SELECT AN EDITION:
9th EDITION   10th EDITION   11th EDITION
A First Look at Communication Theory Reveal main menu
 

The screen on this device is not wide enough to display Theory Resources. Try rotating the device to landscape orientation to see if more options become available.

Resources available to all users:

  • Text Comparison—theories covered in A First Look and ten other textbooks
  • Theory Overview—abstract of each chapter
  • Self-Help Quizzes—for student preparation
  • Chapter Outlines
  • Key Names—important names and terms in each chapter
  • Conversation Videos—interviews with theorists
  • Application Logs—student application of theories
  • Essay Questions—for student prepatation
  • Suggested Movie Clips—tie-in movie scenese to theories
  • Links—web resources related to each chapter
  • Primary Sources—for each theory with full chapter coverage
  • Further Resources—bibliographic and other suggestions
  • Changes—for each theory, since the previous edition
  • Theory Archive—PDF copies from the last edition in which a theory appeared

Resources available only to registered instructors who are logged in:

  • Discussion Suggestions
  • Exercises & Activities
  • PowerPoint® presentations you can use
  • Short Answer Quizzes—suggested questions and answers

Information for Instructors. Read more


CHANGE TO: View by Type

Resources
by Theory

 VIEW BY THEORY HOME
For the full list of resources
see View by Type

Instructors can get additional
resources. Read more





CONVERSATION VIDEOS








TEXT COMPARISON

Archived chapters (PDF)
from previous editions are
available in Resources by
Type. See list

New to Theory Resources?
Find out more in this
short video overview (3:01).


Genderlect Styles
Deborah Tannen

CULTURAL CONTEXT: GENDER AND COMMUNICATION

Chapter 31
 Gender and Communication
Standpoint Theory 
Chapter 31
 Gender and Communication
Standpoint Theory 

Chapter Outline 10th Edition

  1. Introduction.
    1. Deborah Tannen argues that male-female communication is cross-cultural.
    2. Miscommunication between men and women is both common and insidious because the parties usually don’t realize that the encounters are cross-cultural.
    3. Tannen’s writing underscores the mutually alien nature of male and female conversation styles.
    4. Tannen’s approach departs from much feminist scholarship that claims that conversations between men and women reflect male domination.
      1. She assumes that male and female conversational styles are equally valid.
      2. The term genderlect suggests that masculine and feminine styles of discourse are best viewed as two distinct cultural dialects rather than as inferior or superior ways of speaking.
    5. At the risk of reinforcing a reductive biological determinism, Tannen insists that there are gender differences in the ways we speak.
  2. Women’s desire for connection versus men’s desire for status.
    1. More than anything else, women seek human connection.
    2. Men are concerned mainly with status.
    3. Tannen agrees that many men and women would like to have intimacy and independence in every situation if they could, but she doesn’t think it’s possible.
    4. Tannen does not believe that men and women seek only status or connection, respectively, but these are their primary goals.
  3. Rapport talk versus report talk.
    1. Tannen scrutinizes the conversation of representative speakers from the feminine culture and the masculine culture to determine their core values.
    2. These linguistic differences give her confidence that the connection/status distinction structures verbal contact between women and men.
    3. Julia Wood thinks that Tannen’s observations have merit and that the connection/status distinction is evident even in childhood.
    4. Each of these speech forms shows that women value rapport talk, while men value report talk.
      1. Public speaking versus private speaking.
        1. Folk wisdom suggests that women talk more than men.
        2. Women talk more than do men in private conversations.
        3. In the public arena, men vie for ascendancy and speak much more than do women.
        4. James Pennebaker’s empirical evidence calls into question the supposed gender difference in the quantity of talk, but not necessarily its quality—its tone and intent.
        5. Men assume a lecture style to establish a “one-up” position, command attention, convey information, and insist on agreement.
        6. Men’s monologue style is appropriate for report, but not for rapport.
        7. Girls learn to involve others in conversations while boys learn to use communication to assert their own ideas and draw attention to themselves.
      2. Telling a story.
        1. Tannen recognizes that the stories people tell reveal a great deal about their hopes, needs, and values.
        2. Men tell more stories and jokes than do women.
          1. Telling jokes is a masculine way to negotiate status.
          2. Men are the heroes in their own stories.
        3. When women tell stories, they downplay themselves.
      3. Listening.
        1. Women show attentiveness through verbal and nonverbal cues.
        2. Men may avoid these cues to keep from appearing “one-down.”
        3. A woman interrupts to show agreement, to give support, or to supply what she thinks the speaker will say (a cooperative overlap).
        4. Men regard any interruption as a power move.
      4. Asking questions.
        1. Tannen thinks that men and women also annoy each other with their different ways of asking questions—or of not asking them.
        2. Men don’t ask for help because it exposes their ignorance.
        3. Women ask questions to establish a connection with others.
        4. When women state their opinions, they often use tag questions to soften the sting of potential disagreement and to invite participation in open, friendly dialogue.
      5. Conflict.
        1. Since they see life as a contest, many men are more comfortable with conflict and are therefore less likely to hold themselves in check.
        2. To women, conflict is a threat to connection to be avoided at all costs.
        3. Men are extremely wary about being told what to do.
      6. Nonverbal communication.
        1. Curiously, Tannen doesn’t extend the connection/status distinction to the ways in which men and women communicate nonverbally.
        2. Susan Pease Gadoua, a licensed marriage counselor with a column in Psychology Today magazine, finds it difficult to analyze the way men and women talk to each other without also including the nonverbal component.
        3. Sadly, Gadoua observes that when women want to connect and men want to have sex, it’s often the case that neither activity takes place.
  4. Men and women grow up in different speech communities
    1. Tannen concluded that the origins of speaking in different genderlects must be traced back to early childhood.
    2. Linguists and communication scholars refer to the segregated groups to which boys and girls belong as speech communities.
    3. The differences that Tannen sees between the speech of adult males and females have their roots in the early socialization of children.
  5. “Now you’re beginning to understand.”
    1. Tannen believes that both men and women need to learn how to adopt the other’s voice.
    2. However, she expresses only guarded hope that men and women will alter their linguistic styles.
    3. She has more confidence in the benefits of multicultural understanding between men and women.
  6. Ethical reflection: Gilligan’s different voice.
    1. Gilligan claims that women tend to think and speak in an ethical voice different from men.
    2. She believes men seek autonomy and think in terms of justice; women desire linkage and think in terms of care.
    3. Men’s justice is impersonal; women’s is contextual.
    4. Though more descriptive than prescriptive, the underlying assumption is that the way things are reflects the way things ought to be.
    5. Gilligan’s theory suggests different ethics for different groups.
  7. Critique: Is Tannen soft on research--and men?
    1. Tannen suggests we use the “aha factor”—a subjective standard of validity—to test her truth claims.
    2. Tannen’s analysis of common misunderstandings between men and women has struck a chord with millions of readers and mental health care professionals.
    3. Critics suggest that selective data may be the only way to support a reductionist claim that women are one way and men another.
    4. Tannen’s intimacy/independence dichotomy echoes one of Baxter and Bakhtin’s tensions, but it suggests none of the ongoing complexity of human existence that relational dialectics theory describes.
    5. Tannen’s assertions about male and female styles run the risk of becoming self-fulfilling prophecy.
    6. Adrianne Kunkel and Brant Burleson challenged the different cultures perspective that is at the heart of Tannen’s genderlect theory, citing their work on comforting as equally valuable to both sexes.
    7. Senta Troemel-Ploetz accuses Tannen of ignoring issues of male dominance, control, power, sexism, discrimination, sexual harassment, and verbal insults.
      1. You cannot omit issues of power from communication.
      2. Men understand what women want but give it only when it suits them.
      3. Tannen’s theory should be tested to see if men who read her book talk more empathetically with their wives.

CHANGE TO: View by Type

Resources
by Theory

 THEORY HOME
For the full list of resources
see View by Type

Instructors can get additional
resources. Read more





VIDEOS








TEXT COMPARE

Archived chapters (PDF)
from previous editions
are available in
Resources by Type.
See list

New to Theory
Resources?
Find out more in this short
video overview (3:01).


Genderlect Styles
Deborah Tannen

CULTURAL CONTEXT: GENDER AND COMMUNICATION

Chapter 31
 Gender and Communication
Standpoint Theory 
Chapter 31
 Gender and Communication
Standpoint Theory 

Chapter Outline 10th Edition

  1. Introduction.
    1. Deborah Tannen argues that male-female communication is cross-cultural.
    2. Miscommunication between men and women is both common and insidious because the parties usually don’t realize that the encounters are cross-cultural.
    3. Tannen’s writing underscores the mutually alien nature of male and female conversation styles.
    4. Tannen’s approach departs from much feminist scholarship that claims that conversations between men and women reflect male domination.
      1. She assumes that male and female conversational styles are equally valid.
      2. The term genderlect suggests that masculine and feminine styles of discourse are best viewed as two distinct cultural dialects rather than as inferior or superior ways of speaking.
    5. At the risk of reinforcing a reductive biological determinism, Tannen insists that there are gender differences in the ways we speak.
  2. Women’s desire for connection versus men’s desire for status.
    1. More than anything else, women seek human connection.
    2. Men are concerned mainly with status.
    3. Tannen agrees that many men and women would like to have intimacy and independence in every situation if they could, but she doesn’t think it’s possible.
    4. Tannen does not believe that men and women seek only status or connection, respectively, but these are their primary goals.
  3. Rapport talk versus report talk.
    1. Tannen scrutinizes the conversation of representative speakers from the feminine culture and the masculine culture to determine their core values.
    2. These linguistic differences give her confidence that the connection/status distinction structures verbal contact between women and men.
    3. Julia Wood thinks that Tannen’s observations have merit and that the connection/status distinction is evident even in childhood.
    4. Each of these speech forms shows that women value rapport talk, while men value report talk.
      1. Public speaking versus private speaking.
        1. Folk wisdom suggests that women talk more than men.
        2. Women talk more than do men in private conversations.
        3. In the public arena, men vie for ascendancy and speak much more than do women.
        4. James Pennebaker’s empirical evidence calls into question the supposed gender difference in the quantity of talk, but not necessarily its quality—its tone and intent.
        5. Men assume a lecture style to establish a “one-up” position, command attention, convey information, and insist on agreement.
        6. Men’s monologue style is appropriate for report, but not for rapport.
        7. Girls learn to involve others in conversations while boys learn to use communication to assert their own ideas and draw attention to themselves.
      2. Telling a story.
        1. Tannen recognizes that the stories people tell reveal a great deal about their hopes, needs, and values.
        2. Men tell more stories and jokes than do women.
          1. Telling jokes is a masculine way to negotiate status.
          2. Men are the heroes in their own stories.
        3. When women tell stories, they downplay themselves.
      3. Listening.
        1. Women show attentiveness through verbal and nonverbal cues.
        2. Men may avoid these cues to keep from appearing “one-down.”
        3. A woman interrupts to show agreement, to give support, or to supply what she thinks the speaker will say (a cooperative overlap).
        4. Men regard any interruption as a power move.
      4. Asking questions.
        1. Tannen thinks that men and women also annoy each other with their different ways of asking questions—or of not asking them.
        2. Men don’t ask for help because it exposes their ignorance.
        3. Women ask questions to establish a connection with others.
        4. When women state their opinions, they often use tag questions to soften the sting of potential disagreement and to invite participation in open, friendly dialogue.
      5. Conflict.
        1. Since they see life as a contest, many men are more comfortable with conflict and are therefore less likely to hold themselves in check.
        2. To women, conflict is a threat to connection to be avoided at all costs.
        3. Men are extremely wary about being told what to do.
      6. Nonverbal communication.
        1. Curiously, Tannen doesn’t extend the connection/status distinction to the ways in which men and women communicate nonverbally.
        2. Susan Pease Gadoua, a licensed marriage counselor with a column in Psychology Today magazine, finds it difficult to analyze the way men and women talk to each other without also including the nonverbal component.
        3. Sadly, Gadoua observes that when women want to connect and men want to have sex, it’s often the case that neither activity takes place.
  4. Men and women grow up in different speech communities
    1. Tannen concluded that the origins of speaking in different genderlects must be traced back to early childhood.
    2. Linguists and communication scholars refer to the segregated groups to which boys and girls belong as speech communities.
    3. The differences that Tannen sees between the speech of adult males and females have their roots in the early socialization of children.
  5. “Now you’re beginning to understand.”
    1. Tannen believes that both men and women need to learn how to adopt the other’s voice.
    2. However, she expresses only guarded hope that men and women will alter their linguistic styles.
    3. She has more confidence in the benefits of multicultural understanding between men and women.
  6. Ethical reflection: Gilligan’s different voice.
    1. Gilligan claims that women tend to think and speak in an ethical voice different from men.
    2. She believes men seek autonomy and think in terms of justice; women desire linkage and think in terms of care.
    3. Men’s justice is impersonal; women’s is contextual.
    4. Though more descriptive than prescriptive, the underlying assumption is that the way things are reflects the way things ought to be.
    5. Gilligan’s theory suggests different ethics for different groups.
  7. Critique: Is Tannen soft on research--and men?
    1. Tannen suggests we use the “aha factor”—a subjective standard of validity—to test her truth claims.
    2. Tannen’s analysis of common misunderstandings between men and women has struck a chord with millions of readers and mental health care professionals.
    3. Critics suggest that selective data may be the only way to support a reductionist claim that women are one way and men another.
    4. Tannen’s intimacy/independence dichotomy echoes one of Baxter and Bakhtin’s tensions, but it suggests none of the ongoing complexity of human existence that relational dialectics theory describes.
    5. Tannen’s assertions about male and female styles run the risk of becoming self-fulfilling prophecy.
    6. Adrianne Kunkel and Brant Burleson challenged the different cultures perspective that is at the heart of Tannen’s genderlect theory, citing their work on comforting as equally valuable to both sexes.
    7. Senta Troemel-Ploetz accuses Tannen of ignoring issues of male dominance, control, power, sexism, discrimination, sexual harassment, and verbal insults.
      1. You cannot omit issues of power from communication.
      2. Men understand what women want but give it only when it suits them.
      3. Tannen’s theory should be tested to see if men who read her book talk more empathetically with their wives.

 
 
 
Home  McGraw-Hill—How to get copies of A First Look  Information for Instructors  Meet the Authors
Compare Comm Theory Texts  Viewing Hints & Troubleshooting  Changes in the 10th Edition  Website Changes
Contact Us  Instructor Login 
 
 

Copyright © Em Griffin 2024 | Web design by Graphic Impact