The bases for differing evaluations of male and female speech: Evidence from ratings of transcribed conversation

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Studies of sex‐linked language variation devised to test Lakoff's genderlect theory have yielded inconsistent findings. Yet studies of evaluative reactions to the speech forms she hypothesized as “male”; and “female”; have consistently yielded preferential reactions to the male language. A series of studies by Mulac and his colleagues assessing evaluative reactions to the language used by actual speakers has found higher ratings of the dynamism of male speakers but also higher ratings of the aesthetic quality of female speakers. These evaluations occur despite raters’ inability to identify the sex of speakers from transcripts of their language productions. Most recently, Mulac, Incontro, and James (1985) found both gender‐linked language and stereotypes independently to produce such evaluations, language differences accounting for more of the variance in evaluations than stereotypes. The present study sought to compare effects of the two variables on a more even footing by assessing evaluative reactions to transcripts of men and women engaging in naturally‐occurring conversation. Also assessed was the impact of language variation within the sexes on evaluations. Only language effects were found. Within‐sex‐of‐speaker effects were considerably larger than those resulting from sex differences. These results form the basis of a reconceptualization of the processes underlying variation in the speech of men and women as well as the cognitive influences on evaluations of such variation.