The Effect of Interruptions and Dyad Gender Combination on Perceptions of Interpersonal Dominance

Youngquist, Jeff

doi:10.1080/10510970902834874

Cited by 11 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In contrast, such conflicts are less likely to emerge in high-quality LMX relationships because such relationships are less likely to be characterized by perceived interpersonal dominance (Youngquist, 2009). In high-quality LMX relationships, employees are aware of differences, but these differences may not become a focus.…”

Section: Literature Review and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Proactive Personality, LMX, and Voice Behavior: Employee–Supervisor Sex (Dis)similarity as a Moderator

Wijaya¹

2018

Management Communication Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In today's changing environment, employees' voice behavior can enhance organizational effectiveness. This study tests an integrative model linking proactive personality, leader-member exchange (LMX), voice behavior, and employee-supervisor sex (dis)similarity. Sex (dis)similarity is posited as a moderator. Results showed proactive personality was positively related to both voice behavior and LMX quality, and LMX quality was positively related to voice behavior. LMX quality partially mediated the relationship between proactive personality and voice behavior. Employee-supervisor sex (dis)similarity moderated the effect of LMX quality on voice behavior. Employees working in higher quality LMX relationships with supervisors of dissimilar sex exhibited more voice behavior.

show abstract

Section: Literature Review and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Proactive Personality, LMX, and Voice Behavior: Employee–Supervisor Sex (Dis)similarity as a Moderator

Wijaya¹

2018

Management Communication Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is found that men are assertive and opinionated, while women tend to act friendly, agree with others, and be process oriented (Myaskovsky, Unikel, & Dew, 2005; Wegge, Roth, Neubach, Schmidt, & Kanfer, 2008). Dominance occurs when an interpersonal behavior is initiated by one individual and accepted by another, resulting in reduced verbal communication of the other (Youngquist, 2009). Dominance is particularly salient in close relationships (Dunbar & Burgoon, 2005), which is the case for a deception detection group where individual members collectively identify deception and make a detection decision.…”

Section: Hypotheses Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effects of Group Factors on Deception Detection Performance

Zhou

Zhang

Sung

2013

Small Group Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Deception has been an important problem in interactive groups, impeding effective group communication and group work, yet deception detection in such a context remains understudied. Extrapolated from the interpersonal deception theory (IDT) and group composition research in cooperative contexts, this research proposes that group factors, including diversity and familiarity, have influence on the performance of deception detection. The measurement of group performance was not limited to success, as previous deception studies did, but included efficiency as well because it is fundamental to the effectiveness of deception detection. An analysis of data collected from a real-world online community found that behavioral familiarity had a positive effect, and gender diversity had a negative effect, on group success in deception detection. In addition, behavioral familiarity had a negative effect and functional diversity had a positive effect on the group efficiency of deception detection. The findings not only extend IDT in several important ways but also suggest the need to distinguish between noncooperative and cooperative groups, an important theoretical implication for group composition research.

show abstract

“…The expectations of what is appropriate or typical behaviour for males and females evidently has influence on the perceptions of interruptions. This is further demonstrated by Youngquist (2009), who conducted a study where participants were asked to listen to dyads having a conversation, featuring one person continually interrupting the other. Three conversations of two same-sex dyads and one opposite-sex dyad were used as stimuli, and participants were asked to judge how dominant each person in the conversation was.…”

Section: Understanding Speech Overlapsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Overall, these results suggest that those who are more socially anxious, and perhaps less dominant, are more likely to let others interrupt and to offer backchannel responses, whilst they interrupt less. Subsequent research has found more direct evidence to suggest that dominance is associated with increased interruptions (Youngquist, 2009) however research in this area has tended to focus on the sex differences of this behaviour. Natale et al's (1979) study found that males interrupted more than females did.…”

Section: Understanding Speech Overlapsmentioning

confidence: 99%