Communication Research

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by MULAC, A.
Right arrow Articles by PRESCOTT, M. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Communication Research, Vol. 25, No. 6, 641-668 (1998)
DOI: 10.1177/009365098025006004
© 1998 SAGE Publications

"Uh-huh. What's That All About?"

Differing Interpretations of Conversational Backchannels and Questions as Sources of Miscommunication Across Gender Boundaries

ANTHONY MULAC

KAREN T. ERLANDSON

W. JEFFREY FARRAR

JENNIFER S. HALLETT

JENNIFER L. MOLLOY

MARGARET E. PRESCOTT

Maltz and Borker argue that because men and women grow up in different sociolinguistic cultures, they learn to interpret conversational features differently—including backchannels ("uh-huh,""yeah") and questions ("What's next?"). If true, this might help explain conversational miscommunication that occurs across gender boundaries. This study tests this theory by assessing the effects of observer sex, observer gender schematicity, speaker sex, and partner sex on interpretation. Two hundred and sixty-eight observers rated 96 naturally occurring conversational excerpts, 48 containing backchannels and 48 including questions, in terms of: (a) apparent meaning of the utterance (control, other-focus, and uncertainty) and (b) speaker traits (dominance and sensitivity). Four-way MANOVAs indicated: (a) male and female observers interpret backchannels and questions differently, and (b) several interaction effects. However, no interactions were found to demonstrate female bilingualism, proposed by male dominance theorists. The results are discussed in terms of their support for two-cultures theory and their lack of support for dominance theory.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Communication ResearchHome page
S. PETRONIO, N. ELLEMERS, H. GILES, and C. GALLOIS
(Mis)communicating Across Boundaries: Interpersonal and Intergroup Considerations
Communication Research, December 1, 1998; 25(6): 571 - 595.
[Abstract]