政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/38530
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 113393/144380 (79%)
Visitors : 51233416      Online Users : 913
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
    •  Adv. Search
    Home ‧ Login ‧ Upload ‧ Help ‧ About ‧ Administer Goto mobile version


    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/38530


    Title: 非語言敏感度的性別差異：權力差異與不同社會角色期待的效果探討
    Gender difference on nonverbal sensitivity: Due to power differentials or different social role expectations?
    Authors: 林怡秀
    Lin, Yi Hsiu
    Contributors: 李怡青
    Lee, I Ching
    林怡秀
    Lin, Yi Hsiu
    Keywords: 非語言敏感度
    性別差異
    權力
    社會角色
    預期狀態理論
    nonverbal sensitivity
    gender difference
    power
    social roles
    expectation states theory
    Date: 2008
    Issue Date: 2010-04-09 12:54:14 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 非語言敏感度（nonverbal sensitivity）指正確察覺與解釋他人非語言訊息的能力。過去研究發現女性的非語言敏感度優於男性，可以權力取向或社會角色理論解釋。權力取向認為女性在社會上缺乏權力，故需展現良好的非語言敏感度保障自己權益。社會角色理論認為女性擔任，或被期待擔任照顧者，因此培養良好的非語言敏感度。本研究同時探討權力取向與社會角色理論，嘗試比較兩個理論對非語言敏感度性別差異的解釋。本實驗採用兩人互動，透過權力差異的操弄與不同的議題（經濟提供者議題或照顧者議題）討論，探討互動時的非語言敏感度。每位受試者還觀看四部影片，測量無動機影響的非語言敏感度。結果顯示權力差異可解釋兩人互動的非語言敏感度，且資料型態符合權力差異者的動機解釋。而觀看影片時，相較於探討經濟提供者議題受試者，探討照顧者議題受試者有較佳的非語言敏感度。此外我們亦發現性別、權力與社會角色三因子交互作用，非語言敏感度會受到實驗分派的社會角色是否符合生理性別的傳統作業影響，符合預期狀態理論的觀點。
    Nonverbal sensitivity refers to the ability to accurately detect and decode nonverbal cues communicated by others. Past research showed that women enjoy superior nonverbal sensitivity over men. Power perspective and social role theory each provides explanations for women`s superior nonverbal sensitivity. Power perspective suggests that due to the lack of power in the society, women count on their nonverbal sensitivity to get what they want and for protection. Social role theory suggests that women are more likely to be in or are usually expected to be in caretaker roles, which require their attending to others` verbal or nonverbal cues. As a result, women develop superior nonverbal sensitivity compared to men. We designed an experimental study to test explanations offered by power perspective and social role theory. In the experiment, two individuals were told to collaborate on a task either required them to be in the provider role mode (focusing on earning money) or caretaker role mode (focusing on taking care of others). Power difference was manipulated by assigning one of the two individuals to be a leader and the other follower in this task. Interactions were recorded upon participants’ consent. After interaction, the participants were asked to interpret nonverbal cues in their interaction. They were also told to view four video clips, and then report and interpret nonverbal cues in each video clip. The results suggest that nonverbal sensitivity in interaction can be best accounted for by explanations consistent with the power perspective. The powerful was better at “B sees Self” nonverbal sensitivity, and the powerless was better at “B sees Me” nonverbal sensitivity, consistent with motivational explanations. In addition, we found a three-way interaction of participant sex, power, and social role, suggesting that women had the best “B sees Me” sensitivity when they had no power and were in the provider role. And men showed the best “B sees Self” sensitivity when they had power and were in the provider role. The three-way interaction finding is consistent with predictions made by expectation states theory. However, when viewing four video clips, participants in the caretaker role had better nonverbal sensitivity than those in the provider role. Motivation was offered to account for the differential effects of power and social roles. By analyzing clips of the dyadic interactions, we found that the powerful showed more leader behavior such as deciding discussion direction, and the powerless showed more follower behavior such as stammering. However, the results of the clips did not account for the aforementioned findings of nonverbal sensitivity.
