Sex Roles

, Volume 39, Issue 3–4, pp 225–252 | Cite as

Meta-Analyses of Gender Effects on Conversational Interruption: Who, What, When, Where, and How

  • Kristin J. Anderson
  • Campbell Leaper

Abstract

Meta-analyses of 43 published studies comparingadult women's and men's interruptions duringconversations were conducted. Combined significancelevels and combined effect sizes were analyzed. Acrossstudies, men were significantly more likely than womento use interruptions. This difference, however, wasassociated with a negligible effect size (d = .15). Amore substantial effect size (d = .33) was found when studies looking specifically at intrusive typesof interruption were analyzed separately. Othermoderator variables were found to be related to gendereffects on the use of intrusive interruptions. Most notably, reports of gender differences inintrusive interruptions were more likely and larger inmagnitude when either women (versus men) were firstauthors, participants were observed in naturalistic(versus laboratory) settings, or participants wereobserved interacting in groups of three or more persons(versus in dyads). These results lend support to acontextual-interactive model of gender that emphasizes the importance of situational moderators ongender-related variations in social behavior.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Aries, E. (1996). Men and women in interaction: Reconsidering the difference. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bakeman, R., & Quera, V. (1995). Analyzing interaction: Sequential analysis with SDIS and GSEQ. New York: Cambridge University.Google Scholar
  3. Bakeman, R., & Gottman, J. M. (1986). Observing interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Beall, A. E. (1993). A social constructionist view of gender. In A. E. Beall & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The psychology of gender. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  5. Beattie, G. (1977). The dynamics of interruption and the filled pause. British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 16, 283–284.Google Scholar
  6. *Beattie, G. W. (1981). Interruption in conversational interaction and its relation to the sex and status of the interactants. Linguistics, 19, 5–35.Google Scholar
  7. *Bilous, F. R., & Krauss, R. M. (1988). Dominance and accommodation in the conversational behaviors of same-and mixed-gender dyads. Language and Communication, 8, 183–194.Google Scholar
  8. *Bohn, E., & Stutman, R. (1983). Sex role differences in the relational control dimension of dyadic interaction. Women's Studies in Communication, 6, 965–104.Google Scholar
  9. *Brooks, V. R. (1982). Sex differences in student dominance behavior in female and male professors' classrooms. Sex Roles, 8, 683–690.Google Scholar
  10. Campbell, K. E., Kleim, D. M., & Olson, K. R. (1992). Conversational activity and interruptions among men and women. The Journal of Social Psychology, 132, 419–421.Google Scholar
  11. *Carli, L. L. (1990). Gender, language, and influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 941–951.Google Scholar
  12. *Case, S. S. (1988). Cultural differences, not deficiencies: An analysis of managerial women's language. In S. Rose & L. Larwood (Eds.), Women's careers: Pathways and pitfalls. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
  13. Chambliss, C. A., & Feeny, N. (1992). Effect of sex of subject, sex of interrupter, and topic of conversation on the perceptions of interruptions. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 75, 1235–1241.Google Scholar
  14. Cohen, J. (1977). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (rev. ed.). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  15. *Craig, D., & Pitts, M. K. (1990). The dynamics of dominance in tutorial discussion. Linguistics, 28, 125–138.Google Scholar
  16. Crawford, M. (1995). Talking difference: On gender and language. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  17. *Dabbs, J. M., Jr., & Ruback, R. B. (1984). Vocal patterns in male and female groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 10, 518–525.Google Scholar
  18. *De Boer, M. (1987). Sex differences in language: Observations of dyadic conversations between members of the same sex. In D. Brouwer & D. de Haan (Eds.), Women's language, socialization and self-image. Providence, RI: Foris.Google Scholar
  19. Deaux, K., & Major, B. (1987). Putting gender into context: An interactive model of gender-related behavior. Psychological Review, 94, 369–389.Google Scholar
  20. *Dindia, K. (1987). The effects of sex of subject and sex of partner on interruptions. Human Communication Research, 13, 345–371.Google Scholar
  21. Drass, K. A. (1986). The effect of gender identity on conversation. Social Psychology Quarterly, 49, 294–301.Google Scholar
  22. Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L. (1981). Sex of researchers and sex-typed communications as determinants of sex differences in influenceability: A meta-analysis of social influence studies. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 1–20.Google Scholar
  23. *Eakins, B., & Eakins, R. G. (1976). Verbal turn-taking and exchanges in faculty dialogue. In B. L. Dubois & I. M. Crouch (Eds.), The sociology of the languages of American women. San Antonio, TX: Trinity University.Google Scholar
  24. *Fallon, J., & Guo, D. (1994). The relationship between topic familiarity and conversational dominance. Psychology, a Journal of Human Behavior, 31, 53–57.Google Scholar
