Understanding groups from a feminist perspective

Theories of Small Groups: Interdisciplinary Perspectives

Volumn , Issue , 2005, Pages 241-276

  Meyers, Renee A ^a   Berdahl, Jennifer L ^b   Brashers, Dale ^c   Considine, Jennifer R ^d   Kelly, Janice R ^e   Moore, Celia ^f   Peterson, Jennifer L ^b   Spoor, Jennifer R ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MILWAUKEE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

^d TEXAS A AND M UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^e PURDUE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^f UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 47949114214     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4135/9781483328935.n7     Document Type: Chapter

References (169)

1. Adler, A. (1927). Understanding human nature. New York: Greenberg.
2. Adrianson, L. (2001). Gender and computer-mediated communication: Group processes in problem solving. Computers in Human Behavior, 17, 71-94. doi:10.1016/S0747-5632(00)00033-9 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0747-5632%2800%2900033-9
3. Alderton, S. M., & Jurma, W. E. (1980). Genderless/gender-related task leader communication and group satisfaction: A test of two hypotheses. Southern Speech Communication Journal, 46, 48-60. doi:10.1080/10417948009372475 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10417948009372475
4. Anderson, J., Perry, J., Blue, C., Browne, A., Henderson, A., Khan, K. B. et al. (2003). Rewriting cultural safety within the postcolonial and postnational feminist project: Toward new epistemologies of healing. Advances in Nursing Science, 26, 196-214. doi:10.1097/00012272-200307000-00005 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00012272-200307000-00005
5. Anderson, L. R., & Blanchard, P. N. (1982). Sex differences in task and social-emotional behavior. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 3, 109-139. doi:10.1207/s15324834basp0302_3 http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15324834basp0302_3
6. Andrews, P. H. (1992). Sex and gender differences in group communication: Impact on the facilitation process. Small Group Research, 23, 74-94. doi:10.1177/1046496492231005 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1046496492231005
7. Anzaldua, G., & Moraga, C. (Eds.). (1981). This bridge called my back: Writings by radical women of color. Watertown, MA: Persephone Press.
8. Aries, E. (1976). Interaction patterns and themes of male, female, and mixed groups. Small Group Behavior, 7, 7-18. doi:10.1177/104649647600700102 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/104649647600700102
9. Armstrong, S. J., & Priola, V. (2001). Individual differences in cognitive style and their effects on task and social orientations of self-managed work teams. Small Group Research, 32, 283-312. doi:10.1177/104649640103200302 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/104649640103200302
10. Assiter, A. (1996). Enlightened women: Modernist feminism in a postmodern age. New York: Routledge.
11. Austen, S., Jefferson, T., & Thein, V. (2003). Gendered social indicators and grounded theory. Feminist Economics, 9, 1-18. doi:10.1080/1354570032000063065 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1354570032000063065
12. Bales, R. F. (1950). Interaction process analysis: A method for the study of small groups. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley.
13. Bartunek, J. M., Walsh, K., & Lucey, C. A. (2000). Dynamics and dilemmas of women leading women. Organization Science, 11, 589-610. doi:10.1287/orsc.11.6.589.12531 http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.11.6.589.12531
14. Bem, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 45, 196-205. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.45.2.196 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.45.2.196
15. Bem, S. L. (1975). Androgyny vs. the tight little lives of fluffy women and chesty men. Psychology Today, 9, 58-62.
16. Berdahl, J. L. (1996). Gender and leadership in work groups: Six alternative models. Leadership Quarterly, 7, 21-40. doi:10.1016/S1048-9843(96)90033-8 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843%2896%2990033-8
17. Berdahl, J., & Anderson, C. (2003). Gender and leadership centralization in groups. Unpublished manuscript.
18. Berger, J., Fisek, M. H., Norman, R. Z., & Zelditch, M., Jr. (1977). Status characteristics and social interaction: An expectation states approach. New York: Elsevier.
19. Booth-Butterfield, M., & Booth-Butterfield, S. (1988). Jock talk: Cooperation and competition within a university women's basketball team. In B.Bate & A.Taylor (Eds.), Women communicating: Studies of women's talk (pp. 177-198). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
20. Borisoff, D., & Merrill, L. (1985). The power to communicate: Gender differences as barriers. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.
21. Bowers, C. A., Pharmer, J. A., & Salas, E. (2000). When member homogeneity is needed in work teams: A meta-analysis. Small Group Research, 31, 305-327. doi:10.1177/104649640003100303 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/104649640003100303
22. Bradley, P. H. (1981). The folk-linguistics of women's speech: An empirical investigation. Communication Monographs, 48, 73-90. doi:10.1080/03637758109376048 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03637758109376048
23. Bullis, C., & Bach, B. W. (1996). Feminism and the disenfranchised: Listening beyond the "other." In E. B.Ray (Ed.), Communication and disenfranchisement: Social health issues and implications (pp. 3-28). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
24. Burgoon, M., Dillard, J. P., & Doran, N. E. (1983). Friendly or unfriendly persuasion: The effects of violations of expectations by males and females. Human Communication Research, 10, 283-294. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1983.tb00018.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1983.tb00018.x
25. Burns, M. (2003). Interviewing: Embodied communication. Feminism & Psychology, 13, 229-236. doi:10.1177/0959353503013002006 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0959353503013002006
26. Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble, feminism, and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge.
27. Campbell, R., & Wasco, S. M. (2000). Feminist approaches to social science: Epistemological and methodological tenets. American Journal of Community Psychology, 28, 773-791. doi:10.1023/A:1005159716099 http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1005159716099
28. Canary, D. J., & House, K. S. (1993). Is there any reason to research sex differences in communication? Communication Quarterly, 41, 129-144. doi:10.1080/01463379309369874 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01463379309369874
29. Cannon, L. W., Higgenbothan, E., & Leung, M. L. A. (1991). Race and class bias in qualitative research on women. In M. M.Fonow & J. A.Cook (Eds.), Beyond methodology: Feminist scholarship as lived research (pp. 107-118). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
30. Carli, L. L. (1982). Are women more social and men more task oriented? A meta-analytic review of sex differences in group interaction, reward allocation, coalition formation, and cooperation in the Prisoner's Dilemma game. Unpublished manuscript, University of Massachusetts-Amherst.
31. Carli, L. L. (1989). Gender differences in interaction style and influence. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 56, 565-576. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.56.4.565 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.56.4.565
32. Carli, L. L., & Eagly, A. H. (1999). Gender effects on social influence and emergent leadership. In G.Powell (Ed.), Handbook of gender and work (pp. 203-222). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. doi:10.4135/9781452231365 http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452231365
33. Cascio, W. F. (1995). Whither industrial and organizational psychology in a changing world of work? American Psychologist, 50, 928-939. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.50.11.928 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.50.11.928
34. Chodorow, N. (1978). The reproduction of mothering: Psychoanalysis and the sociology of gender. Berkeley: University of California Press.
35. Chodorow, N. J. (1989). Feminism and psychoanalytic theory. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
36. Christie, C. (2001). Gender and language: Towards a feminist pragmatics. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press.
37. Cixous, H. (1981). Castration or decapitation? Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 7, 41-55. doi:10.1086/493857 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/493857
38. Counselman, E. F. (1991). Leadership in a long-term leaderless group. Small Group Research, 22, 240-257. doi:10.1177/1046496491222006 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1046496491222006
39. Daly, M. (1978). Gyn/Ecology: The meta-ethics of radical feminism. Boston: Beacon Press.
40. Deal, J. J. (2000). Gender differences in the intentional use of information in competitive negotiations. Small Group Research, 31, 702-723. doi:10.1177/104649640003100604 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/104649640003100604
41. de Beauvoir, S. (1974). The second sex (H. M.Parshley, Trans.). New York: Vintage Books. (Original work published 1952)
42. Derrida, J. (1978). Writing and difference (A.Bass, Trans.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
43. Dinnerstein, D. (1977). The mermaid and the minotaur: Sexual arrangements and human malaise. New York: Harper.
44. Dubrovsky, V. J., Kiesler, S., & Sethna, B. N. (1991). The equalization phenomenon: Status effects in computer-mediated and face-to-face decision-making groups. Human Computer Interaction, 6, 119-146. doi:10.1207/s15327051hci0602_2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327051hci0602_2
45. Duck, S., & Wright, P. (1993). Reexamining gender differences in same-gender friendships: A close look at two kinds of data. Sex Roles, 28, 709-727. doi:10.1007/BF00289989 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00289989
46. Eagly, A. E. (1987). Sex differences in social behavior: A social role interpretation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
47. Eagly, A. H., & Johnson, B. T. (1990). Gender and leadership style: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 233-256. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.108.2.233 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.108.2.233
48. Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (1991). Gender and the emergence of leaders: A meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 685-710. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.60.5.685 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.60.5.685
49. Eagly, A. H., Makhijani, M. G., Klonsky, B. G. (1992). Gender and the evaluation of leaders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 3-22. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.111.1.3 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.111.1.3
50. Eagly, A. H., Wood, W., & Diekman, A. B. (2000). Social role theory of sex differences and similarities: A current appraisal. In T.Eckes & H.Trautner (Eds.), The developmental social psychology of gender (pp. 123-174). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
51. Engels, F. (1942). The origin of the family, private property and the state. New York: International Publishers Company. (Original work published 1902)
52. Few, A. L., Stephens, D. P., & Rouse-Arnett, M. (2003). Sister-to-sister talk: Transcending boundaries and challenges in qualitative research with Black women. Family Relations, 52, 205-215. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3729.2003.00205.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3729.2003.00205.x
53. Fields, D. L., & Blum, T. C. (1997). Employee satisfaction in work groups with different gender composition. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18, 181-196. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(199703)18:2<181::AID-JOB799>3.0.CO;2-M http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/%28SICI%291099-1379%28199703%2918:2%3C181::AID-JOB799%3E3.0.CO;2-M
54. Firestone, S. (1970). The dialectic of sex. New York: Morrow.
55. Flanagin, A. J., Tiyaamornwong, V., O'Connor, J., & Seibold, D. R. (2002). Computer-mediated group work: The interaction of member sex and anonymity. Communication Research, 29, 66-93. doi:10.1177/0093650202029001004 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0093650202029001004
56. Foley, L., & Faircloth, C. A. (2003). Medicine as discursive resource: Legitimation in the work narratives of midwives. Sociology of Health & Illness, 25, 165-184. doi:10.1111/1467-9566.00330 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.00330
57. Foss, S. K. (1997). Transforming rhetoric through feminist reconstruction: A response to the gender diversity perspective. Women's Studies in Communication, 20, 117-135. doi:10.1080/07491409.1997.10162406 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07491409.1997.10162406
58. Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The theory of the prison (A.Sheridan, Trans.). London: Allen Lane.
59. Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge. New York: Pantheon.
60. Fournier, V., & Kelemen, M. (2001). The crafting of community: Recoupling discourses of management and womanhood. Human Relations, 8, 267-290.
61. Fraser, N., & Nicholson, L. J. (1990). Social criticism without philosophy. In L. J.Nicholson (Ed.), Feminism/postmodernism (pp. 19-38). New York: Routledge.
62. French, M. (1985). Beyond power: On women, men, and morals. New York: Summit Books.
63. Freud, S. (1962). Three essays on the theory of sexuality (J.Strachey, Trans.). New York: Basic Books. (Original work published 1925)
64. Gayle, B. M., Priess, R. W., & Allen, M. (1994). Gender differences and the use of conflict strategies. In L. H.Turner & H. M.Sterk (Eds.), Differences that make a difference: Examining the assumptions in gender research (pp. 13-26). Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.
65. Gergen, M. (2001). Feminist reconstructions in psychology: Narrative, gender, and performance. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. doi:10.4135/9781452220482 http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452220482
66. Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women's development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
67. Goldsmith, D. J., & Fulfs, P. A. (1999). "You just don't have the evidence": An analysis of claims and evidence in Deborah Tannen's You just don't understand. In M. E.Roloff (Ed.), Communication yearbook (Vol. 22, pp. 1-49). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
68. Gopal, A., Mirana, S. M., Robichaux, B. P., & Bostrom, R. P. (1997). Leveraging diversity with information technology: Gender, attitude, and intervening influences in the use of group support systems. Small Group Research, 28, 29-71. doi:10.1177/1046496497281002 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1046496497281002
69. Graham, E. E., & Papa, M. J. (1993). Gender and function-oriented discourse in small groups: An examination of problem-solving processes and outcomes. In C.Berryman-Fink, D.Ballard-Reisch, & L. H.Newman (Eds.), Communication and sex role socialization (pp. 311-335). New York: Garland.
70. Gray, A. (1995). I want to tell you a story: The narratives of Video Playtime. In B.Skeggs (Ed.), Feminist cultural theory: Processes and production (pp. 153-168). New York: Manchester University Press.
71. Harding, S. (Ed.). (1987). Feminism and methodology. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
72. Hartmann, H. (1981). The unhappy marriage of marxism and feminism: Towards a more progressive union. In L.Sargent (Ed.), Women and revolution: A discussion of the unhappy marriage of marxism and feminism (pp. 1-41). Boston: South End Press.
73. Hartsock, N. C. M. (1983). The feminist standpoint: Developing the ground for a specifically feminist historical materialism. In S.Harding & M. B.Hintikka (Eds.), Discovering reality: Feminist perspectives on epistemology, methodology, metaphysics, and philosophy of science (pp. 283-310). Boston: Reidel.
74. Hartsock, N. C. M. (1998). The feminist standpoint revisited and other essays. Boulder, CO: Westview.
75. Hawkins, K. (1995). Effects of gender and communication content on leadership emergence in small task-oriented groups. Small Group Research, 26, 234-249. doi:10.1177/1046496495262004 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1046496495262004
76. Hawkins, K., & Power, C. B. (1999). Gender differences in questions asked during small decision-making group discussions. Small Group Research, 30, 235-256. doi:10.1177/104649649903000205 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/104649649903000205
77. Henley, N. M., & Kramerae, C. (1991). Gender, power, and miscommunication. In N.Coupland, H.Giles, & J. M.Wiemann (Eds.), Miscommunication and problematic talk (pp. 18-43). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
78. Herschel, R. T., Cooper, T. R., Smith, L. F., & Arrington, L. (1994). Exploring numerical proportions in a unique context: The group support systems meeting environment. Sex Roles, 31, 99-123. doi:10.1007/BF01560279 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01560279
79. Hoffman, L. R. (1965). Group problem solving. In L.Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 99-132). New York: Academic Press.
80. Hooks B. (1990). Yearning: Race, gender, and cultural politics. Boston: South End Press.
81. Horney, K. (1973). Feminine psychology. New York: W. W. Norton.
82. Hutson-Comeaux, S. L., & Kelly, J. R. (1996). Sex differences in interaction style and group task performance: The process-performance relationship. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 11, 255-275.
83. Hyde, J. S., & Plant, E. A. (1995). Magnitude of psychological gender differences: Another side to the story. American Psychologist, 50, 159-161. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.50.3.159 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.50.3.159
84. Infante, D. A. (1982). The argumentative student in the speech communication classroom: An investigation and implications. Communication Education, 31, 141-148. doi:10.1080/03634528209384671 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03634528209384671
85. Infante, D. A., Wall, C. H., Leap, C. J., & Danielson, K. (1984). Verbal aggression as a function of the receiver's argumentativeness. Communication Research Reports, 1, 33-37.
86. Irigaray, L. (1985). This sex which is not one (CPorter, Trans.). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
87. Jaffe, J. M., Lee, Y., Huang, L., & Oshagan, H. (1999). Gender identification, interdependence, and pseudonyms in CMC: Language patterns in an electronic conference. The Information Society, 15, 221-234. doi:10.1080/019722499128385 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/019722499128385
88. Jaggar, A. M. (1983). Feminist politics and human nature. Totowa, NJ: Rowman & Allenheld.
89. Jaggar, A. M., & Rothenberg, P. S. (Eds.). (1984). Feminist frameworks: Alternative theoretical accounts of the relations between women and men (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
90. Jessup, L. M., Connolly, T., & Tansik, D. A. (1990). Toward a theory of automated group work: The deindividuating effects of anonymity. Small Group Research, 21, 333-348. doi:10.1177/1046496490213003 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1046496490213003
91. Jurma, W. E., & Wright, B. C. (1990). Follower reactions to male and female leaders who maintain or lose reward power. Small Group Research, 21, 97-112. doi:10.1177/1046496490211007 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1046496490211007
92. Karakovsky, L., & Elangovan, A. R. (2001). Risky decision making in mixed-gender teams: Whose risk tolerance matters? Small Group Research, 32, 94-111. doi:10.1177/104649640103200105 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/104649640103200105
93. Kees, N. L. (1999). Women together again: A phenomenological struggle of leaderless women's groups. Journal for Specialists in Group Work, 24, 288-305. doi:10.1080/01933929908411437 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01933929908411437
94. Keller, E. F. (1985). Reflections on gender and science. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
95. Kelly, J. R., & Barsade, S. (2001). Mood and emotions in small groups and work teams. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86, 99-130. doi:10.1006/obhd.2001.2974 http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/obhd.2001.2974
96. Kelly, J. R., Craig, T. Y., & Spoor, J. S. (2003). How cognitive centrality and gender affect perceptions of leadership, influence, and likability. Unpublished manuscript.
97. Kendall, S., & Tannen, D. (1997). Gender and language in the workplace. In R.Wodak (Ed.), Gender and discourse (pp. 81-105). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. doi:10.4135/9781446250204 http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446250204
98. Kent, R. L., & Moss, S. E. (1994). Effects of sex and gender role on leader emergence. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 1335-1346. doi:10.2307/256675 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/256675
99. Kerr, N. L., & MacCoun, R. J. (1985). Role expectations in social dilemmas: Sex roles and task motivation in groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 1547-1556. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.49.6.1547 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.49.6.1547
100. Kohlberg, L. (1969). Stage and sequence: The cognitive-development approach to socialization. In D. A.Goslin (Ed.), Handbook of socialization theory and research (pp. 347-480). Chicago: Rand McNally.
101. Kristeva, J. (1980). Desire in language. New York: Columbia University Press.
102. Kushner, K. E., & Morrow, R. (2003). Grounded theory, feminist theory, and critical theory. Advances in Nursing Science, 26, 30-43. doi:10.1097/00012272-200301000-00006 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00012272-200301000-00006
103. Lacan, J. (1977). Ecrits. New York: W. W. Norton.
104. Lakoff, R. (1975). Language and women's place. New York: Harper & Row.
105. Lucas, J. W., & Lovaglia, M. J. (1998). Leadership status, gender, group size, and emotion in face-to-face groups. Sociological Perspectives, 41, 617-637. doi:10.2307/1389566 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1389566
106. MacKinnon, C. A. (1989). Toward a feminist theory of the state. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
107. Martin, J. (1992). Cultures in organizations: Three perspectives. New York: Oxford University Press.
108. Martin, J., Knopoff, K., & Beckman, C. (1988). An alternative to bureaucratic impersonality and emotional labor: Bounded emotionality at The Body Shop. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43, 429-469. doi:10.2307/2393858 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2393858
109. Marx, K. (2000). Karl Marx: Selected writings (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. (Original work published in 1834-1894)
110. Mauthner, N. S., & Doucet, A. (2003). Reflexive accounts and accounts of reflexivity in qualitative data analysis. Sociology, 37, 413-431. doi:10.1177/00380385030373002 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00380385030373002
111. McGrath, J. E., Kelly, J. R., & Rhodes, J. E. (1993). A feminist perspective on research methodology: Some metatheoretical issues, contrasts, and choices. In S.Oskamp & M.Constanzo (Eds.), The Claremont Symposium on Applied Social Psychology: Gender issues in contemporary society (pp. 19-37). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
112. McIntyre, A. (2003). Feminist fieldwork and political change. Feminism & Psychology, 13, 283-286. doi:10.1177/0959353503013003001 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0959353503013003001
113. Metcalf, B., & Linstead, A. (2003). Gendering teamwork: Re-writing the feminine. Gender, Work, and Organization, 10, 94-119. doi:10.1111/1468-0432.00005 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-0432.00005
114. Meyers, R. A., & Brashers, D. E. (1994). Expanding the boundaries of small group communication research: Exploring a feminist perspective. Communication Studies, 45, 68-85. doi:10.1080/10510979409368410 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10510979409368410
115. Meyers, R. A., Brashers, D. E., Winston, L., & Grob, L. (1997). Sex differences and group argument: A theoretical framework and empirical investigation. Communication Studies, 48, 19-41. doi:10.1080/10510979709368489 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10510979709368489
116. Millet, K. (1970). Sexual politics. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
117. Mirchandani, K. (2003). Challenging racial silences in studies of emotion work: Contributions from anti-racist feminist theory. Organization Studies, 24, 721-742. doi:10.1177/0170840603024005003 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0170840603024005003
118. Mitchell, J. (1971). Women's estate. New York: Random House.
119. Mitchell, J. (1974). Psychoanalysis and feminism. New York: Vintage.
120. Moreland, R. L. (1987). The formation of small groups. In C.Hendrick (Ed.), Review of personality and social psychology: Vol 8. Group processes (pp. 80-110). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
121. Nelson, M. W. (1988). Women's ways: Interactive patterns in predominantly female research teams. In B.Bate & A.Taylor (Eds.), Women communicating: Studies of women's talk (pp. 199-232). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
122. Nicotera, A. M., & Rancer, A. S. (1994). The influence of sex on self-perceptions and social stereotyping of aggressive communication predispositions. Western Journal of Communication, 58, 283-307. doi:10.1080/10570319409374501 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10570319409374501
123. Noddings, N. (1984). Caring: A feminine approach to ethics and moral education. Berkeley: University of California Press.
124. Oakley, A. (1988). Interviewing women: A contradiction in terms. In H.Roberts (Ed.), Doing feminist research (pp. 30-61). New York: Routledge.
125. Ohara, Y., & Sullivan, S. (2003). Using conversation analysis to track gender ideologies in social interaction: Toward a feminist analysis of a Japanese phonein consultation program. Discourse and Society, 14, 153-172. doi:10.1177/0957926503014002855 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0957926503014002855
126. Peplau, L. A., & Conrad, E. (1989). Beyond non-sexist research: The perils of feminist methods in psychology. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 13, 379-400. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.40.7.800 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.40.7.800
127. Piliavin, J. A., & Martin, R. R. (1978). The effects of the sex composition of groups on style and social interaction. Sex Roles, 4, 281-296. doi:10.1007/BF00287507 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00287507
128. Porter, N. (1999). Reconstructing mountains from gravel: Remembering context in feminist research [Commentary]. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 23, 59-64. doi:10.1037//0003-066X.49.8.748 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//0003-066X.49.8.748
129. Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (2002). Behavior on-line: Does anonymous computer communication reduce gender inequality? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1073-1083. doi:10.1177/01461672022811006 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/01461672022811006
130. Rich, A. (1980). Compulsory heterosexuality and lesbian existence. Signs, 5, 631-690. doi:10.1086/493756 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/493756
131. Ridgeway, C. L. (1997). Interaction and the conservation of gender inequality: Considering employment. American Sociological Review, 62, 218-235. doi:10.2307/2657301 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2657301
132. Ridgeway, C. L. (2001a). The emergence of status beliefs: From structural inequality to legitimizing ideology. In J. T.Jost & B.Major (Eds.), The psychology of legitimacy: Emerging perspectives on ideology, justice, and intergroup relations (pp. 257-277). New York: Cambridge University Press.
133. Ridgeway, C. L. (2001b). Gender, status, and leadership. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 637-655. doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00233 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00233
134. Riley, S. C. E. (2003). The management of the traditional male role: A discourse analysis of the constructions and functions of provision. Journal of Gender Studies, 12, 99-113. doi:10.1080/0958923032000088300 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0958923032000088300
135. Ristock, J. L. (2003). Exploring dynamics of abusive lesbian relationships: Preliminary analysis of a multi-site, qualitative study. American Journal of Community Psychology, 31, 329-341. doi:10.1023/A:1023971006882 http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1023971006882
136. Robinson, D. T., & Smith-Lovin, L. (2001). Getting a laugh: Gender, status, and humor in task discussions. Social Forces, 80, 123-158. doi:10.1353/sof.2001.0085 http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/sof.2001.0085
137. Rowbotham, S. (1973). Woman's consciousness, man's world. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.
138. Ruddick, S. (1980). Maternal thinking: Toward a politics of peace. Boston: Beacon Press.
139. Samter, W., & Burleson, B. R. (1990). Evaluations of communication skills as predictors of peer acceptance in a group living situation. Communication Studies, 41, 311-326. doi:10.1080/10510979009368313 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10510979009368313
140. Scheerhorn, D., Geist, P., & Teboul, J. B. (1994). Beyond decision making in decision-making groups: Implications for the study of group communication. In L.Frey (Ed.), Group communication in context: Studies of natural groups (pp. 247-262). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
141. Schiller, L. Y. (1997). Rethinking stages of development in women's groups: Implications for practice. Social Work with Groups, 20(3), 3-19. doi:10.1300/J009v20n03_02 http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J009v20n03_02
142. Seiter, E. (1995). Mothers watching children watching television. In B.Skeggs (Ed.), Feminist cultural theory: Process and production (pp. 137-152). New York: Manchester University Press.
143. Shabat, E. (Ed.). (1998). Talking visions: Multicultural feminism in a transnational age. Cambridge: MIT Press.
144. Siegel, J., Dubrovsky, V. J., Kiesler, S., & McGuire, T. W. (1986). Group processes in computer-mediated communication. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 3, 157-187. doi:10.1016/0749-5978(86)90050-6 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978%2886%2990050-6
145. Skeggs, B. (Ed.). (1995). Feminist cultural theory: Process and production. New York: Manchester University Press.
146. Smith-Lovin, L., & Brody, C. (1989). Interruptions in group discussions: The effects of gender and group composition. American Sociological Review, 54, 424-435. doi:10.2307/2095614 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2095614
147. Spelman, E. V. (1988). Inessential woman: Problems of exclusion in feminist thought. Boston: Beacon Press.
148. Spender, D. (1980). Man made language. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
149. Sterk, H. M., & Turner, L. H. (1994). Gender, communication, and community. In L. H.Turner & H. M.Sterk (Eds.), Differences that make a difference: Examining the assumptions in gender research (pp. 213-222). Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.
150. Tannen, D. (1990). You just don't understand. New York: Balantine.
151. Taylor, J. R., & Strassberg, D. S. (1986). The effects of sex composition on cohesiveness and interpersonal learning in short-term personal growth groups. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 23(2), 267-273. doi:10.1037/h0085608 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0085608
152. Taylor, V., & Rupp, L. J. (1993). Women's culture and lesbian feminist activism: A reconsideration of cultural feminism. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 19, 32-61. doi:10.1086/494861 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/494861
153. Todd, A. D., & Fisher, A. (Eds.). (1988). Gender and discourse: The power of talk. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
154. Tong, R. P. (1998). Feminist thought: A more comprehensive introduction (2nd ed). Boulder, CO: Westview.
155. Walker, H. A., Illardi, B. C., McMahon, A. M., & Fennell, M. L. (1996). Gender, interaction, and leadership. Social Psychology Quarterly, 59, 255-272. doi:10.2307/2787022 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2787022
156. Wallston, B. S., & Grady, K. E. (1985). Integrating the feminist critique and the crisis in social psychology: Another look at research methods. In V. E.O'Leary, R. K.Unger, & B. S.Wallston (Eds.), Women, gender, and social psychology (pp. 7-33). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
157. Walters, A. E., Stuhlmacher, A. F., & Meyer, L. L. (1998). Gender and negotiator competitiveness: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 76(1), 1-29. doi:10.1006/obhd.1998.2797 http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1998.2797
158. West, C., & Zimmerman, D. H. (1983). Small insults: A study of interruptions in cross-sex conversations between unacquainted persons. In B.Thorne, C.Kramarae, & N.Henley (Eds.), Language, gender, and society (pp. 102-117). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
159. Wheelan, S. A. (1996). Effects of gender composition and group status differences on member perceptions of group developmental patterns, effectiveness, and productivity. Sex Roles, 34, 665-686. doi:10.1007/BF01551501 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01551501
160. Williams, J., & Lykes, M. B. (2003). Bridging theory and practice: Using reflexive cycles in feminist participatory action research. Feminism & Psychology, 13, 287-294. doi:10.1177/0959353503013003002 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0959353503013003002
161. Wittig, M. (1981). One is not born a woman. Feminist Issues, 2, 47-54.
162. Wood, J. T., & Dindia, K. (1998). What's the difference? A dialogue about differences and similarities between women and men. In D. J.Canary & K.Dindia (Eds.), Sex differences and similarities in communication: Critical essays and empirical investigations of sex and gender in interaction (pp. 19-39). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
163. Wood, J. T., McMahan, E. M., & Stacks, D. W. (1984). Research on women's communication: Critical assessment and recommendations. In D. L.Fowlkes & C. S.McClure (Eds.), Feminist visions: Toward a transformation of the liberal arts curriculum (pp. 31-41). Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.
164. Wood, W. (1987). Meta-analytic review of sex differences in group performance. Psychological Bulletin, 102, 53-71. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.102.1.53 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.102.1.53
165. Wood, W., Polek, D., & Aiken, C. (1985). Sex differences in group task performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 63-71. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.48.1.63 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.48.1.63
166. Wood, W., & Rhodes, N. (1992). Sex differences in interaction style in task groups. In C. L.Ridgeway (Ed.), Gender, interaction, and inequality (pp. 97-121). New York: Springer-Verlag. doi:10.1007/978-1-4757-2199-7_5 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-2199-7_5
167. Wright, P. (1988). Interpreting research on gender differences in friendship: A case for moderation and a plea for caution. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 5, 367-373. doi:10.1177/0265407588053006 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0265407588053006
168. Wyatt, N. (2002). Foregrounding feminist theory in group communication research. In L. R.Frey (Ed.), New directions in group communication (pp. 43-56). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. doi:10.4135/9781412990042 http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412990042
169. Young, I. (1990). Socialist feminism and the limits of dual systems theory. In I.Young, Throwing like a girl and other essays in feminist philosophy and social theory (pp. 21-35). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.