Journal of Language and Social Psychology

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Free Access - Register Here

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mulac, A.
Right arrow Articles by Lundell, T. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Journal of Language and Social Psychology, Vol. 5, No. 2, 81-101 (1986)
DOI: 10.1177/0261927X8652001

Linguistic Contributors to the Gender-Linked Language Effect

Anthony Mulac

Communication Studies Program, University of California, Santa Barbara

Torborg Louisa Lundell

Department of Germanic, Oriental and Slavic Languages and Literature, University of California, Santa Barbara

Forty Speakers (20 male, 20 female), ranging from 11 to 69 years of age, described landscape photographs orally to a researcher. Orthographic transcripts were analysed for 31 linguistic variables. A discriminant analysis showed that a combination of 17 variables predicted speaker gender with 87.5% accuracy. The 17 gender-discriminating language variables were used in multiple regression analyses to predict previously found (Mulac & Lundell, 1980) speaker attribution ratings for these speakers. Results showed significant predictive ability for all three attributional dimensions: Socio-Intellectual Status (R 2= 0.53), Aesthetic Quality (R2 =0.43), and Dynamism (R2=0.33). Of the 14 language variables displaying effects consistent with the Gender-Linked Language Effect, seven were more indicative of male speakers: impersonals, fillers, elliptical sentences, units, justifiers, geographical references, and spatial references. Greater use of the other seven variables was more indicative of female speakers: intensive adverbs, personal pronouns, negations, verbs of cognition, dependent clauses with subordinating conjunctions understood, oppositions, and pauses. These clusters of male and female contributors to the effect are discussed in terms of potential underlying communication strategies.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Journal of Language and Social PsychologyHome page
K. Robertson and T. Murachver
Intimate Partner Violence: Linguistic Features and Accommodation Behavior of Perpetrators and Victims
Journal of Language and Social Psychology, December 1, 2006; 25(4): 406 - 422.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Written CommunicationHome page
A. Janssen and T. Murachver
The Relationship between Gender and Topic in Gender-Preferential Language Use
Written Communication, October 1, 2004; 21(4): 344 - 367.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Language and Social PsychologyHome page
A. Janssen and T. Murachver
The Role of Gender in New Zealand Literature: Comparisons Across Periods and Styles of Writing
Journal of Language and Social Psychology, June 1, 2004; 23(2): 180 - 203.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Language and Social PsychologyHome page
J. A. Green
The Writing on the Stall: Gender and Graffiti
Journal of Language and Social Psychology, September 1, 2003; 22(3): 282 - 296.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Language and Social PsychologyHome page
A. Mulac, D. R. Seibold, and J. L. Farris
Female and Male Managers' and Professionals' Criticism Giving: Differences in Language Use and Effects
Journal of Language and Social Psychology, December 1, 2000; 19(4): 389 - 415.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Language and Social PsychologyHome page
C. Gallois and J. Pittam
Social Psychological Approaches to Using Natural Language Texts
Journal of Language and Social Psychology, March 1, 1995; 14(1-2): 5 - 17.
[Abstract]


Home page
Journal of Language and Social PsychologyHome page
M. A. Fitzpatrick, A. Mulac, and K. Dindia
Gender-Preferential Language Use in Spouse and Stranger Interaction
Journal of Language and Social Psychology, March 1, 1995; 14(1-2): 18 - 39.
[Abstract]


Home page
Journal of Language and Social PsychologyHome page
K. Greene and D. L. Rubin
Effects of Gender Inclusive/Exclusive Language in Religious Discourse
Journal of Language and Social Psychology, June 1, 1991; 10(2): 81 - 98.
[Abstract]


Home page
Journal of Language and Social PsychologyHome page
S. G. Lawrence and R. Hopper
The Effects of Sex Dialects and Sex Stereotypes on Speech Evaluations
Journal of Language and Social Psychology, September 1, 1990; 9(3): 209 - 224.
[Abstract]


Home page
Journal of Language and Social PsychologyHome page
A. Mulac
Men's and Women's Talk in Same-Gender and Mixed-Gender Dyads: Power or Polemic?'
Journal of Language and Social Psychology, September 1, 1989; 8(3-4): 249 - 270.
[Abstract]