Reexamining gender differences in same-gender friendships: A close look at two kinds of data

Duck, Steven W.; Wright, Paul H.

doi:10.1007/bf00289989

Cited by 76 publications

(60 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Collectively, these results imply that men's friendships are less intimate than women's friendships (Bank & Hansford, 2000;Fehr, 1996), but some (e.g., Inman, 1996) have challenged this conclusion and argued that men simply define and achieve intimacy in different ways than women do. However, recent studies confirm that men and women similarly regard self-disclosure and expressiveness as the routes to intimate and supportive relationships, although men seem less willing than women to engage in such behaviors with same-sex friends (Burleson, 2003;Duck & Wright, 1993;Fehr, 2004). Researchers have thus concluded that men prefer less intimacy in their friendships than women do (Burleson, 2003;Duck & Wright, 1993;Fehr, 1996Fehr, , 2004.…”

Section: Gender and Friendshipmentioning

confidence: 86%

“…However, recent studies confirm that men and women similarly regard self-disclosure and expressiveness as the routes to intimate and supportive relationships, although men seem less willing than women to engage in such behaviors with same-sex friends (Burleson, 2003;Duck & Wright, 1993;Fehr, 2004). Researchers have thus concluded that men prefer less intimacy in their friendships than women do (Burleson, 2003;Duck & Wright, 1993;Fehr, 1996Fehr, , 2004.…”

Section: Gender and Friendshipmentioning

confidence: 86%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Friendship and Gender in Russia and the United States

Sheets

Lugar

2005

Sex Roles

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study provides descriptive data that contrast patterns of friendship for men and women in Russia and the United States, based on a parallel survey conducted at comparable universities in the two countries. Both cultural and gender differences were observed. Russians reported fewer friends with whom they shared less personal information than did Americans, and women in both societies reported that their friendships are more conversation-focused and intimate than men's. In addition, interactive effects of culture and gender were apparent in patterns of cross-gender friendships. Numerous explanations for these patterns-including differences in the social and political histories of the two countries and in the relative importance of gender role distinctions-are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Gender and Friendshipmentioning

confidence: 86%

Section: Gender and Friendshipmentioning

confidence: 86%

Friendship and Gender in Russia and the United States

Sheets

Lugar

2005

Sex Roles

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While a great deal of social science research fails to find any meaningful, large, or consistent differences between males and females across a variety of behavioral variables (e.g., Aries, 1996;Burleson & Kunkel, 2006;Canary & Hause, 1993;Duck & Wright, 1993), there have been documented differences indicating that women tend to be more nurturant or emotionfocused in relationships, whereas men tend to be more instrumentally oriented or problemfocused (see reviews by Cutrona, 1996;Reis, 1998;Winstead, 1986). This has implications for self-disclosure; in fact, research finds that self-disclosure about personal topics within relationships seems quite natural and accepted but, only for women (Derlega, Metts, Petronio, & Margulis, 1993;Dindia & Allen, 1992;Winstead).…”

Section: Sex-based Differences In Reasons For Avoidancementioning

confidence: 99%

“Let's (Not) Talk About That”: Bridging the Past Sexual Experiences Taboo to Build Healthy Romantic Relationships

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Satisfaction primarily contributes to functional, value-based utilitarian connections with tangible benefi ts. Trust builds personal, more emotional connections that refl ect unilateral benefi t expectations and a sense of communality with the brand ( Duck and Wright, 1993 ). Hess and Story (2005) and Hess et al (2011) show that personal and functional connections lead to brand commitment.…”

Section: Methods -Nomological Networkmentioning

confidence: 95%

On the validity of measuring brand images by rating concepts and free associations

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Keith Vorstreceived his PhD from Michigan State University and is an associate professor of Industrial Technology in the Orfalea College of Business, Cal Poly. Dr Vorst directs the development and design and biodegradable components of packaging projects at Cal Poly. He has worked for three major packaging companies and as consultant for a major automotive manufacturer; and he has published extensively in ABSTRACT This article provides a validity assessment of measuring brand image by free association using newly developed Web-based tools. Nomological validity is assessed by testing causal effects as predicted by a causal model for brand commitment when brand image is measured by rating free associations. Three sets of data were collected to assess validity: (1) traditional questionnaire to measure the construct indirectly with multiple indicators, (2) traditional questionnaire with direct construct assessment and (3) a virtual ideation session with direct construct assessment. Estimable causal effects were identifi ed by Pearl ' s ' back-door ' criterion; the nomological network was found to be valid: select causal predictions of the brand Danes et al

show abstract

Reexamining gender differences in same-gender friendships: A close look at two kinds of data

Cited by 76 publications

References 17 publications

Friendship and Gender in Russia and the United States

Friendship and Gender in Russia and the United States

“Let's (Not) Talk About That”: Bridging the Past Sexual Experiences Taboo to Build Healthy Romantic Relationships

On the validity of measuring brand images by rating concepts and free associations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About