Gender and aggression in the recognition of interruption

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Early studies on interruption focused on dominance and floor control, power asymmetry and imbalance, gender and cultural differences, and historical lack of access to power that resulted in the suppression of women's voices. These were critical issues that opened up a field of investigation. More recent studies have examined the interactive character of interruption in actual conversation. The current study focuses on whether women and men have different perceptions about when simultaneous talk becomes interruptive. Presented with a conflictive interview between a high‐powerfemale and a low‐power male, this study asks participants to judge whether 20 overlaps are interruptive. These judgments are compared with verbal aggressiveness and attitudes of men and women toward interruption. The results suggest that verbal aggressiveness is a better predictor of recognition of interruption than gender. People who measure high in verbal aggressiveness react less to simultaneity as being negative than people who measure low in verbal aggressiveness. Implications of these findings are discussed against the broader literature on gender and interruption.