A Defense of the Cross-Cultural Approach to Male-Female (Mis)Communication

Preda, Alina

doi:10.26424/philobib.2017.22.2.15

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In news articles, blogposts, and opinion pieces (e.g., Manne, 2020 ), mansplaining is presented as a gendered phenomenon which positions men as higher status and questioning the competence of women. However, the concept has been the focus of only a handful of scholarly articles spread across disciplines (e.g., Daddis, 2018 ; Imperatori-Lee, 2015 ; Preda, 2017 ; Reagle, 2016 ; Smith et al, 2022 ).…”

Section: Competence-questioning Behaviors Of Focusmentioning

confidence: 99%

Competence-Questioning Communication and Gender: Exploring Mansplaining, Ignoring, and Interruption Behaviors

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Competence-questioning communication at work has been described as gender-linked (e.g., mansplaining) and as impacting the way women perceive and experience the workplace. Three studies were conducted to investigate how the specific communication behaviors of condescending explanation (i.e., mansplaining), voice nonrecognition, and interruption can be viewed as gender-biased in intention by receivers. The first study was a critical incident survey to describe these competence-questioning behaviors when enacted by men toward women in the workplace and how women react toward them. Studies 2 and 3 used experimental paradigms (in online and laboratory settings, respectively) to investigate how women and men perceive and react to these behaviors when enacted by different genders. Results demonstrated that when faced with condescending explanation, voice nonrecognition, or interruption, women reacted more negatively and were more likely to see the behavior as indicative of gender bias when the communicator was a man. Implications for improving workplace communications and addressing potential gender biases in communication in organizations are discussed. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10869-022-09871-7.

show abstract

Section: Competence-questioning Behaviors Of Focusmentioning

confidence: 99%