<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>Literature points towards the role of context in irony interpretation and the existence of gender differences in language use. We decided to examine the influence of interlocutors’ gender stereotypes on interpreting and reacting to ironic criticism in conversation. To this end, we designed two experiments gathering participants’ responses to the same ironic utterances voiced both by women and by men in control and gender stereotype activation conditions. Results of the first experiment showed that women tended to use irony significantly more often when responding to a man than to another woman. The second, ongoing experiment will additionally examine participants’ response times and total time of utterance in respect to their addressee’s gender. The results are discussed with regard to the social comparison theory (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="j_plc-2016-0014_ref_039_w2aab2b8c11b1b7b1ab1ac39Aa">Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher, &amp; Wetherell, 1987</xref>) and the linguistic intergroup bias theory (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="j_plc-2016-0014_ref_041_w2aab2b8c11b1b7b1ab1ac41Aa">Wigboldus &amp; Douglas, 2007</xref>).</p></abstract>

Literature points towards the role of context in irony interpretation and the existence of gender differences in language use. We decided to examine the influence of interlocutors’ gender stereotypes on interpreting and reacting to ironic criticism in conversation. To this end, we designed two experiments gathering participants’ responses to the same ironic utterances voiced both by women and by men in control and gender stereotype activation conditions. Results of the first experiment showed that women tended to use irony significantly more often when responding to a man than to another woman. The second, ongoing experiment will additionally examine participants’ response times and total time of utterance in respect to their addressee’s gender. The results are discussed with regard to the social comparison theory (Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher, & Wetherell, 1987) and the linguistic intergroup bias theory (Wigboldus & Douglas, 2007).

<bold><italic>Zing Zing Bang Bang:</italic></bold> How Do You Know What She Really Meant. Gender Bias in Response to Irony: The Role of Who is Speaking to Whom

Psychology of Language and Communication

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

 How Do You Know What She Really Meant. Gender Bias in Response to Irony: The Role of Who is Speaking to Whom

Literature points towards the role of context in irony interpretation and the existence of gender differences in language use. We decided to examine the...

Zing Zing Bang Bang: How Do You Know What She Really Meant. Gender Bias in Response to Irony: The Role of Who is Speaking to Whom

Data publikacji: 23 lut 2017

Zakres stron: 219 - 234

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/plc-2016-0014

Słowa kluczowe
irony, figurative language, gender, gender stereotypes, social cognition

© 2016 Anna Milanowicz et al., published by De Gruyter Open

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Zing Zing Bang Bang: How Do You Know What She Really Meant. Gender Bias in Response to Irony: The Role of Who is Speaking to Whom

Data publikacji: 23 lut 2017

Zakres stron: 219 - 234

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/plc-2016-0014

Słowa kluczoweirony, figurative language, gender, gender stereotypes, social cognition

© 2016 Anna Milanowicz et al., published by De Gruyter Open

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Słowa kluczowe
irony, figurative language, gender, gender stereotypes, social cognition