Tannen's theory can be looked at in both a humanistic and scientific perspective. I am going to critique the theory with the five criteria from the scientific perspective.
#1 - Explanation of Data: The Genderlect Theory does this well. A theory is supposed to explain an event or a behavior. Genderlect focuses on male and female communication and the differences between them. The theory lacks a little on the why part. Tannen gives many instances on the differences in communication between men and women, but fails to bring up the root of why there are such differences. She does not give any clear examples why men and women communicate so differently. Is it because that is the way each gender is brought up? Does each learn this way of communicating by watching each other? These are some questions the theory should explain better.
#2 - Prediction of Future Events:Tannen feels that male-female communication can be improved if we take some measures to understand why the other gender communicates in the way they do. Tannen believes that men should take sensitivity training to teach them how to think and speak more feminine. Women should take assertiveness training to learn more about the male communication tactics. I do not think this is a very probable answer. Not all men and women are going to take training classes to try and understand the opposite sex. Would you? I do not think that I would. I think it would be a waste of time.
#3 - Relative Simplicity:Tannen's theory is incredibly simple to understand. She uses many examples and applications of her theory that are easy to relate to. Movies like When Harry Met Sally is something that both men and women can easily understand. Many of her applications are written in a way that both genders can relate to.In some ways her theory is a little too simplistic. This just goes back to the why thing. She needs to put more depth into the theory.
#4 - Hypotheses That Can Be Tested:There is really only one way to test the Genderlect Theory: go around and listen to the communication between men and women. Listen to the way that they talk, and the differences in the way that they communicate, especially listening to the way that they view each other's communication styles. Looking at couples would be an especially good way to do this.
#5 - Practical Utility: I think that Tannen's theory is very useful. In a heterosexual relationship, it is important to understand why the other gender talks and acts the way they do. If we could finally reach a point where both genders could completely understand where the other is coming from that would be great, but I think the probability of that ever happening is very rare. If Tannen thinks that could ever be a possibility, I think she is way off base. Perfect utopia is never going to happen!
There are many different ways to look at the Genderlect Theory. I think that the Theory is good in certain situations, but much of this theory goes under the assumption that the only reason that we could be having conflict with the opposite sex is because of our communication differences. I believe this is untrue. The opposite sex can be very hard to understand at times, but there are ways to have effective communication. Not all conflict originates because of this. Also, Tannen's theory sticks strictly to a heterosexual relationship. Do all the same points apply when talking about a same sex relationship too? Even though the couple may be of the same sex does not mean that they completely understand each other all the time. There also does not seem to be any origination of where the theory is coming from.
Tannen does bring some good points through in her theory. I can identify through my past relationships. The points that she makes are clear, and easy to understand. I think that the Genderlect Theory is a good start to make when looking at male-female communication, but I think there is more to understand about conflict in relationships.
To see an interview with Deborah Tannen, click here.
To go back to Sara's title pageclick here.
The Genderlect theory can also be related to the theory of Relational Dialectics. Genderlect and Relational Dialectics both concentrate heavily on relationships and why conflicts exist usually due to some type of miscommunication. To get a closer look at this, Relational Dialectics.
Griffin,Em.A First Look at Communication Theory.
New York: The McGraw-Hill Companies,Inc.,1997.
This page was last revised by Marion Dudas(http://oak.cats.ohiou.edu/~md413097/genderlect.htm)
on November 17, 1999