The evolution of gender and communication research: Intersections of theory, politics, and scholarship

The SAGE Handbook of Gender and Communication

Volumn , Issue , 2006, Pages ix-xxiv

  Dow, Bonnie J ^a   Wood, Julia T ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84952705744     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4135/9781412976053     Document Type: Chapter

References (75)

1. Balswick, J.O. (1988). The inexpressive male. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
2. Balswick, J.O., & Peek, C.W. (1976). The inexpressive male: A tragedy of American society. In D.S. David & R. Brannon (Eds.), The forty-nine percent majority: The male sex-role (pp. 55-57). Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
3. Bate, B. (1988). Communication between the sexes. New York: Harper & Row.
4. Bate, B., & Taylor, A. (Eds.). (1988). Women communicating: Studies of women’s talk. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
5. Belenky, M., Clinchy, B., Goldberger, N., & Tarule, J. (1986). Women’s ways of knowing: The development of self, voice, and mind. New York: Basic Books.
6. Bordwell, M. Dancing with death: Performativity and "undiscussable" bodies in Still/Here. Text and Performance Quarterly 18 (1998). 369-379. doi:10.1080/10462939809366237 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10462939809366237
7. Boxer, M.J. (1998). When women ask the questions: Creating women’s studies in America. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins.
8. Bradley, P.H. The folk-linguistics of women’s speech: An empirical examination. Communication Monographs 48 (1981). 73-90. doi:10.1080/03637758109376048 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03637758109376048
9. Bruner, M.L. Producing identities: Gender problematization and feminist argumentation. Argumentation and Advocacy 32 (1996). 185-198.
10. Busby, L. Sex role research in the mass media. Journal of Communication 25 (1975). 107-131. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1975.tb00646.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1975.tb00646.x
11. Butler, J. (1999). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge.(Original work published 1990)
12. Butler, J. (2004). Undoing gender. New York: Routledge.
13. Campbell, A. (2002). A mind of her own. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198504986.001.0001 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198504986.001.0001
14. Campbell, K.K. The rhetoric of women’s liberation: An oxymoron. Quarterly Journal of Speech 59 (1973). 74-86. doi:10.1080/00335637309383155 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00335637309383155
15. Campbell, K.K. Stanton’s "Solitude of Self": A rationale for feminism Quarterly Journal of Speech 66 (1980). 304-312. doi:10.1080/00335638009383528 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00335638009383528
16. Campbell, K.K. The communication classroom: A chilly climate for women? ACA Bulletin 51 (1985). 68-72.
17. Coates, J. (1986). Women, men, and language: Studies in language and linguistics. London: Longman.
18. Coates, J. (Ed.). (1997). Language and gender: A reader. London: Basil Blackwell.
19. Coates, J., & Cameron, D. (1989). Women in their speech communities: New perspectives on languageand sex. London: Longman.
20. Condit, C.M. In praise of eloquent diversity: Gender and rhetoric as public persuasion. Women’s Studies in Communication 20 (1997). 91-116. doi:10.1080/07491409.1997.10162405 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07491409.1997.10162405
21. Dallimore, E.J. A feminist response to issues of validity in research. Women’s Studies in Communication 23(2) (2000). 157-181. doi:10.1080/07491409.2000.10162567 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07491409.2000.10162567
22. Diamond, E. (1996). Introduction. In E. Diamond (Ed.), Performance and cultural politics (pp. 1-15). New York: Routledge.
23. Dow, B.J. Feminism, difference(s), and rhetorical studies. Communication Studies 46 (1995). 106-117. doi:10.1080/10510979509368442 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10510979509368442
24. Dow, B.J., Condit, C.M. The state of the art in feminist scholarship incommunication. Journal of Communication 55 (2005). 448-478. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2005.tb02681.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2005.tb02681.x
25. Duck, S.W., & Wood, J.T. (in press). Whatgoes up may come down: Sex and gendered patterns in relationaldissolution. In M. Fine & J. Harvey (Eds.), Relational dissolution. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
26. Eakins, B.W., & Eakins, R.G. (1978). Sex differences in human communication. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
27. Evans, S. (2003). Tidal wave: How women changed America at century’s end. New York: Free Press.
28. Foss, S.K., Griffin, C.L. Beyond persuasion: A proposal for an invitationalrhetoric. Communication Monographs 62 (1995). 2-19. doi:10.1080/03637759509376345 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03637759509376345
29. Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women’s moraldevelopment. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
30. Gingrich-Philbrook, C. "Good vibration" or domination? Stylized repetition inmythopoetic performance of masculinity. Text and Performance Quarterly 14 (1994). 21-46. doi:10.1080/10462939409366068 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10462939409366068
31. Goldsmith, D., & Fulfs, P. (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. Roloff (Ed.), Communication Yearbook, 22, (pp. 1-49). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
32. Gornick, V., & Moran, B. (Eds.). (1971). Woman in sexist society: Studies in power and powerlessness. New York: Basic/Signet.
33. Gray, J. (1992). Men are from Mars, women are from Venus: A practical guide forimproving communication and getting what you want inrelationships. New York: Harper Collins.
34. Hall, D., & Langellier, K. (1988). Storytelling strategies in mother-daughter communication. In B. Bate & A. Taylor (Eds.), Women communicating: Studies of women’s talk (pp. 107-126). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
35. Hanke, R. Hegemonic masculinity in Thirtysomething. Critical Studies in Mass Communication 7 (1990). 231-249. doi:10.1080/15295039009360176 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15295039009360176
36. Harragan, B. (1981). Games your mother never taught you. New York: Warner Books.
37. Helgesen, S. (1990). The female advantage: Women’s ways of leadership. New York: Doubleday Currency.
38. Henning, M., & Jardim, A. (1977). The managerial woman. New York: Anchor Press/Doubleday.
39. Johnson, F. (1989). Women’s culture and communication: An analyticalperspective. In C.M. Lont & S.A. Friedley (Eds.), Beyond boundaries: Sex and gender diversity incommunication (pp. 301-316). Fairfax, VA: George Mason University Press.
40. Johnson, F. (2000). Speaking culturally: Language diversity in the United States. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. doi:10.4135/9781452220406 http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452220406
41. Kanter, R.M. (1977). Men and women of the corporation. New York: Basic.
42. Kramarae, C. (1981). Women and men speaking: Frameworks for analysis. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
43. Kramer, C., Thorne, B., Henley, N. Perspectives on language and communication. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 3 (1978). 638-651. doi:10.1086/493507 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/493507
44. Labov, W. (1972). Sociolinguistic patterns. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
45. Lakoff, R. (1975). Language and woman’s place. New York: Harper & Row.
46. Maltz, D., & Borker, R. (1982). A cultural approach to male-female miscommunication. In J.J. Gumperz (Ed.), Language and social identity (pp. 196-216). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
47. Mumby, D.K. Organizing men: Power, discourse and the social construction of masculinity(s) in the workplace. Communication Theory 8 (1998). 164-183. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.1998.tb00216.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.1998.tb00216.x
48. Murphy, B., & Zorn, T. (1996). Gendered interaction in professional relationships. In J.T. Wood (Ed.), Gendered relationships: A reader (pp. 213-232). Mountain View, CA: Mayfield.
49. Parry-Giles, S., Parry-Giles, T. Gendered politics and presidential image construction: Areassessment of the "feminine style." Communication Monographs 63 (1996). 337-374. doi:10.1080/03637759609376398 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03637759609376398
50. Patton, B.R., & Patton, B.R. (1976). Living together…: Female/male communication. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
51. Pearson, J. (1985). Gender and communication. Dubuque, IA: William C. Brown.
52. Pollock, D. (1995). Performativity. In C.N. Davidson & L. Wagner-Martin (Eds.), The Oxford companion to women’s writing in the United States (pp. 657-658). New York: Oxford University Press.
53. Pollock, D. (1998). A response to Dwight Conquergood’s essay "Beyond the Text: Towards a performative cultural politics. In S.J. Dailey (Ed.), The future of performance studies: Visions and revisions (pp. 37-46). Annandale, VA: National Communication Association.
54. Rakow, L. Rethinking gender research in communication. Journal of Communication 36 (1986). 11-26. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1986.tb01447.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1986.tb01447.x
55. Rosen, R. (2000). The world split open: How the women’s movement changed America. New York: Penguin.
56. Sedgwick, E.K. (1990). Epistemology of the closet. Berkeley: University of California Press.
57. Sedgwick, E.K. (2003). Touching feeling: Affect, pedagogy, performativity. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
58. Shimanoff, S.B. Sex as a variable in communication research 1970-1976: Anannotated bibliography. Women’s Studies in Communication 1 (1977). 8-20.
59. Spender, D. (1980). Man-made language. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
60. Stephen, T. Concept analysis of gender, feminist, and women’s studiesresearch in the communication literature. Communication Monographs 67 (2000). 193-214. doi:10.1080/03637750009376504 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03637750009376504
61. Stewart, L.P., Stewart, A.D., Friedley, S.A., & Cooper, P.J. (1987). Communication between the sexes: Sex differences, and sex role stereotypes. Scottsdale, AZ: Gorsuch Scarisbrick.
62. Strine, M.S. (1998). Articulating performance/performativity: Disciplinary tasks and the contingencies of practice. In J.S. Trent (Ed.), Communication: Views from the helm for the 21st century (pp. 312-317). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
63. Tedesco, N.S. Patterns in prime time. Journal of Communication 24 (1974). 119-124. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1974.tb00376.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1974.tb00376.x
64. Thomson, D. "Is race a trope?" Anna Deavere Smith and the question of racial performativity. African American Review 37 (2003). 127-138. doi:10.2307/1512365 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1512365
65. Trujillo, N. Hegemonic masculinity on the mound: Media representations of Nolan Ryan and American sports culture. Critical Studies in Mass Communication 8 (1991). 290-309. doi:10.1080/15295039109366799 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15295039109366799
66. Tuchman, G., Daniels, A.K., & Benét, J. (Eds.). (1978). Hearth and home: Images of women in the mass media. New York: Oxford University Press.
67. West, C., Zimmerman, D. "Doing gender." Gender and Society 1 (1987). 125-151. doi:10.1177/0891243287001002002 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0891243287001002002
68. Wood, J.T. (1993a). Engendered relationships: Interaction, caring, power, and responsibility in close relationships. In S. Duck (Ed.), Processes in close relationships: Contexts of close relationships (Vol. 3, pp. 26-54). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
69. Wood, J.T. (1993b). Engendered identities: Shaping voice and mind throughgender. In D. Vocate (Ed.), Intrapersonal communication: Different voices, differentminds (pp. 145-167). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
70. Wood, J.T. From "woman’s nature" to standpoint epistemology: Gilligan and the debate over essentializing in feminist scholarship. Women’s Studies in Communication 15 (1993c). 1-24.
71. Wood, J.T. Feminist scholarship and the study of relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 12 (1995). 103-120. doi:10.1177/0265407595121007 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0265407595121007
72. Wood, J.T. A critical response to John Gray’s Mars and Venus portrayals of men and women. Southern Communication Journal 67 (2001). 201-210. doi:10.1080/10417940209373229 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10417940209373229
73. Wood, J.T. Feminist standpoint theory and muted group theory: Commonalitiesand divergences. Women and Language 28 (in press).
74. Wood, J.T., & Duck, S. (1995). Off the beaten track: New shores for relationshipresearch. In J.T. Wood & S. Duck (Eds.), Understanding relationship processes series, 6: Understudied relationships: Off the beaten track (pp. 1-21). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
75. Wood, J.T., Inman, C. In a different mode: Recognizing male modes of closeness. Journal of Applied Communication Research 21 (1993). 279-295. doi:10.1080/00909889309365372 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00909889309365372