Effects of "gender" of the computer on informational social influence: The moderating role of task type

International Journal of Human Computer Studies

Volumn 58, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 347-362

  Lee, Eun Ju ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Character representation; Computers Are Social Actors (CASA); Gender stereotypes; Human Computer Interaction (HCI); Informational social influence

Indexed keywords

CHARACTER RECOGNITION; COMPUTER APPLICATIONS; INFORMATION ANALYSIS;

GENDER-STEREOTYPES;

SOCIAL ASPECTS;

EID: 0037391625     PISSN: 10715819     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1071-5819(03)00009-0     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Amalberti, R., 1993. User representations of computer systems in human-speech interaction. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 38, 547-566.
2. Biernat, M., Vescio, T.K., 1993. Categorization and stereotyping: effects of group context on memory and social judgment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 29, 166-202.
3. Carli, L.L., 2001. Gender and social influence. Journal of Social Issues 57, 725-741.
4. Eakins, B.W., Eakins, R.G., 1978. Sex Differences in Human Communication. Houghton Mifflin, Boston.
5. Falbo, T., Hazen, M.D., Linimon, D., 1982. The costs of selecting power bases or messages associated with the opposite sex. Sex Roles 8, 147-157.
6. Feldman-Summers, S., Montano, D.E., Kasprzyk, D., Wagner, B., 1980. Influence attempts when competing views are gender-related: sex as credibility. Psychology of Women Quarterly 5, 311-320.
7. Festinger, L., 1954. A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations 7, 117-140.
8. Gerrard, M., Breda, C., Gibbons, F.X., 1990. Gender effects in couples' sexual decision making and contraceptive use. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 20, 449-464.
9. Goethals, G.R., Nelson, R.E., 1973. Similarity in the influence process: the value-belief distinction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 25, 117-122.
10. Hensley, V., Duval, S., 1976. Some perceptual determinants of perceived similarity, liking, and correctness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 34, 159-168.
11. Herring, S., 1994. Gender differences in computer-mediated communication: bringing familiar baggage to the new frontier. Paper presented at American Library Association Convention, Miami, FL.
12. Hewstone, M., Hantzi, A., Johnson, L., 1991. Social categorization and person memory: the pervasiveness of race as an organizing principle. European Journal of Social Psychology 21, 517-528.
13. Hogg, M.A., Turner, J.C., 1987. Social identity and conformity: a theory of referent informational influence. In: Doise, W., Moscovici, S. (Eds.), Current Issues in European Social Psychology. Vol. 2. Cambridge Univ. Press, New York, pp. 139-182.
14. Hogg, M.A., Turner, J.C., Davidson, B., 1990. Polarized norms and social frames of reference: a test of the self-categorization theory of group polarization. Basic and Applied Social Psychology 11, 77-100.
15. Langer, E.J., 1992. Matters of mind: mindfulness/mindlessness in perspective. Consciousness and Cognition 1, 289-305.
16. Lee, E.-J., Nass, C., Brave, S., 2000. Can Computer-Generated Speech Have Gender? An Experimental Test of Gender Stereotypes. CHI 2000 Extended Abstracts. ACM Press, New York, pp. 289-290.
17. Lockheed, M.E., 1985. Sex and social influence: a meta-analysis guided by theory. In: Berger, J., Zelditch Jr., M. (Eds.), Status, Rewards, and Influence: How Expectations Organize Behavior. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp. 406-429.
18. Morishima, Y., Benette, C., Nass, C., Lee, K.M., 2001. Effects of voice gender, user gender, and product gender on credibility in e-commerce. Unpublished manuscript.
19. Mulac, A., Lundell, T.L., 1986. Linguistic contributions to the gender-linked language effect. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 5, 81-102.
20. Mullennix, J.W., Stern, S.E., Wilson, S.J., Dyson, C.-L., 2001. Social perception of male and female computer synthesized speech. Manuscript under review.
21. Myers, G.D., 1982. Polarizing effects of social interaction. In: Brandstatter, H., Davis, J.H., Stocker-Kerichgauer, G. (Eds.), Group Decision-Making. Academic Press, London.
22. Nass, C., Moon, Y., 2000. Machines and mindlessness; social responses to computers. Journal of Social Issues 56, 81-103.
23. Nass, C., Moon, Y., Green, N., 1997. Are computers gender-neutral? Gender Stereotypic responses to computers. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 27, 864-876.
24. Reeves, B., Nass, C., 1996. The Media Equation: How People Treat Computers, Televisions, New Media Like Real People and Places. Cambridge University Press, Stanford, CA.
25. Ridgeway, C.L., 2001. Gender, status, and leadership. Journal of Social Issues 57, 637-655.
26. Savicki, V., Lingenfelter, D., Kelley, M., 1996. Gender, language style, and group composition in Internet discussion groups. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 2. Retrieved October 3, 2002, from http://www.asusc.Org/jcmc/vol/2/issue3.
27. Simons, H.W., Berkowitz, N.N., Moyer. R.J., 1970. Similarity, credibility, and attitude change. Psychological Bulletin, 73, 1-16.
28. Tajfel, H. (Ed.), 1978. Interindividual behavior and intergroup behavior. In: Differentiation Between Social Groups: Studies in the Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations. Academic Press, New York, pp. 27-60.
29. Turner, J.C., 1984. Social identification and psychological group formation. In: Tajfel, H. (Ed.), The Social Dimension: European Studies in Social Psychology, Vol. 2. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 518-538.
30. Wagner, D.G., Berger, J., 1997. Gender and interpersonal task behaviors: status expectation accounts. Sociological Perspectives 40, 1-32.
31. Winer, B.J., 1971. Statistical Principles in Experimental Design, (2nd Edition). McGraw-Hill, New York.