on New Zealand primary schoolchildren's interaction strategies in pair discussions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About