This study investigated ways in which gender identity is enacted within written language. Participants first supplied a self-descriptive letter that might be filed with a dating service. Next, they responded to a fabricated personal ad posted by a potential dating partner. Contextual factors in this study were writing task (self-description or response to a personal ad) and the gender role “bid” (either instrumental or expressive) of the hypothetical personal ad writer. Individual difference variables were biological gender and measured gender role orientation. Texts were coded for frequency of seven gender-typed language features (e.g., hedges, first-person pronouns). Writers’ own gender role schemata affected their language use, as did their biological sex. Contextual factors were more potent than the writers’ gender in affecting these stylistic features. Overall, writers altered their styles to complement (rather than converge toward) the apparent gender role orientations of their interlocutors.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Ahuvia, A. C.
, & Adelman, M. B. (1992). Formal intermediaries in the marriage market: A typology and review. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 54, 452-463.
2.
Aries, E.
(1996). Men and women in interaction: Reconsidering the differences. New York: Oxford University Press.
3.
Ayres, J.
(1992). Personal ads: An exploratory investigation into the relationships among ad characteristics, communication apprehension and contact. Communication Reports, 5, 67-72.
4.
Balester, V. M.
(1993). Cultural divide: A study of African-American college-level writers. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.
5.
Bell, R. A.
, & Daly, J. A. (1984). The affinity-seeking function of communication. Communication Monographs, 51, 91-113.
6.
Bem, S. L.
(1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42, 155-162.
7.
Bem, S. L.
(1981). Gender role schema: A cognitive account of sex typing. Psychological Review, 88, 354-364.
8.
Bem, S. L.
(1984). Androgyny and gender schema theory: A conceptual and empirical integration. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 32, 179-226.
9.
Bem, S. L.
(1993). The lenses of gender: Transforming the debate on sexual inequality. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
10.
Blom, J.
, & Gumperz, J. J. (1972). Social meaning and linguistic structure: Code-switching in Norway. In J. J. Gumperz & D. Hymes (Eds.), New directions in sociolinguistics (pp. 407-434). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
11.
Bohan, J. S.
(1993). Regarding gender: Essentialism, constructionism and feminist psychology. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 17, 5-21.
12.
Bolig, R.
, Stein, P. J., & McKenry, P. C. (1984). The self-advertisement approach to dating: Male-female differences. Family Relations, 33, 587-592.
13.
Burgoon, J. K.
, Stern, L. A., & Dillman, L. (1995). Interpersonal adaptation: Dyadic interaction patterns. New York: Cambridge University Press.
14.
Chafe, W.
(1986). Writing in the perspective of speaking. In C. Cooper & S. Greenbaum (Eds.), Studying writing: Linguistic approaches (pp.12-39). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
15.
Collier, M. J.
, & Thomas, M. (1988). Cultural identity: An interpretive perspective. In Y. Y. Kim & W. B. Gudykunst (Eds.), Theories in intercultural communication (pp. 99-122). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
16.
Coupland, J.
(1996). Dating advertisements: Discourses of the commodified self. Discourse and Society, 7, 187-207.
17.
Crawford, M.
(1995). Talking difference: On gender and language. London: Sage Ltd.
18.
Crowhurst, M.
, & Piché, G. L. (1979). Audience and mode of discourse effects on syntactic complexity at two grade levels. Research in the Teaching of English, 13, 101-109.
19.
Deaux, K.
, & Hanna, R. (1984). Courtship in the personals column: The influence of gender and sexual orientation. Sex Roles, 11, 363-375.
20.
Douglas, W.
(1987). Affinity-testing in initial interactions. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 4, 3-15.
21.
Edelsky, C.
(1976). The acquisition of communication competence: Recognition of linguistic correlates of sex roles. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly of Behavior and Development, 22, 47-59.
22.
Freimuth, M. J.
, & Hornstein, G. A. (1982). A critical examination of the concept of gender. Sex Roles, 8, 515-532.
23.
Giles, H.
, Coupland, N., & Coupland, J. (1991). Accommodation theory: Communication, context, and consequence. In H. Giles, J. Coupland, & N. Coupland (Eds.), Contexts of accomodation: Developments in applied sociolinguistics (pp. 1-68). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
24.
Greenlees, I. A.
, & McGrew, W. C. (1994). Sex and age differences in preferences and tactics of mate attraction: Analysis of published advertisements. Ethology and Sociobiology, 15, 59-72.
25.
Grob, L. M.
, Meyers, R. A., & Schuh, R. (1997). Powerful/powerless language use in group interactions: Sex differences or similarities?Communication Quarterly, 45, 282-303.
26.
Harrison, A. A.
, & Saeed, L. (1977). Let’s make a deal: An analysis of revelations and stipulations in lonely hearts advertisements. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 257-264.
27.
Hiatt, M.
(1977). The way women write. New York: Teachers College Press.
28.
Hogg, M. A.
(1985). Masculine and feminine speech in dyads and groups: A study of speech style and gender salience. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 4, 99-112.
29.
Hogg, M. A.
, & Rigoli, N. (1996). Effects of ethnolinguistic vitality, ethnic identification, and linguistic contacts on minority language use. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 15, 76-89.
30.
Holmes, J.
(1986). Functions of you know in women’s and men’s speech. Language in Society, 15(1), 1-21.
31.
House, A.
, Dallinger, J. M., & Kilgallen, D. (1998). Androgyny and rhetorical sensitivity: The connection of gender and communicator style. Communication Reports, 11, 11-21.
32.
Huberty, C. V.
, & Morris, J. D. (1989). Multivariate analysis versus multiple univariate analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 302-308.
33.
Jason, L. A.
, Moritsugu, J. N., & DePalma, D. M. (1982). Advertising as a strategy for meeting people. Psychological Reports, 71, 1311-1314.
34.
Johnson, D.
, & Roen, D. (1992). Complimenting and involvement in peer reviews. Language in Society, 21, 27-57.
35.
Koestner, R.
, & Wheeler, L. (1988). Self-presentation in personal advertisements: The influence of implicit notions of attraction and role expectations. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 5, 149-160.
36.
Kramarae, C.
(1990). Changing the complexion of gender in language research. In H. Giles & W. P. Robinson (Eds.), Handbook of language and social psychology (pp. 345-360). New York: John Wiley.
37.
Kramer, C.
, Thorne, B., & Henley, N. (1978). Review essay: Perspectives on language and communication. Signs: A Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 3, 638-651.
38.
Lakoff, R.
(1975). Language and women’s place. New York: Harper & Row.
39.
Meyerhoff, M.
(1998). Accommodating your data: The use and misuse of accommodation theory in sociolinguistics. Language & Communication, 18, 205-225.
40.
Montini, T.
, & Ovrebro, B. (1990). Personal relationship ads: An informal balancing act. Psychological Perspectives, 33, 327-339.
41.
Mulac, A.
, Lundell, T. L., & Bradac, J. 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.
42.
Nichols, P. C.
(1983). Linguistic options and choices for Black women in the rural South. In B. Thorne, C. Kramarae, & N. Henley (Eds.), Language, gender and society (pp. 54-68). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
43.
O’Barr, W.
, & Atkins, B. K. (1980). “Women’s language”or “powerless language.” In S. McConnell-Ginet, R. Borker, & N. Furman (Eds.), Women and language in literature and society (pp. 93-110). New York: Praeger.
44.
Parrott, R.
, Lemieux, R., Travillion, L., & Harris, T. (1997). Interfacing interpersonal and mediated communication: Strategic self-disclosure in personal ads. Southern Communication Journal, 64(2), 318-331.
45.
Redd, T. M.
(1995). Untapped resources: “Styling” in Black students’ writing. In D. Rubin (Ed.), Composing social identity in written language (pp. 221-240). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
46.
Roulis, E.
(1995). Gendered voice in composing, gendered voice in evaluating: Gender and the assessment of writing quality. In D. Rubin (Ed.), Composing social identity in written language (pp. 151-186). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
47.
Rubin, D. L.
(1982). Adapting syntax in writing to varying audiences as a function of age and social cognitive ability. Journal of Child Language, 9, 497-510.
48.
Rubin, D. L.
(1995). Introduction: Composing social identity. In D. Rubin (Ed.), Composing social identity in written language (pp. 1-30). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
49.
Rubin, D. L.
(1998). Writing for readers: The primacy of audience in composing. In N. Nelson & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), The reading-writing connection (97th yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, part 2) (pp.53-73). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
50.
Rubin, D. L.
, & Greene, K. (1992). Gender-typical style in written language. Research in the Teaching of English, 26, 7-40.
51.
Rubin, D. L.
, & Greene, K. (1995). The suppressed voice hypothesis in women’s writing: Effects of revision of gender-typical style. In D. Rubin (Ed.), Composing social identity in written language (pp. 133-150). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
52.
Rubin, D. L.
, & Nelson, M. W. (1983). Multiple determinants of stigmatized speech style: Women’s language, powerless language, or everyone’s language?Language and Speech, 26, 273-290.
53.
Sachdev, I.
, & Bourhis, R. Y. (1990). Language and social identification. In D. Abrams & M. A. Hogg (Eds.), Social identity theory (pp. 211-229). New York: Springer-Verlag.
54.
Scollon, R.
, & Scollon, S. W. (1995). Intercultural communication: A discourse approach. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
55.
Sitton, S.
, & Rippee, E. T. (1986). Women still want marriage: Sex differences in lonely hearts advertisements. Psychological Reports, 58, 257-258.
56.
Sterkel, K.
(1988). The relationship between gender and writing style in business communication. Journal of Business Communication, 25, 17-38.
57.
Tannen, D.
(1982). The oral/literate continuum in discourse. In D. Tannen (Ed.), Spoken and written language: Exploring orality and literacy (pp.1-16). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
58.
Thiessen, D.
, Young, R. K., & Burroughs, R. (1993). Lonely hearts advertisements reflect sexually dimorphic mating strategies. Ethology and Sociobiology, 14, 209-229.
59.
Waters, M. C.
(1990). Ethnic options: Choosing identities in America. Berkeley: University of California Press.
60.
West, C.
, & Zimmerman, D. (1987). Doing gender. Gender and Society, 1, 125-151.
61.
Wheeless, V. E.
, & Dierks-Stewart, K. (1981). The psychometric properties of the Bem Sex-Role Inventory. Communication Quarterly, 29, 173-186.
62.
Willis, F. N.
, & Carlson, R. A. (1993). Singles ads: Gender, social class and time. Sex Roles, 29, 387-404.
63.
Yaeger-Dror, M.
(1998). Factors influencing the contrast between men’s and women’s speech. Women and Language, 21(1), 40-45.
64.
Zeni, J.
, & Thomas, J. K. (1990). Suburban African American basic writers: A text analysis. Journal of Basic Writing, 9(2), 15-39.
