Building a Repertoire of Communication Styles

Children can be brutally honest and at times this honesty can hold a mirror to society, allowing us to observe truths of our reality. For this reason, children are the subject of much psychological, sociological, and linguistic research, which may even help to explain some common miscommunications experienced in adulthood.

For example, have you ever shared an idea just to have someone else repeat it after and get the credit? Have you ever laughed along with group banter only to have the group fall silent when you try to join in? Have you ever had a partner tell you they don’t feel listened to, even though you can repeat every word they said? The following lessons learned from gendered communication research may help to explain.

FACE-TO-FACE VS. SIDE-BY-SIDE CONVERSATIONS

As researched by Paul Wright in 1982, conversations between girls tend to be face to face, whereas conversations between boys tend to be side by side, with their attention on an activity rather than each other. The face-to-face nature of feminine-typical communication is shown to produce stronger relationships through more intimate conversations and non-verbal communication such as eye contact (Winstead, 1986). Additionally, eye contact can communicate power and establish hierarchies (Nelson, 2010). When in group settings, it can be interesting to observe who “looks to who” in order to assess subconscious hierarchies and to be mindful of to whom we award our own eye contact.

COLLABORATIVE VS. COMPETITIVE LANGUAGE

Another replicated gender difference found by research of children is that girls tend to build friendships by relating to each other whereas boys tend to do so by competing with each other. This communication difference is typically reinforced throughout one’s lifetime, resulting in men engaging in more competitive and hierarchical communication focused on status and independence (Ersoy, 2008). Competitive communication can be characterized by monologues, one-at-a-time floor-holding patterns, and other techniques that allow one to “play the expert” in the conversation (Ersoy, 2008). Contrastingly, women in conversation tend to prioritize connection and rapport-building through cooperative communication, hallmarks of which include building off one another’s idea and supporting other speakers by using language to emphasize solidarity with frequent conversation overlaps such as “mhmm” and “yes” (Ersoy, 2008, referencing Coates, 2004).

Both communication styles have their advantages. Cooperative communication is effective for team-building, encouraging expression of thoughts or ideas, and increasing innovation and creativity. Competitive communication is helpful when asserting ideas and ensuring one’s voice is heard, which can be especially beneficial in negotiations and when discussing promotions, raises, or important projects.

TURN TAKING AND INTERRUPTION

Research supports that “as children acquire conversational skills, they are simultaneously learning sex-typed patterns associated with adult conversation,” which includes power dynamics demonstrated through interruption and turn-taking in conversation. At ages 3-5, boys tend to interrupt girls approximately twice as often as the inverse, and this trend increases with age as gendered power dynamics are reinforced through socialization (Esposito, 1979).

Similarly, the rate at which women allow themselves to be interrupted by men by falling silent upon interruption also increases with age. These statistics are not surprising as interruption patterns tend to follow social hierarchies. What is more interesting, however, is that through observing interruption patterns in conversation, gender power dynamics seem to outweigh all other hierarchies such that male students are more likely to interrupt their female teachers, male employees are more likely to interrupt their female leaders, and so on.

To integrate these research findings into your own conversations, try observing interruptions in conversation. Notice whether you tend to fall silent upon being interrupted, or whether your conversation partner does, and consider practicing resisting this silence. If you notice yourself interrupting others, practice bringing the conversation back to them by saying “Sorry I interrupted you, please continue,” and do the same for others who you hear were interrupted by asking “What were you saying before?” When applied in the appropriate context, these techniques will be appreciated by your counterparts and can help earn respect.

For anyone looking to vary their communication techniques, it is important to be mindful of potential backlash, especially women, as behaving less feminine may be stereotyped as aggressive or bossy. Neither female-typical nor male-typical communication should be adopted wholesale, but rather individuals should develop a flexible repertoire of communication skills that allow them to adapt to different contexts.

Sources

Aries, E.J., & Johnson, F.L. (1983). Close friendship in adulthood: Conversational content between same-sex friends. Sex Roles, 9, 1183–1196.

Ersoy, S. (2008). Men Compete, Women Collaborate. Kristianstad University.

Esposito, A. (1979). Sex Differences in Children’s Conversation. Language and Speech, 22(3), 213–220. https://doi.org/10.1177/002383097902200302

LaFrance, M. (1992). Gender and Interruptions: Individual Infraction or Violation of the Social Order? Psychology of Women Quarterly, 16(4), 497–512. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1992.tb00271.x

Nelson, A. (2010). The Politics of Eye Contact: A Gender Perspective. Psychology Today.

Winstead, B.A. (1986). Sex Differences in Same-Sex Friendships. In: Derlega, V.J., Winstead, B.A. (eds) Friendship and Social Interaction. Springer Series in Social Psychology. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-4880-4_5

Wright, P.H. (1982). Men’s friendships, women’s friendships and the alleged inferiority of the latter. Sex Roles, 8, 1–20.