Skip to main content
Log in

Sex differences in imagined interactions

  • Published:
Sex Roles Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Empirical research has revealed a variety of differences in the communication behavior of males and females. This study addresses whether males and females think differently about communication. Imagined interactions are cognitive representations of interactive behavior in which the actor experiences the self to be engaged in communication with another. Results of a study reveal that females have more frequent and pleasant imagined interactions, they imagine more self-words, and they are more likely to imagine and recall the scene of imagined interactions than males.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Argyle, M., Lalljee, M., & Cook, M. The effects of visibility on interaction in a dyad. Human Relations, 1968, 21, 3–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crosby, F., Jose, P., & Wong-McCarthy, W. Gender, androgyny, and conversational assertiveness. In C. Mayo & N. Henley (Eds.), Gender and nonverbal behavior. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eakins, B. W., & Eakins, R. G. Sex differences in human communication. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, R., Honeycutt, J. M., & Zagacki, K. S. Imagined interaction as an element of social cognition. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 1988, 52, 23–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fugita, B. N., Harper, R. G., & Wiens, A. N. Encoding-decoding of nonverbal emotional messages: Sex differences in spontaneous and enacted expressions. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 1980, 4, 131–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haas, A., & Sherman, M. Reported topics of conversation among same-sex adults. Communication Quarterly, 1982, 30, 332–342.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henley, N. Body politics: Power, sex and nonverbal communication. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  • Honeycutt, J. M., Edwards, R., & Zagacki, K. S. Using imagined interaction features to predict measures of self-awareness: Loneliness, locus of control, self-dominance, and emotional intensity. Imagination, Cognition, and Personality, 1989–1990, 9, 17–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Honeycutt, J. M., Zagacki, K. S., & Edwards, R. Interpersonal communication, social cognition, and imagined interactions. In C. V. Roberts & K. W. Watson (Eds.), Intrapersonal communication processes: Original essays. New Orleans: Spectra, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ickes, W. Sex-role influences in dyadic interaction: A theoretical model. In C. Mayo & N. Henley (Eds.), Gender and nonverbal behavior. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ickes, W., & Barnes, R. D. The role of sex and self-monitoring in unstructured dyadic interactions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1977, 35, 315–330.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ickes, W., Schermer, B., & Steeno, J. Sex and sex-role influences in same-sex dyads. Social Psychology Quarterly, 1979, 2, 373–385.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ickes, W., Patterson, M. L., Rajecki, D. W., & Tanford, S. Behavioral and cognitive consequences of reciprocal versus compensatory responses to preinteraction expectancies. Social Cognition, 1982, 1, 160–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Indvik, J., & Fitzpatrick, M. A. If you could read my mind, love...: Understanding and misunderstanding in the marital dyad. Family Relations, 1982, 31, 43–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laing, R. D. Self and others. London: Tavistock, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mead, G. H. Mind, self and society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1934.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norton, R. W. Communicator style: Theory applications and measures. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norton, R. W., & Montgomery, B. Sex differences and similarities in communicator style. Communication Monographs, 1981, 48, 121–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenblatt, P. C., & Meyer, C. Imagined interactions and the family. Family Relations, 1986, 35, 319–324.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, Z., Peplau, L. A., & Hill, C. T. Loving and leaving: Sex differences in romantic attachments. Sex Roles, 1981, 7, 821–835.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shimanoff, S. B. The role of gender in linguistic references to emotive states. Communication Quarterly, 1983, 30, 174–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, J. L. Imagery and daydream methods in psychotherapy and behavior modification. New York: Academic Press, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, J. L. Experimental studies of daydreaming and the stream of thought. In K. S. Pope & J. L. Singer (Eds.), The stream of consciousness. New York: Plenum, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, H. Same-sex versus across-sex observational recognition: An effect of attention or recall? Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1983, 57, 380–382.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zagacki, K. S., Edwards, R., & Honeycutt, J. M. Imagined interactions, social cognition and intrapersonal communication: Elaboration of a theoretical construct. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Speech Communication Association Conference, New Orleans, LA, 1988.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Edwards, R., Honeycutt, J.M. & Zagacki, K.S. Sex differences in imagined interactions. Sex Roles 21, 263–272 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00289906

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00289906

Keywords

Navigation