Affiliation and Dominance in Female and Male Dyads: When Discoordination Makes Happy

Abstract

Drawing on sixteen 45-min-long dyadic same-sex conversations between unacquainted females or males, we used the joystick method by Sadler et al. (J Pers Soc Psychol 97:1005-1020. https ://doi.org/10.1037/a0016 232, 2009) to rate the moment-to-moment levels of affiliation and dominance during the first and last 10 min of these conversations. Besides comparing the behavioral patterns in female and male dyads, we drew on the pre-and post-conversation questionnaires filled by the participants of the rated conversations to study the experiential consequences (valence, arousal, happiness, anxiety) of these patterns. Both genders exhibited the same complementary patterns where affiliation pulls for affiliation and dominance for submissiveness. However, these patterns were experienced differently by females and males. Greater affiliation synchrony increased the levels of happiness and arousal for males, but not for females. In addition, greater dominance coordination predicted a more negative valence change for females than for males. The paper thus points to gender differences in what constitutes a positive interactional experience and suggests a need to revisit social scientific theorizing in this regard.

Do women and men use language differently in spoken face-to-face interaction? A scoping review

“…The current state of empirical findings on the relationship between speaker's sex/gender and speaker's use of linguistic and interactional variables in spoken interaction is inconclusive. On the one hand, a substantial amount of new research has been conducted, often within an interdisciplinary context that shed new, nuanced light on the question if, and in what contexts, gender differences in language use emerge (Land & Kitzinger, 2011, Palomares, 2009Stevanovic et al, 2018;Stokoe, 2012). In particular, in the discipline of health care an increasing amount of research focuses on the role of sex/gender in language use, for instance in magazines' health language (Fandrich & Beck, 2012) and physician-patient interactions (Mast et al, 2008;Van den Brink-Muinen et al, 2002).…”

Psychodynamic Psychotherapy Process Research: A quick ride through what you should know about process (research)

“…This type of study (Voutilainen, Henttonen, Stevanovic, Kahri, & Peräkylä ) was differentiated for persons with clinical diagnoses (Stevanovic et al ), for male‐female dyads (Stevanovic, Henttonen, Kahri, & Koski ) and for shifts between empathy and challenge during a therapeutic interaction (Voutilainen, Henttonen, Kahri et al ). It seems as if the hypothesis (Krach, Paulus, Bodden, & Kircher ) that interpersonal exchange has an immediate influence on physiological measures does receive support from this kind of study.…”