    Reference: 一、中文參考文獻
    王瑞祺（1986）。《批判理論與現代社會學》。台北:巨流。
    王佳玲（2004）。《大學生情緒智力信念、創造力信念與情緒智力、創造力之關係》。國立政治大學教育學研究所，碩士論文。
    李美枝（1981）。〈性別特質問卷的編制及男女大學生四種性別特質類型在成就動機、婚姻、事業及性態度上的比較〉。《中華心理學刊》，23，23-37。
    張殿興譯（1992）。《肢體語言》。台北：世茂。
    陳皎眉（2004）。《人際關係與人際溝通》。台北：雙葉書廊。
    陳皎眉、王叢桂、孫蒨如（2006）。《社會心理學》。台北：雙葉書廊。
    曾懷萱（2003）。《情緒性非語言行為的覺知特性與精神分裂病質傾向的關連性探討》。國立台灣大學心理學研究所，碩士論文。
    葉淑美譯（1989）。《肢體語言教戰手冊》。台北：世茂。
    廖立文譯（1986）。《當代社會理論：從派深思到哈伯瑪斯》。台北: 桂冠。
    滿莉芳（2002）。《情緒勞務工作者情緒勞務負荷與工作結果之研究-以情緒智力與工作特性為干擾》。靜宜大學企業管理研究所，碩士論文。
    鄧湘蘭（1999）。《成人情緒辨識量表之發展及其相關因素研究》。國立高雄師範大學成人教育研究所，碩士論文。

    二、英文參考文獻
    Anderson, C., & Berdahl, J. (2002). The experience of power: Examining the effects of power on approach and inhibition tendencies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 1362-1377.
    Anderson, P. A. (1998). The evolution of biological sex differences in communication. In D. J. Canary & K. Dindia (Eds.), Sex Differences and Similarities in Communication (pp. 117-136). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    Balkwell, J. W., & Berger, J. (1996). Gender, status, and behavior in task situations. Social Psychology Quarterly, 59, 273-283.
    Baum, K. M., & Nowicki, S., Jr. (1998). Perception of emotion: Measuring decoding accuracy of adult prosodic cues varying in intensity. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 22, 89-107.
    Bem, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Counseling and Clinical Psychology, 42, 155-162.
    Bernieri, F. J. (1991). Interpersonal sensitivity in teaching interactions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 98-103.
    Bernieri, F. J., Zuckerman, M., Koestner, R., & Rosenthal, R. (1994). Measuring person perception accuracy: Another look at self-other agreement. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 367-378.
    Blackman, M. C. (2002). The employment interview via the telephone: Are we sacrificing accurate personality judgment for cost efficiency? Journal of Research in Personality, 36, 208-223.
    Brody, L. R. (1985). Gender differences in emotional development: A review of theories and research. Journal of Personality, 53, 102-149.
    Broverman, I. K., Vogel, S. R., Broverman, D. M., Clarkson, F. E., & Rosenkrantz, P. S. (1972). Sex-role stereotype: A current appraisal. Journal of Social Issues, 28, 59-78.
    Burgoon, J. K., & Hoobler, G. D. (2002). Nonverbal signals. In M. L. Knapp & G. R. Miller (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal communication (pp. 240-299). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Dovidio, J. F., Brown, C. E., Heltman, K., Ellyson, S. L., & Keating, C. F. (1988). Power displays between woman and men in discussions of gender-linked tasks: A multichannel study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 580-587.
    Eagly, A. H. (1987). Sex differences in social behavior: A social-role interpretation. Zhillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
    Ekman, P., Friesen, W. V., O`Sullivan, M., & Scherer, K. (1980). Relative importance of face, body, and speech in judgments of personality and affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 270-277.
    Fiske, S. T., & Berdahl, J. (2007). Social power. In A. Kruglanski & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Social psychology: A handbook of basic principles (pp. 678-692). New York: Guilford.
    Freudenthaler, H. H., Neubauer, A. C., & Haller, U. (2008). Emotional intelligence: Instruction effects and sex differences in emotional management abilities. Journal of Individual Differences, 29, 105-115.
    Funder, D. C. (1980). On seeing ourselves as others see us: Self-other agreement and discrepancy in personality rating. Journal of Personality, 48, 473-493.
    Guimond, S., Branscombe, N. R., Brunot, S., Buunk, A. P., Chatard, A., Desert, M., et al. (2007). Culture, gender, and the self: Variations and impact of social comparison processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 1118-1134.
    Hall, J. A. (1979). Gender, gender role, and nonverbal communication skills. In R. Rosenthal (Ed.), Skill in nonverbal communication: Individual differences (pp. 32-67). Cambridge, Massachusetts: Oelgeschlager, Gunn & Hain, Publishers, Inc.
    Hall, J. A. (1984). Nonverbal sex differences: Communication accuracy and expressive style. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.
    Hall, J. A., Bernieri, F. J., & Carney, D. R. (2005). Nonverbal behavior and interpersonal sensitivity. In J. A. Harrigan, R. Rosenthal & K. R. Scherer (Eds.), The new handbook of methods in nonverbal behavior research (pp. 237-281). New York, US: Oxford University Press.
    Hall, J. A., Carter, J. D., & Horgan, T. G. (2001). Status roles and recall of nonverbal cues. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 25, 79-99.
    Hall, J. A., & Halberstadt, A. G. (1994). "Subordination" and sensitivity to nonverbal cues: A study of married working women. Sex Roles, 31, 149-165.
    Hall, J. A., Halberstadt, A. G., & O`Brien, C. E. (1997). "Subordination" and nonverbal sensitivity: A study and synthesis of findings based on trait measures. Sex Roles, 37, 295-317.
    Hall, J. A., & Matsumoto, D. (2004). Gender differences in judgments of multiple emotions from facial expressions. Emotion, 4, 201-206.
    Hall, J. A., Murphy, N. A., & Mast, M. S. (2006). Recall of nonverbal cues: Exploring a new definition of interpersonal sensitivity. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 30, 141-155.
    Hall, J. A., Rosip, J. C., LeBeau, L. S., Horgan, T. G., & Carter, J. D. (2006). Attributing the sources of accuracy in unequal-power dyadic communication: Who is better and why? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 18-27.
    Halpern, D. F. (1986). Sex differences in cognitive abilities. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    Henley, N. M. (1977). Body politics: Power, sex, and nonverbal communication. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
    Henley, N. M. (1995). Body politics revisited: What do we know today? In P. J. Kalbfleisch & M. J. Cody (Eds.), Gender, power, and communication in human relationships (pp. 27-61). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    Henley, N. M., & LaFrance, M. (1997, 1984). Gender as culture: Difference and dominance in nonverbal behavior. In A. Wolfgang (Ed.), Nonverbal Behavior (pp. 531-571). Seattle: Hogrefe & Huber Publishers.
    Juslim, P. N., & Scherer, K. R. (2005). Vocal expression of affect. In J. A. Harrigan, R. Rosenthal & K. R. Scherer (Eds.), The new handbook of methods in nonverbal behavior research (pp. 65-136). New York: Oxford University Press.
    Kashy, D. A., & Kenny, D. A. (2000). The analysis of data from dyads and groups. In H. T. Reis & C. M. Judd (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in social psychology (pp. 451-477). New York: Cambridge University Press.
    Keltner, D., Gruenfeld, D., & Anderson, C. (2003). Power, approach, and inhibition. Psychological Review, 110, 265-284.
    Kenny, D. A. (1994). Interpersonal perception: A social relation analysis. New York: Guilford Press.
    Knapp, M. L., & Hall, J. A. (2006). Nonverbal communication in human interaction. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth / Thomson Learning.
    LaFrance, M., & Henley, N. M. (1994). On oppressing hypotheses: Or differences in nonverbal sensitivity revisited. In H. L. Radtke & H. J. Stan (Eds.), Power / gender: Social relations in theory and practice (pp. 287-311). London: Sage.
    Lawton, M. P., Kleban, M. H., & Dean, J. (1993). Affect and age: Cross-sectional comparisons of structure and prevalence. Psychology and Aging, 8, 165-175.
    Lippa, R. A., & Dietz, J. K. (2000). The relation of gender, personality, and intelligence to judges` accuracy in judging strangers` personality from brief video segments. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 24, 25-43.
    Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991) Culture and the self: Implication for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological review, 98, 224-253.
    Maupin, H. E., & Fisher, R. J. (1989). The effects of superior female performance and sex-role orientation on gender conformity. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 21, 55-69.
    McClure, E. B. (2000). A meta-analytic review of sex differences in facial expression processing and their development in infants, children, and adolescents. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 424-453.
    Noller, P. (1980). Misunderstandings in marital communication: A study if couples` nonverbal communication. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 1135-1148.
    Noller, P. (2001). Using standard content methodology to assess nonverbal sensitivity in dyads. In J. A. Hall & F. J. Bernieri (Eds.), Interpersonal sensitivity: Theory and measurement (pp. 243-264). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    Oyserman, D., Coon, H. M., & Kemmelmeier, M. (2002). Rethinking individualism and collectivism: Evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 3-72.
    Patterson, M. L., Churchill, M. E., Farag, F., & Borden, E. (1992). Impression management, cognitive demand, and interpersonal sensitivity. Current Psychological Research and Reviews, 10(4), 263-271.
    Preacher, K. J., & Leonardelli, G. J. (2001). Calculation for the Sobel test: An interactive calculation tool for mediation tests. from http://www.people.ku.edu/~preacher/sobel/sobel.htm.
    Proverbio, A. M., Matarazzo, S., Brignone, V., Zotto, M., & Zani, A. (2007). Processing valence and intensity of infant expressions: The roles of expertise and gender. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 48, 477-485.
    Ridgeway, C. L. (2001). Social status and group structure. In M. A. Hogg & R. S. Tindale (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Group process (pp. 352-395). Malden, MA: Blackwell publishing.
    Ridgeway, C. L., & Bourg, C. (2004). Gender as status: A expectation states theory approach. In A. H. Eagly, A. E. Beall & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The psychology of gender (pp. 217-241). New York: Guilford Press.
    Riggio, R. E. (2006). Nonverbal skill and abilities. In V. Manusov & M. L. Patterson (Eds.), The Sage handbook of nonverbal communication (pp. 79-95). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Rosenthal, R. (2005). Conducting judgment studies: Some methodological issues. In J. A. Harrigan, R. Rosenthal & K. R. Scherer (Eds.), The new handbook of methods in nonverbal research (pp. 199-234). New York: Oxford University Press.
    Rosenthal, R., & DePaulo, B. M. (1979). Sex differences in accommodation in nonverbal communication. In R. Rosenthal (Ed.), Skill in nonverbal communication (pp. 68-103). Cambridge, MA: Oelgeschlager, Gunn & Hain.
    Rosip, J. C., & Hall, J. A. (2004). Knowledge of nonverbal cues, gender, and nonverbal decoding accuracy. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 28, 267-286.
    Shout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979). Intra-class Correlation: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 420-428.
    Snodgrass, S. E. (1985). Women`s intuition: The effect of subordinate role on interpersonal sensitivity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 146-155.
    Snodgrass, S. E. (1992). Further effects of role versus gender on interpersonal sensitivity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 154-158.
    Snodgrass, S. E. (2001). Correlational method for assessing interpersonal sensitivity within dyadic interaction. In J. A. Hall & F. J. Bernieri (Eds.), Interpersonal sensitivity: Theory and measurement (pp. 201-218). Mahwah, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    Snodgrass, S. E., Hecht, M. A., & Ploutz-Snyder, R. (1998). Interpersonal sensitivity: Expressivity or perceptivity? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 238-249.
    Thomas, G., & Fletcher, G. J. (2003). Mind-reading accuracy in intimate relationships: Assessing the roles of the relationship, the target, and the judge. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 1079-1094.
    Trost, M. R., & Alberts, J. K. (1998). An evolutionary view on understanding sex effects in communicating attraction. In D. J. Canary & K. Dindia (Eds.), Sex Differences and Similarities in Communication (pp. 233-255). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    Vrij, A. (2006). Nonverbal communication and deception. In V. Manusov & M. L. Patterson (Eds.), The Sage handbook of nonverbal communication (pp. 341-359). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Wagner, D. G., & Berger, J. (1997). Gender and international task behaviors: Status expectation accounts. Social Perspectives, 40, 1-32.
    Wiggins, J. S., Trapnell, P., & Phillips, N. (1988). Psychometric properties and geometric characteristics of the revised interpersonal adjective scales (IAS-R). Multivariate Behavioral Research, 23, 517-530.
    Wong, C.-S., & Law, K. S. (2002). The effects of leader and follower emotional intelligence on performance and attitude: An exploratory study. The Leadership Quarterly, 13, 243-274.
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    心理學研究所
    95752021
    97
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0095752021
    Data Type: thesis
    Appears in Collections:[Department of Psychology] Theses

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    202101.pdf98KbAdobe PDF2799View/Open
    202102.pdf127KbAdobe PDF2922View/Open
    202103.pdf119KbAdobe PDF2977View/Open
    202104.pdf142KbAdobe PDF2858View/Open
    202105.pdf133KbAdobe PDF21060View/Open
    202106.pdf275KbAdobe PDF22011View/Open
    202107.pdf130KbAdobe PDF2930View/Open
    202108.pdf237KbAdobe PDF21287View/Open
    202109.pdf178KbAdobe PDF21020View/Open
    202110.pdf213KbAdobe PDF21039View/Open
    202111.pdf146KbAdobe PDF21213View/Open
    202112.pdf178KbAdobe PDF2807View/Open
    202113.pdf600KbAdobe PDF21220View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback