skip to main content
article

If you spoke as she does, sir, instead of the way you do: a sociolinguistics perspective of gender differences in virtual communities

Published:07 June 2005Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

This study examines virtual community quality through sociolinguistics theory. According to sociolinguistics, in oral discourse men communicate to establish superior social standing, while women communicate with the undertone of rapport, compassion, and empathy. The study shows that these differences carry over to the asynchronous written environment of virtual communities and affect men's and women's respective perceptions of community quality. Women go to virtual communities to give and to get social support and have a more favorable assessment of the capability of others. This pattern generally holds even when comparing mostly single-gender communities and mixed-gender communities. However, a closer look at these differences reveals a more complex picture, with undertones in mixed-gender communities being less than in their respective mostly single-gender communities.

References

  1. Anderson, K.J. and Leaper, C. (1998). "Meta-analyses of Gender Effects on Conversational Interruption: Who, What, When, Where, and How," Sex Roles, Vol. 39, No. 3/4, pp. 225--252.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Baron, R.M. and Kenny, D.A. (1986). "The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 51, No. 6, pp. 1173--1182.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Bellman, S., Lohse, G.L. and Johnson, E.J. (1999). "Predictors of Online Buying Behavior," Communications of the ACM, Vol. 42, No. 12, pp. 32--38. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Boneva, B., Kraut, R. and Frohlich, D. (2001). "Using e-Mail for Personal Relationships: The Difference Gender Makes," American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 45, No. 3, pp. 530--549.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Cameron, D. (1992). Feminism and Linguistic Theory, New York: St. Martin's Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Cameron, D., McAlinden, F. and O'Leary, K. (1988). "Lakoff in Context: The Social and Linguistic Functions of Tag Questions," in Coates, J. and Cameron, D. (Eds.), Women in Their Speech Communities: New Perspectives on Language and Sex, New York: Longman Group Limited, pp. 74--93.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Chidambaram, L. and Jones, B. (1993). "Impact of Communication Medium and Computer Support on Group Perceptions and Performance: A Comparison of Face-to-Face and Dispersed Meetings," MIS Quarterly, Vol. 17, No. 4, pp. 465--491.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Coates, J. (1986). Women, Men and Languages: Studies in Language and Linguistics, London, UK: Longman.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Costa, P.T.J., Terracciano, A. and McCrae, R.R. (2001). "Gender Differences in Personalilty Traits Across Cultures: Robust and Surprising Findings," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 81, No. 2, pp. 322--331.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Crawford, M. (1995). Talking Difference. On Gender and Language., London, UK: Sage.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Davison, R.M. (1997). "An Instrument for Measuring Meeting Success," Information and Management, Vol. 32, No. 4, pp. 163--176. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Deeter-Schmelz, D.R. and Ramsey, R.P. (1978). "Considering Sources and Types of Social Support: A Psychometric Evaluation of the House and Wells Instrument," The Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 49--61.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Edelsky, C. (1993). "Who's Got the Floor?," in Tannen, D.(Ed.), Gender and Conversational Interaction, New York, NY: Oxford University Press, pp. 189--227.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Feingold, A. (1994). "Gender Differences in Personality: A Meta-analysis," Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 116, No. 3, pp. 429--456.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Gefen, D. (2000a). "Gender Differences in the Perception and Adoption of E-mail and Computer-Mediated Communication Media: A Sociolinguistics Approach," in Kent, A. (Ed.), The Encyclopedia Of Library And Information Science (Volume 69), New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc., pp. 139--153.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Gefen, D. (2000b). "It is not Enough To Be Responsive: The Role of Cooperative Intentions in MRP II Adoption," The. DATABASE for Advances in Information Systems, Vol. 31, No. 2, pp. 65--79.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Gefen, D. (2003). "Tutorial Assessing Unidimensionality through LISREL: An Explanation and Example," Communications of the Association for Information Systems, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 1--26.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Gefen, D. and Keil, M. (1998). "The Impact of Developer Responsiveness on Perceptions of Usefulness and Ease of Use: An Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model," The DATA BASE for Advances in Information Systems, Vol. 29, No. 2Issue, Spring 1998, pp. 35--49. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Gefen, D. and Straub, D.W. (1997). "Gender Differences in Perception and Adoption of E-mail: An Extension to the Technology Acceptance Model," MIS Quarterly, Vol. 21, No. 4, pp. 389--400. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Hair, J.F.J., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. and Black, W.C. (1998). Multivariate Data Analysis with Readings, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Hawkins, K. and Power, C.B. (1999). "Gender Differences In Questions Asked During Small Decision-Making Group Discussions," Small Group Research, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp. 235--256.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Herring, S.C. (1993). "Gender and Democracy in Computer Mediated Communication," Electronic Journal of Communication, ??? Vol. 3, No. 2, http://dc.smu.edu/dc/classroom/gender.txt. pp. ???Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Herring, S.C. (1996a). "Posting in a Different Voice: Gender and Ethics in Computer-Mediated Communication," in Ess, C. (Ed.), Philosophical Perspectives on Computer-Mediated Communication, Albany: State University of New York Press, pp. 115--145.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Herring, S.C. (1996b). "Two Variants of an Electronic Message Schema," in Herring, S.C. (Ed.), Computer-Mediated Communication Linguistic, Social and Cross-cultural Perspectives, Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 81--106.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Herring, S.C., Johnson, D.A. and DiBenedetto, T. (1985). ""This Discussion is Going Too Far!": Male Resistance to Female Participation on the Internet," in Hall, K. and Bucholtz, M. (Eds.), Gender Articulated: Language and the Socially Constructed Self, New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 67--96.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Hiltz, S.R. (1984). Online Communities: A Case Study of the Office of the Future, Norwood, NJ.: Ablex Publishing Corporation. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Hiltz, S.R. and Wellman, B. (1997). "Asynchronous Learning Networks as a Virtual Classroom," Communications of the ACM, Vol. 40, No. 9, pp. 44--49. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work Related Values, London, UK: Sage.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Holmes, J. (1992). "Women's Talk in Public Contexts," Discourse and Society, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 131--150.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. House, J.S. (1981). Work Stress and Social Support, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Jarvenpaa, S.L., Knoll, K. and Leidner, D.E. (1998). "Is Anybody Out There? Antecedents of Trust in global Virtual Teams," Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 29--64. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Kilbourne, W. and Weeks, S. (1997). "A Socio-economic Perspective on Gender Bias in Technology," Journal of Socio-Economics, Vol. 26, No. 1, pp. 243--260.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Mulac, A., Erlandson, K.T., Farrar, W.J. and Hallett, J.S. (1998). "Uh-huh. What's That all about? Differing Interpretations of Conversational Backchannels and Questions as Source of Miscommunication Across Gender Boundaries," Communication Research, Vol. 25, No. 6, pp. 641--668.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Nunnally, J.C. and Bernstein, I.H. (1994). Psychometric Theory, New York: McGraw-Hill.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Parks, M.R. and Floyd, K. (19965). "Making Friends in Cyberspace," Journal of Communications??? Vol. 461, No. 14, pp. 80--97. ???Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Preisler, B. (1987). "The Tentative Female," English Today, Vol. 12, No. ??? pp. 29--30.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. Ridings, C., Gefen, D. and Arinze, B. (2002). "Some Antecedents and Effects of Trust in Virtual Communities," Journal of Strategic Information Systems, Vol. 11, No. 3-4, pp. 271--295.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Savicki, V., Lingenfelter, D. and Kelley, M. (1996). "Gender Language Style and Group Composition in Internet Discussion Groups," Journal of computer mediated communication, ??? Vol. 2, No. 3, http://jcmc.indiana.edu/ pp. ???Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  39. Sproull, L. and Kiesler, S. (1986). "Reducing Social Context Cues: Electronic Mail in Organizational Communication," Management Science, Vol. 32, No. 11, pp. 1492--1512. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Sproull, L. and Kiesler, S. (1991). Connections: New Ways of Working in the Networked Organization, Cambridge: The MIT Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Stewart, C.M., Shields, S.F. and Sen, N. (2001). "Diversity in On-Line Discussions: A study of Cultural and Gender Differences in Listervs," in Ess, C. and Sudweeks, F. (Eds.), Culture, Technology, Communication: Towards an Intercultural Global Village, Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, pp. 161--186.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Sussman, N.M. and Tyson, D.H. (2000). "Sex and Power: Gender Differences in Computer-Mediated Interactions," Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 16, No. ??? pp. 381--394.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  43. Tannen, D. (1994). You Just Don't Understand Women and Men in Conversation, New York, NY: Ballantine Books.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Tannen, D. (1995). "The Power of Talk: Who Gets Heard and Why," Harvard Business Review, Vol. 73, No. 5, pp. 138--148.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Venkatesh, V. and Morris, M.G. (2000). "Why Don't Men Ever Stop to Ask for Directions? Gender, Social Influence, and their Role in Technology Acceptance and Usage Behavior," MIS Quarterly, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 115--139. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Wang, R.Y. and M., S.D. (1996). "Beyond Accuracy: What Data Quality Means to Data Consumers," Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 5--34. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Weatherall, A. (1998). "Re-visioning Gender and Language Research," Women and Language, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp. 1--9.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. West, C. and Zimmerman, D. (1983). "Small Insults: A Study of Interruptions in Cross-Sex Conversations between Unacquainted Persons," in Thorne, B., Kramarae, H. and Henley N. (Eds.), Lauguage, Gender and Society, Rowley: Newbury House, pp. 103--118.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Witmer, D.F., Colman, R.W. and Katzman, S.L. (1999). "From Paper-and-Pencil to Screen-and-Keyboard: Toward a Methodology for Survey Research on the Internet," in Jones, S. (Ed.), Doing Internet Research: Critical Issues and Methods for Examining the Net, Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, pp. 145--161.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Yaeger-Dror, M. (1998). "Factor Influencing the Contrast Between Men's and Women's Speech," Women and Language, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp. 40--46.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. Yates, S.J. (2001). "Gender, Language an CMC for Education," Learning and Instruction, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 21--34.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  52. Zimmerman, D. and West, C. (1975). "Sex--Roles, Interruptions and Silences in Conversation," in Thorne, B., Kramarae, H. and Henley N. (Eds.), Language and Sex: Difference and Dominance, Rowley: Newbury House, pp. 89--101.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. If you spoke as she does, sir, instead of the way you do: a sociolinguistics perspective of gender differences in virtual communities

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in

        Full Access

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader