It might seem at first surprising that when I studied women and men talking at work, I found that women 'interrupted' each other more often than men did - when they were in all-women conversations.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
One of the first studies in the field of gender and language, by Don H. Zimmerman and Candace West in 1975, found that in casual conversations between women and men, women were interrupted far more often.
Women have to be active listeners and interrupters - but when you interrupt, you have to know what you are talking about.
Until very recently men and women inhabited very separate spheres. There was always interconnection, passion, love. But men and women didn't hang out at the end of the day and chat about what their day was like at the office.
An assumption underlying almost all comments on interruptions is that they are aggressive, but the line between what's perceived as assertiveness or aggressiveness almost certainly shifts with an interrupter's gender.
Women communicate differently and process information differently, which leads them to resolve conflicts differently.
The sight of women talking together has always made men uneasy; nowadays it means rank subversion.
Well I do think, when there are more women, that the tone of the conversation changes, and also the goals of the conversation change. But it doesn't mean that the whole world would be a lot better if it were totally run by women. If you think that, you've forgotten high school.
Women are more complicated communicators than men, who have a tendency to pronounce and bloviate, and that makes for better writing in talky work.
Women have a greater verbal capacity.
What I find is with all due deference to - deference to our male colleagues, that women's styles tend to be more collaborative.
No opposing quotes found.