  25. Ferguson, N. (1977). Simultaneous speech, interruptions and dominance. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 16, 295–302.Google Scholar
  26. *Frances, S. J. (1979). Sex differences in nonverbal behavior. Sex Roles, 5, 519–535.Google Scholar
  27. Goldberg, J. A. (1990). Interrupting the discourse on interruptions: An analysis in terms of relationally neutral, power-and rapport-oriented acts. Journal of Pragmatics, 14, 883–903.Google Scholar
  28. Hall, J. A. (1978). Gender effects in decoding nonverbal cues. Psychological Bulletin, 85, 845–857.Google Scholar
  29. Hawkins, K. (1991). Some consequences of deep interruption in task-oriented communication. Journal of Language & Social Psychology, 10, 185–203.Google Scholar
  30. Hyde, J. S., Fennema, E., & Lamon, S. J. (1990). Gender differences in mathematics performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 139–155.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Hyde, J. S., & Linn, M. C. (1988). Gender differences in verbal ability: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 104, 53–69.Google Scholar
  32. James, D., & Clarke, S. (1992). Interruptions, gender, and power: A critical review of the literature. In K. Hall, M. Bucholtz, & B. Moonwoman (Eds.), Locating power: Proceedings of the Second Berkeley Women and Language Conference. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Women and Language Group.Google Scholar
  33. James, D., & Clarke, S. (19930). Women, men, and interruptions: A critical review. In D. Tannen (Ed.), Gender and conversational interaction. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  34. *Johnson, C. (1994). Gender, legitimate authority, and leader-subordinate conversations. American Sociological Review, 59, 122–135.Google Scholar
  35. *Jones, E. S., & Gallois, C., Callan, V. J., & Barker, M. (1995). Language and power in an academic context: The effects of status, ethnicity, and sex. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 14, 434–461.Google Scholar
  36. *Kennedy, C. W., & Camden, C. (1983). A new look at interruptions. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 47, 45–58.Google Scholar
  37. *Kollock, P., Blumstein, P., & Schwartz, P. (1985). Sex and power in interaction: Conversational privileges and duties. American Sociological Review, 50, 34–46.Google Scholar
  38. *LaFrance, M., & Carmen, B. (1980). The nonverbal display of psychological androgyny. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 38, 36–49.Google Scholar
  39. Leaper, C. (1994). Exploring the consequences of gender segregation on social relationships. In C. Leaper (Ed.), Childhood gender segregation: Causes and consequences (New Directions for child Development, No. 65). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  40. Leaper, C., & Anderson, K. J. (1997). Gender development and heterosexual romantic relationships during adolescence. In W. Damon (Series Ed.) & S. Shulman & W. A. Collins (Issue Eds.), Romantic relationships in adolescence: Developmental perspectives (New Directions for Child Development, No. 78). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.Google Scholar
  41. Leaper, C., Anderson, K. J., & Sanders, P. (1998). Moderators of gender effects on parents' talk to their children: A meta-analysis. Developmental Psychology, 34, 3–27.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. *Leet-Pellegrini, H. M. (1980). Conversational dominance as a function of gender and expertise. In H. Giles, W. P. Robinson, & P. M. Smith (Eds.), Language: Social psychological perspectives. New York: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  43. *Leffler, A., Gillespie, D., & Conaty, J. C. (1982). The effects of status differentiation on nonverbal behavior. Social Psychology Quarterly, 45, 153–161.Google Scholar
  44. *Makri-Tsilipakou, M. (1994). Interruption revisited: Affiliative vs. disaffiliative intervention. Journal of Pragmatics, 21, 401–426.Google Scholar
  45. *Marche, T. A., & Peterson, C. (1993). The development and sex-related use of interruption behavior. Human Communication Research, 19, 388–408.Google Scholar
  46. *Margolin, G., & Wampold, B. E. (1981). Sequential analysis of conflict and accord in distressed and nondistressed marital partners. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 49, 554–567.Google Scholar
  47. *Martin, J. N., & Craig, R. T. (1983). Selected linguistic sex differences during initial social interactions of same-sex and mixed-sex student dyads. The Western Journal of Speech Communication, 47, 16–28.Google Scholar
  48. *McLachlan, A. (1991). The effects of agreement, disagreement, gender and familiarity on patterns of dyadic interaction. Journal of Language & Social Psychology, 10, 199–213.Google Scholar
  49. McLaughlin, M. L. (1984). Conversation: How talk is organized. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  50. *McMillan, J. R., Clifton, A. K., McGrath, D., & Gale, W. S. (1977). Women's language: Uncertainty, or interpersonal sensitivity and emotionality? Sex Roles, 3, 545–559.Google Scholar
  51. Mott, H., & Petrie, H. (1995). Workplace interactions: Women's linguistic behavior. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 14, 324–336.Google Scholar
  52. Mullen, B. (1989). Advanced BASIC meta-analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  53. Murata, K. (1994). Intrusive or co-operative? A cross-cultural study of interruption. Journal of Pragmatics, 21, 385–400.Google Scholar
  54. Murray, S. O., & Covelli, L. H. (1988). Women and men speaking at the same time. Journal of Pragmatics, 12, 103–111.Google Scholar
  55. *Natale, M., Entin, E., & Jaffe, J. (1979). Vocal interruptions in dyadic communication as a function of speech and social anxiety. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 37, 865–878.Google Scholar
  56. *Nemeth, C., Endicott, J., & Wachtler, J. (1976). From the '50s to the '70s: Women in jury deliberations. Sociometry, 39, 293–304.Google Scholar
  57. *Ng, S. H., Brook, M., & Dunne, M. (1995). Interruption and influence in discussion groups. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 14, 369–381.Google Scholar
  58. *Nohara, M. (1992). Sex differences in interruption. An experimental reevaluation. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 21, 127–146.Google Scholar
  59. *Redeker, G., & Maes, A. (1996). Gender differences in interruptions. In D. I. Slobin, J. Gerhardt, A. Kyratzis, & J. Guo (Eds.), Social interaction, social context, and language: Essays in honor of Susan Ervin-Tripp. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  60. Rim, Y. (1977). Personality variables and interruptions in small discussion. European Journal of Social Psychology, 7, 247–251.Google Scholar
  61. Robinson, L. F., & Reis, H. T. (1989). The effects on interruption, gender and status on interpersonal perceptions. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 13, 141–153.Google Scholar
  62. *Roger, D., Nesshoever, W. (1987). Individual differences in dyadic conversational strategies: A further study. British Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 247–255.Google Scholar
  63. *Roger, D. B., & Schumacher, A. (1983). Effects of individual differences on dyadic conversational strategies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 700–705.Google Scholar
  64. *Rogers, W. T., & Jones, S. E. (1980). Effects of dominance tendencies on floor holding and interruption behavior in dyadic interaction. Human Communication Research, 1, 113–122.Google Scholar
  65. Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50, 696–735.Google Scholar
  66. *Shaw, M. E., & Sadler, O. W. (1965). Interaction patterns in heterosexual dyads varying in degree of intimacy. Journal of Social Psychology, 66, 345–351.Google Scholar
  67. *Simkins-Bullock, J., & Wildman, B. G. (1991). An investigation into the relationships between gender and language. Sex Roles, 24, 149–160.Google Scholar
  68. *Smeltzer, L. R., & Watson, K. W. (1986). Gender differences in verbal communication during negotiations. Communication Research Reports, 3, 74–79.Google Scholar
  69. *Smith, H. W. (1977). Small group interaction at various ages: Simultaneous talking and interruptions of others. Small Group Behavior, 8, 65–74.Google Scholar
  70. Smith-Lovin, L., & Brody, C. (1989). Interruptions in group discussions: The effects of gender and group composition. American Sociological Review, 54, 424–435.Google Scholar
  71. *Street, R. L., Jr., & Murphy, T. L. (1987). Interpersonal orientation and speech behavior. Communication Monographs, 54, 42–62.Google Scholar
  72. Tannen, D. (1983). When is an overlap not an interruption? One component of conversational style. In R. J. DePietro, W. Frawley, & A. Wedel (Eds.), The first Delaware Symposium on Language Studies. Newark, DE: University of Delaware Press.Google Scholar
  73. Tannen, D. (1994). Interpreting interruption in conversation. In D. Tannen (Ed.), Gender and discourse. New York: Oxford.Google Scholar
  74. Thimm, C., Rademacher, U., & Kruse, L. (1995). “Power-related talk”: Control in verbal interaction. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 14, 382–407.Google Scholar
  75. Thomas, A. P., Roger, D., & Bull, P. (1983). A sequential analysis of informal dyadic conversation using Markov chains. British Journal of Social Psychology, 22, 177–188.Google Scholar
  76. *Trimboli, C., & Walker, M. B. (1984). Switching pauses in cooperative and competitive conversations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 20, 297–311.Google Scholar
  77. *Welkowitz, J., Bond, R. N., & Feldstein, S. (1984). Conversational time patterns of Japanese-American adults and children in same and mixed-gender dyads. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 3, 127–138.Google Scholar
  78. *West, C., & Zimmerman, D. (1983). Small insults: A study of interruptions in cross-sec conversations between unacquainted person. In B. Thorne, C. Kramarae, & N. Henley (Eds.), Language, gender and society. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
  79. Willis, F. N., & Williams, S. J. (1976). Simultaneous talking in conversation and sex of speakers. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 43, 1067–1070.Google Scholar
  80. Wood, W., & Karten, S. J. (1986). Sex differences in interaction style as a product of perceived sex differences in competence. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 50, 341–347.Google Scholar
  81. Woods, N. (1989). Talking shop: Sex and status as determinants of floor apportionment in a work setting. In J. Coates & D. Cameron (Eds.), Women in their speech communities. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  82. Zimmerman, D. H., & West, C. (1975). Sex roles, interruptions and silences in conversation. In B. Thorne & N. Henley (Eds.), Language and sex: Difference and dominance. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kristin J. Anderson
  • Campbell Leaper

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations