This study examines the differences of gender communication questioning the fact that male and female genders are more abstract or concrete than the other is. The subjects used in the study were 47 Western Connecticut State University students ranging in ages from nineteen to forty-three. The surveys listed 25 commonly known words in the English language and participants were asked to write down the first word that came to their mind after reading the given word. Results found that both genders are more concrete than abstract and the problem genders have in communicating with each other has nothing to do with concreteness or abstractness.

INTRODUCTION

The main reason that men and women have difficulty communicating is due to the fact that our communication styles are altered from each others. Each gender is evidently attracted to each other although the communication styles we have tend to be quite problematic. Men and women understand and comprehend words in different ways and this causes the communication methods, usage, and understanding of words to be vastly different between the genders.

The subject matter discussed in this paper will be gender communication styles and the understanding of certain words. Human's interpretation of certain words has to do with the understanding of them and how words are comprehended. With the understanding of the meanings associated with words they can make each gender (men and/or women) more abstract or concrete. With the following authors' interpretations of gender communication, we can answer the question regarding the meanings men and women associate with words and if the meanings have a tendency to make one gender more concretely oriented than the other. By examining each gender's word associations, inferences can be made as to both genders in terms of one gender being more abstract or concretely oriented than the other is. Hayakawa (1972) states that we must be familiar with the defining of words to make our way down the abstraction ladder. When we learn and explain language we need to grasp words, what they stand for, and how they associate with our lives. By looking at both sexes and how they interpret words the understanding of why men and women have problems communicating can be clearer to us. Found below are conclusions that have to do with the communication of meaning, associations, and our battles of words.

Scott (1969) discusses an essay by William H. Youngren, which states that the use of Korzybski's rules of semantics is useless and that they are too complex to learn yet then having to apply it creates more difficulty. Korzybski's rules of semantics uses the idea of a ladder which has various levels and humans work our way down (widespread ideas to exact) or our way up (exact to widespread ideas). Youngren does not grasp the ideas of abstraction that are needed to utilize it in everyday life. Students came across words on the abstraction levels and then could become aware of how the denotation of words were altered when they progress to a more broad or precise meaning and could tell the difference between models and examples. Then the students were able to make their writing more beneficial and were motivated to continue to use these laws of abstraction in everyday writing. This practice allows students to express their own meanings in more appropriate manners by knowing which levels of the abstraction ladder they were incorporating into their writing.

Hayakawa and Langer both express beliefs that language is defined in more concrete terms according to humans themselves and through personal actions each individual more easily recognizes words in a specific way. Our language is shaped by reality and the labels we give objects are what make it reality (Hayakawa, 1972). We make meaning when it is not there with our language determining our culture. Hayakawa states that linguistic determinism is the idea that the language that we speak determines the way we see the universe. This means that if we alter the way we speak then culture will transform. Our world is made up of words in context and we make meaning according to our uses for those words. Communication varies on whom we are talking with and the meaning of words we use is in the content we create reality with.

Hayakawa's ladder of abstraction is how we see objects in the universe. Dead level abstracting is when people remain stationary on the abstraction ladder. If we are too specific we are seen as on a low level of abstraction while if we are very broad and general we are appear to be on a higher level of the ladder. For example if someone addresses the subject of history and how America has evolved they are high on the abstraction level unless they are able to point out historical figures who made a difference, wars we fought in and other marks in history that are significant to us. Using certain facts and more information in writing or conversation places a person on lower levels of abstraction.

Langer also agrees with Hayakawa in that humans have a "built-in-tendency to abstract" which leads humans to deal with high or low levels of abstraction (1951). Abstraction is the process of forming a conception while leaving out details. Humans can also form general conceptions from a variety of concrete experiences, when this occurs details are brought in and then a person is placed at a lower level on the abstraction ladder to a more concrete level. When a word is stated we automatically visualize a picture in our mind of what it is (connotation), also known as the relationship between the symbol and meaning, which includes our personal feelings. There is also a denotation, which Langer defines as the connection of the symbol to the person. Hayakawa and Langer both express statements that levels of abstraction vary due to how the mind incorporates things we perceive.

Griffin investigated four types of friendships (male-male, female-female, romantic cross-sex, and cross sex platonic friends) to measure communication differences between each group (1983). Areas of interest that the study looked in depth at were self-disclosure, protection of friend, status of friendship, level of caring, future of closeness, personal touch, interest similarities, duration of friendship, and type of communication. The results found state scarce difference among the friendship types researched. Although the male-male friendships demonstrated greater strength, the male-female friendships were more unsteady than any other friendships. The romantic partners felt long durability of their relationship and the female-female friendships felt the least in control of the future friendship because they were doubtful of how long it would last. This article has more to do with gender communication and how humans see various friendships and does not touch the area of abstractness.

The discoveries from the following four articles all show the dominance of women and the constant change of language type due to gender presence (Guzzetti, 1997; Page, 1996; Marche, 1993; Wakefield, 1984). Guzzetti examined the limits of dual comprehension on writings and gender. The article came to the conclusion that neither gender had any more interruption than the other in any setting or any age group did. The authors of this study tend to feel that women deal with more put downs and interruptions because of their gender and due to the fact that they are seen as below men in society.

Page focuses on the communication styles between men and women and states that each gender has to continue to improve communication for us to understand each other in the leadership environment. For these skills to improve we must accept that we are all different, maintaining many combinations of various traits and we need to create a culture where the values of women can be accepted easily. To understand each other better we need to be aware of various communication styles we use with others and the way we communicate with those of the same gender and opposite gender. It is stated that women change the conversation to adapt to men that are present and are seen as less likely to be listened to while men use put-downs, mocking, and teasing to keep their conversations one-up with women. We must realize what goes on while communicating between people in groups or dyads to improve our communication styles.

The three studies that were conducted by Marche and conclusions state that others should accept our gender differences but not until they question the differences beforehand. The author also states that communication interruption should not be based on our gender. Each of three groups (males, females and both sexes) was placed into a pair and had a twenty-minute conversation between them recorded. The topics each pair spoke of could be anything from capital punishment to family allowance and the focus of the study was to determine whether sex has a part on how high the interruption behavior is. The first study found information supporting that we use meanings learned from gender in our reading, writing, and oral speech. Study two was conducted to find the conditions of sex and culture in knowledge mainly due to the gender of the participant. The author states that the results from the first two studies were similar in the fact that our understanding of self alters depending on gender. The third study focused on language styles and states that females seemed to be more knowledgeable in class, spoke out more, and the dominance in the room was clearly the females over the males. All three studies by Marche concluded that the several environments we are surrounded by easily influence gender communication.

Wakefield's research, the final author in this group, examined the power factors and forces of male and female executives in middle to higher management levels. This piece of work attempts to seek the need for more appropriate construction of communication between men and women with high-level positions. With the five hundred surveys used, women tended to have less authority because of age and were positioned at lower levels than men. No major findings were discrete with the effectiveness of communication in the organizational setting with the positions genders held. The studies of Guzzetti, Marche, Page, and Wakefield distinctly state that each gender changes language patterns depending on whether or not the opposite genders are present. It is also stated that females deal with more communication troubles due to male's authority and use of communication.

We must comprehend the importance of gender communication for the concept to improve among males and females (Pifer, 1985; Thomas, 1988). Thomas defined gender communication on the St. Olaf College campus as "appropriate relations between men and women" which included intimate, casual and acquaintance relations. Students, faculty and staff were surveyed and asked to fill out inquiries with the knowledge of gender communication. The main reason for this study was to gather information of gender communication and to determine that it was present on campus. Gender communication brightens the campus and recognizes the need for it on other campuses.

Pifer feels that we must keep in mind that others understand language to be different than ourselves due to the various interpretations we have from previous experiences. Our interpersonal gender (how humans understand are familiar with communicating with others) is closely affiliated to gender. Three areas of controversy the article focused were awareness, involvement, and understanding in the classroom environment that deal with gender communication. Awareness is the demand for gender fairness; involvement is the need for the instructor to be aware of participation efforts and the regularity of each student's individual participation; and understanding states that instructors must also be receptive to the genders present. Language (identifying sexist language), classroom style (comments used by each gender), and responding (more men are called on by name) are other factors the instructor should include in awareness topics. Once the identification of these students' needs are met and recognized then the classroom environment can be more gender open and welcome.

Schools have the job now of using various styles of communication to accommodate all students (Mavrelis, 1997), because schools have students with diverse cultural backgrounds the need for this is necessary along with the changing enrollment. The point of this article is to identify what is being done to change the way our schools operate. Being from different cultural backgrounds affects our communication patterns. Conflicts arise in discussion with others culturally different from us when expectations and assumptions are misinterpreted. Discipline styles, communication between parents and teachers, student participation, and teaching programs were being refined to broaden the students' horizons and environments. Schools are trying to make themselves a more knowledgeable place with culture and social variety in the sense that school systems have identified that communication patterns of other cultures need to be integrated for our learning to be enhanced.

Our communications styles are appropriate and similar in that we have to understand that others' manners are quite different from ours. Communication between genders is difficult to comprehend from each gender's perspective because we have problems understanding each other. Even though we are both humans our styles are not similar in every way. We have to be aware of other's styles and that way it will be easier for us to communicate with each other.

METHOD AND PROCEDURE

The attached survey was handed out to approximately 25 Western Connecticut State University students of each gender in three communication classes. The survey will list 25 words commonly known in the English language. Some words in the survey have been adapted from Sereno, Kenneth K. Bodaken, Edward M, and Rushing, Janice H. (1975). After stating age and gender, participants will then be asked to write down next to the given word, the first word that comes to their mind.

Data gathered with the 47 surveys were examined by comparing the descriptive word with the given word and observations were made to answer questions concerning gender and abstraction. For example, if the word given on the survey is as simple as dog, a concrete answer could be cocker spaniel or german shepherd but an abstract answer would be animal. The more concrete an answer is the more specific and certain the response, and the more abstract the response then we are very broad.

By looking at which gender is more concrete or abstract we can answer questions such as - Are men or women more concretely oriented? Do men speak more abstractly? Do women speak more concretely? Does abstraction or concreteness relate to one gender more than the other?

RESULTS

Figures from the forty-seven surveys show that both genders are more concrete than being abstract. While the results came from both genders, neither group differed greatly from the other; it was found that males were even more concrete than the females.

On the following page is a chart listing each person's number of concrete and abstract answers, the average number of concrete or abstract answers per gender, and the range of concrete or abstract answers given by participants.

Overall, when both genders gave their answers, the majority of the words they associated with the given words were concrete. The problems with the survey was that several were anonymous, handwriting was an issue, sometimes answers could not be read and in other instances the answer given had neither an abstract or concrete relation to the stimulus word and was understood to be comparable to the given word. For example the given word was blue and respondent wrote down red or green; the given word was mother one of the most common words written was father, another given word was queen and the written word was king.

This could mean that the reply was more of a connotative answer and was specific to that person only or was the first word that a person associates the given word with. This could possibly be interpreted as a concrete response but it was best to just disregard several answers that were seen in this way.

A = Average

R = Range of answers given

The total number of female participants whose surveys were used was 27. Looking at the females first, there were more concrete replies than abstract answers. Only one female had an equal balance of both answers (10 concrete, 10 abstract), the 5 remaining answers had to be disregarded because they were seen as neither concrete nor abstract. Abstract answers given ranged from 1 to 10 with the average number of 4 and only seven respondents having over 5 abstract answers. The number of concrete answers given by females was over a broad range of 10 to 22, with an average of 15, stated with not a high or low balance. These numbers of abstract being 4 and concrete averaging 15 distinctly illustrates that females are understood to be concrete over abstract. Each female gave a response to the one given on the survey, but only one survey had answers of a concrete and/or abstract nature that totaled 25. This means that not all the answers given by participants were seen as concrete or abstract. This is explained earlier in the results section concerning the mother vs. father, cat vs. dog, and king vs. queen answers. All of these responses can be seen as equivalent and comparable to the given word. Several other female answers had to be disregarded because they did not relate to given word, some words could not be recognized, and others may have been left blank.

The numbers of male surveys used was 20 and were quite similar to the numbers of the females. Males gave more concrete answers than females. The range of abstract answers was from 0 to 6 with the average of 3 (only 5 respondents had over 4 abstract answers). It could also be stated that the average of 3 abstract answers was arrived at from several low abstract responses. While the number of concrete answers ranged from 12 to 23 the average was 17, with only two males giving under 16 concrete answers per survey. This means that the average of 17 concrete answers for males was arrived at from several high numbers several being in the 20 range. To compare the men and women in concrete vs. abstract answers, on the average, males gave more concrete than abstract responses. Only 4 men gave responses to every given word, which were seen as concrete or abstract. Two males had no abstract responses but the concrete number was 16 on one and 23 on another. This means that the remaining responses on the male surveys could not be comprehended, were seen as neither concrete nor abstract and in that case were thrown out while averaging.

DISCUSSION

After reviewing the surveys according to gender, several statements can be confirmed about obstacles men and women face when communicating with each other. To use a well-known authority as a prime source, Hayakawa decided that since "life is a process of change " then we live on a concrete level by making associations with words we know (pg.150). In addition to this statement humans tend to see the world in more concrete terms than abstract. From the surveys it suggests that both genders understand the world in terms of being concrete and associate meaning more connotatively. When humans master words and meanings, we relate the words to occurrences and experiences. By this action, humans make more concrete relations and connotations of words. If we are familiar with a word someone gives us it is more likely that we will automatically state a concrete answer.

Some humans tend to think that males and females cannot communicate with each other because we tend to think in opposite worlds being concrete or abstract. Although both genders are much more concrete than abstract it only answers one question about why we have problems communicating with each other; the fact that males and females do not have problems communicating in terms of being concrete or abstract. From the words used on the surveys and replies provided we couldn't blame our miscommunication with the opposite gender on this notion. The certainty that males and females have difficulty communicating has little or nothing to do with the fact that we view the world in terms of concreteness.

If both sexes communicate in concrete terms then why do we face obstacles in communicating with each other? This and other questions can be answered if the survey was used on different terms and other steps were taken. The words given on the survey were quite simple and figured that most humans of the ages used would easily recognize them quickly to just write down a word. If the words used on the survey were of more depth or other words were adapted instead then results might have been altered extremely or slightly. Although only a small number of participants were used for this study more participants might greatly change the statistics that were found. To use a larger range of ages is also a possibility and could modify the results depending on whether or not middle-aged or older people are less concrete or abstract. These questions and concepts could be discussed in further research projects.

In conclusion, the results found in this study were remarkable in that both genders are seen as concrete over abstract and perceive the world in distinct and precise terms. Most humans would assume that one gender is concrete and the other is abstract when we communicate. It only makes us wonder why we have problems communicating with the opposite sex. Whether concrete or abstract, males and females may see the world in opposite or similar terms but trying to define one gender as either will not solve the question. Although men and women have issues in communicating with each other, we will continue to deal with each other in our own way. Whether we perceive the world in concrete or abstract terms we will nevertheless resolve problems that we have to face in our relationships with the opposite genders.

REFERENCES

Griffin, E. (1983, November). Communication patterns in four types of friendships. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Speech Communication Association, Washington, D.C.

Guzzetti, B. (1997, December). Mitigating influences in the interrelationships between the development of literacies and gender. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Reading Conference, Scottsdale, AZ.

Hayakawa, S.I. (1972). Language and thought in action. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc.

Langer, S. (1951). Philosophy in a new key. New York: Mentor Books.

Marche, T. (1993). The development and sex-related use of interruption behavior. Human Communication Journal, 19. 388-408.

Mavrelis, J. (1997). Understanding differences in cultural communication styles. High School Magazine, 5. 30-37.

Page, B. (1996, February). Gender issues and leadership: How to improve communication among and between men and women. Paper presented at the Annual International Conference of the National Community College Chair Academy, Phoenix, AZ.

Pifer, R. (1995, April). Gender in interpersonal communication. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Southern States Communication Association, New Orleans, LA.

Sereno, Kenneth K. Bodaken, Edward M, and Rushing, Janice H. (1975). Tran-Per: A teaching strategies guide. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Scott, R. (1969). Using Korzybski's semantics to teach English composition. Journal of English Teaching Techniques, 2. 1-10.

Thomas, A. (1988, June). Gender communication at the liberal arts college: Improving the climate. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Women's Studies Association, Minneapolis, MN.

Wakefield, D. (1984, April). Sex and "power communication" in middle- and top-level administration. Paper presented at the American Business Communication Association Southeast Convention, Hammond, LA.

Sex: (Please circle one) Male Female

Age: __________

After each word listed below please write down the first word that comes to your mind.