This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Mabry, E. A. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Some Theoretical Implications of Female and Male Interaction in Unstructured Small Groups

University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee

The contrasting assumptions and findings of three theoretical orientations frequently used to explain mixed-sex small group interaction are reviewed. Data from human relations training groups were analyzed to test sex-role differentiation theory hypotheses against alternative explanations grounded in role-status expectation and contextual role adaptation theories. Results did not support sex-role differentiation or adaptation orientations. Women were interactively dominant and more proactive and reactive to same-sex group members; men vacillated between attending to opposite-sex members or attempting global impact. Role-status expectation theory was advanced as the most appropriate explanatory framework for these results.

Small Group Research, Vol. 20, No. 4, 536-550 (1989)
DOI: 10.1177/104649648902000410


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?