Final Proposal

RUNNING HEAD: INFLUENCES OF ASSERTIVENESS
Influences of Assertiveness in College, Undergraduate Women
Kathryn DelVerne
California University of Pennsylvania
December 1, 2015

INFLUENCES OF ASSERTIVENESS 2
Introduction
Females between the ages of 18 to 25 spend a large portion of their time in a professional
setting. Whether they are in high school, college, or in the workplace, they are finding
themselves interacting professionally on a daily basis during these years. However, when women
find themselves interacting professionally, the overwhelming majority of women find themselves
holding back. They find themselves not speaking up, not taking credit where credit is due, and
not negotiating for what they deserve. Especially in a professional setting, Pfafman & McEwan
(2014) suggest that women are ‘too female’ to be professional or ‘too professional’ to be
feminine”. In my interpretation, women are looked down upon when they speak their mind, raise
a question, or voice their opinion; they are “too professional”. While if a women is timid, and
keeps her thoughts to herself, she is considered to be “too feminine”. In many cases, their
performance at work, or at school, is always being judged, and is a constant battle.
Previous research has shown just how difficult this battle of assertiveness in a
professional setting can be. According to a study done by Reid et al (2009), women are usually
caught between two forms of male prejudice. If a female questions her answers, men will like her
but not see her as intelligent. While if a woman does not question her answers, and is bold in
answering, men will see her as intelligent but will snub her for being too masculine (Reid et al,
2009).
While many studies have focused on how men perceive women in these settings, few
have shown why women feel they are not assertive. The purpose of this study will be to examine
the influences of gender attitudes, self-esteem, and communication styles on female,
undergraduate students’ likelihood to be assertive.

Literature Review
Gender Stereotyping
Stereotypes set in place by the media and other sources of information can cause females
to not want to be assertive and take credit for their work and/or opinion. The cause of this is
gender stereotyping or gender role expectations. Previous research from Duran & Carveth (1990)
implies that expectancies of others can be a more powerful conjecturer of perceptions of
communication functioning than actual behaviors exhibited (p. 27). In other words, a female will
not be as aggressive in getting what she deserves credit for because the males around her expect
her to be coy and not speak up. The same study also revealed that if a female, or male, do not
meet their gender’s expectations, they receive negative attention. Specifically, women who
communicated loudly, or interrupted during conversation, were perceived negatively (p. 28).
Building onto these gender stereotypes, most of what we believe to be true is a direct
representation on what we see in the media. Goodall (2012) suggests that today’s population
consists of the most media-saturated humans in history. With that, some of us are also “media
literate”. We are building our knowledge from the skills we already have and the information
from which we get from the media to interpret the real world (Goodall, 2012). However, not all
people possess media literacy. Because of this, at a young age, girls are seeing women on
television or movies being coy and reserved, and if they are not maybe media literate, they are
thinking what is being shown is how they should act, because they are not able to decipher
between what is stereotypical and what is not. “If females consume media that depict women as
passive, then they may be more inclined to believe that being passive is a ‘normal’ female trait”
according to Goodall (pp.162-162). Peter Hartley (1999) also mentions that both males and
females rely on social stereotypes. In particular, they rely heavily on gender roles.

Communication Style
The way an individual chooses to communicate also plays a crucial role in how they
carry themselves in a professional or academic setting. Women, as seen in previous research, are
known to not be as aggressive and forward in their communicating as men. Instead females are
polite, and keep to themselves. When they do speak to voice an opinion, they are not confident
with what they are suggesting. Hartley (1999) suggests that women are more likely to add what
are known as “hedges” to their words when speaking. Instead of being blunt, women will add
“kinda” or “well” when speaking about something (p. 186). Females are put into a category of
being too well mannered, and tend to be “overcorrect” in social situations (p. 186). It seems
society has categorized women’s communication style into two categories; blunt or polite.
Pfafman & McEwan (2014) imply that politeness allows others to make bold statements and
express thoughts without the fear of embarrassing the other party, or without hurting their image.
While this is not necessarily a bad thing, it has two sides. Pfafman & McEwan (2014) elaborate
on the idea of positive face and negative face threats (p. 203). Negative face threat is essentially
being passive aggressive, and making indirect statements to the opposing party, while positive
face threat is toying with an individual’s self esteem and convincing them to think highly of you
(p. 203). Furthermore, in Western workplaces, people prefer masculine communication styles
and favor polite women (Pfafman & McEwan, p. 203), making it very difficult for it to be
acceptable for a woman to take on masculine communication tendencies without being rejected.
If a woman uses an assertive approach when trying to complete a task at work, she will
encounter resistance (Pfafman & McEwan). In modern society, it seems a women must
command attention politely without asserting any dominance in order to be effective in
communicating.

Self-Esteem and Extraversion
Being confident, and having a strong level of self-esteem influences how one carries
themselves, and according to Chengting (2015), can make a person much more likely to be
extraverted. Chengting (2015) defines self-esteem as “a positive emotional experience gained
through social practice that reflects the difference between perceived and expected ego states,
and it consists of two components: self-efficacy and self liking” (p. 1245). When an individual is
experiencing positive self-liking, they are more likely to become extroverted, which then leads
them to participate in more positive behaviors such as innovative thought (Chengting, 2015, pp.
1245-1246). When in an extraverted state of mind, if an individual creates innovative thought,
they will share it with another individual or group. Therefore, if a woman is experiencing this
sense of high self-esteem, she will be more likely to share her thoughts and speak her mind. In a
sense, according to Chengting, there is a correlation to being extraverted and being confident.
Assertiveness
In contrast to being confident and extroverted, there is a correlation between being
assertive and self-conscious. According to Ockey (2011), if an individual finds his or her self to
be self-conscious, they are less likely to take the lead and speak without hesitation (pp. 969-970),
therefore, being less assertive in a group setting. Assertiveness, as defined by Mansson, Myers,
and Martin (2012), is a communication trait that is “conceptualized as individuals’ tendencies to
defend their rights by expressing their opinions and making request without jeopardizing the
right of others” (p. 239). Assertive individuals are also described as being “confident, dominant,
and independent” (Johnson & McCroskey, 2010, p. 61). If a female finds herself to be self-
conscious, she is more than likely not going to speak her mind, or if she does, she may apologize
for doing it like Hartley (1999) had suggested when saying women add “hedges” onto their

sentences when they feel inferior. Being assertive is linked with also being more dominating and
verbally expressive (Mansson et al, 2012), which by proxy makes female less likely to be
assertive because in most cases they are not very verbally expressive. Machiavellianism, a
personality trait closely related to assertiveness, is a person’s ability to persuade and manipulate
others for personal gain (p. 239). According to Mannson et al, females with low
Machiavellianism engage in less self-disclosure, making them less likely to speak out and
therefore be assertive.
Hypotheses
H1: There will be a positive correlation between a women’s self-esteem and assertiveness.
H2: There will be a negative correlation between a women’s gender attitude and assertiveness.
H2: There will be a positive correlation between a women’s communication style and
assertiveness.
Methods
The purpose of this study will be to examine the influences of views of gender attitudes,
self-esteem, and communication styles of female, undergraduate student’s likelihood to be
assertive
Participants
For this study’s purpose, female, undergraduate students are the population to be
surveyed. The sample that will be used to will consist of 400 female undergraduate students
attending a college or university between the ages of 18 and 22. They will be recruited from
women of Panhellenic sororities on campus. The sorority women will not receive any sort of
compensation or class credit for their participation in the study.

Nonprobability, convenience sampling will be used to select this sample. This particular
sort of sampling will be utilized because sorority women are easy accessible due to their large
numbers, usually between the ages of 18 and 22, and come from different cultural backgrounds.
Participants will not need to fill out any sort of demographic survey because they are all women,
and in the same age range. Their sex will be measured with nominal measurement, indicating
that they are indeed female.
Measures
Gender Attitudes. A six-item scale adapted from Kistler and Lee (2010), will be used to
assess participant’s attitude towards gender. Items will be scored using a 5-point Likert-type
scale scoring from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Higher scores will indicate the
female believes males are superior to women, while lower scores will indicate that the
participant does not feel males are superior to women.
Self-Esteem. A 10-item scale adapted from Rosenberg (1965) will be used to assess a
participant’s level of self-esteem. Items will be scored using a 5-point Likert-type scale scoring
from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). To score the questionnaire, reverse scoring will
be used on negatively worded questions. Instead of 1 equaling strongly disagree, it would instead
equal 5 and so on and so forth. Normal scoring will be used on positively worded items. Higher
scores will indicate higher levels of self-esteem while lower scores will indicate the participant
has low self-esteem.
Assertiveness. A 15-item scale adapted from Mutual of Omaha (2013) will be used to
assess a participant’s likelihood to be assertive. Items will be scored using a 5-point Likert-type
scale scoring from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Higher scores will indicate that a

participant has a likelihood to communicate more assertively, while lower scores show that they
are hesitant or will not communicate assertively.
Communication Style. A 17-item scale adapted from Newline Ideas (2014)
Communication Style Assessment will be used to evaluate which category of communication
style a participant falls into. Items will be scored using a 5-point Likert-type scale scoring from 1
(strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). To score the questionnaire, reverse scoring will be used
on negatively worded questions. Instead of 1 equaling strongly disagree, it would instead equal 5
and so on and so forth. Normal scoring will be used on positively worded items. Higher scores
will indicate strong, aggressive communication style, and lower scores will indicate passive,
weak communication style.
Table 1
Scale Items.
Assertiveness
1. I am comfortable meeting new people in social situations
2. I am able to say “no” without feeling guilty or anxious.
3. I can express strong feelings such as anger, frustration or disappointment
4. I can easily request help and information from others.
5. I feel capable of learning new things and performing new tasks.
6. I am able to acknowledge and take responsibility for my own mistakes.
7. I can discuss my beliefs without judging those who don’t agree with me.
8. I am able to express my honest opinion to others, even if they don’t agree.
9. I tell others when their behavior is not acceptable with me.
10. I can speak confidently in group situations.
11. I believe my needs are as important as those of others and should be considered.
12. I can assert my beliefs even when the majority disagrees with me.
13. I can express anger or disappointment without blaming others.
14. I am comfortable delegating task to others.
15. I value my own experience and wisdom.
Communication Style
1. I express my opinions honestly, openly and appropriately all of the time.
2. I can get angry and am comfortable letting this show.
3. I find it difficult to say “no”
4. If I do not agree with a task I’ve been given, I find a way of dragging my feet on it.

5. If someone knows more than me I feel comfortable asking them for help.
6. I feel guilty if I leave on time for a valid reason and other people are still working.
7. I think my way of doing things is better than other people’s.
8. I feel I have a right to say no to other people’s requests and to negotiate a compromise.
9. If I am in a large group, I find I do not speak up.
10. I like to be in control of a situation.
11. I make good eye contact with other people.
12. If I am unsure about a task, I find it uncomfortable to ask for help.
13. I have been known to talk about people behind their backs.
14. When I have to deal with someone in authority, I find it difficult to look them directly in
the eye.
15. I am a good listener and equally other people listen to what I have to say.
16. Rather than comforting someone about an issue, I would rather ignore them and drop
hints other people letting them know I’m not happy.
17. I am not afraid to be direct with someone, even if they think I am being rude.
Gender Attitudes
1. The intellectual leadership of a community should be largely in the hands of men.
2. Sons should be given more encouragement to go to college than daughters.
3. Women should remain subject to men.
4. There are many jobs where men should get preference over women in being hired or
promoted.
5. There are some professions that women should not pursue.
6. If a man and women are a couple and both work full-time jobs, the woman should care
for most of the household tasks.
Self-Esteem
1. On the whole, I am satisfied with myself.
2. At times I think I am no good at all.
3. I feel that I have a lot of good qualities.
4. I am able to accomplish things as well as others.
5. I feel I do not have much to be proud of.
6. I certainly feel useless at times.
7. I feel that I’m a person of worth, at least on an equal playing field with others
8. I wish I could have more respect for myself.
9. All in all, I am feel as though I’m a failure.
10. I take a positive attitude toward myself.

Procedures
To collect the appropriate data, female participants will be recruited from various
Panhellenic sororities at California University of Pennsylvania. Before completing the series of
surveys, they will sign to consent for their responses to be used in the study. The researcher will
attend each sorority’s chapter meeting and pass out the surveys on site. Chapter meetings are
typically held in a classroom on campus during the evening. The researcher will give the women
a set of instruction, indicating to them how to answer each questions using the Likert-type scales.
The participants will be told the purpose of the study is to examine the influences of views of
gender attitudes, self-esteem, and communication styles of female, undergraduate student’s
likelihood to be assertive. The participants will be instructed not to speak to one another while
taking the series of surveys to avoid bias. There will be 20 minutes time frame for the
participants to complete the survey.
Each hypothesis will be analyzed using the Pearson-product moment correlation
inferential statistical method to measure the linear correlation between assertiveness and each of
the other three variables. This particular method will be used due to the use interval level
measurement to measure each variable.
Pilot Test. Before completing the proposed study, a pilot test was completed using the same
population, but a smaller number of participants. The pilot test instead of selecting 400 different
sorority women, used 20 different sorority women. The women also did not complete the survey
in the same conditions the proposed study suggests, but instead completed them in classrooms
and chapter meetings. However, each participant was given 20 minutes to complete the survey.
The hypotheses were analyzed using the Pearson-product moment correlation method.

After completing the questionnaire, each participant was asked to give any feedback on
the items on the questionnaire. Many participants commented that they wished they had been
given more time to complete the questionnaire, they felt as if 20 minutes was not enough time to
reflect and accurately answer each question. Also, many participants found the question items
concerning gender attitudes to be repetitive and the overall questionnaire to be too long. Several
participants said they lost interest half way through the questionnaire, which attributed to them
possibly not answering them accurately. To improve the questionnaire, participants suggested
shorting the questionnaire and giving more time and instruction on how to properly answer the
items.
Results
The measures of central tendency for assertiveness (M=62.46, Me=62, Mo=no mode)
were greater than the measures of central tendency for gender attitudes (M=8.77, Me=8, Mo=6).
The measures of dispersion for assertiveness (R=29, V=66.64, SD=8.16) were greater than the
measures of dispersion for gender attitudes (R=10, V=10.86, SD=3.30). As predicted by the
hypothesis, the Pearson-product moment correlation found that the mean of assertiveness
(M=62.46, SD=8.16) differed significantly from the mean of gender attitudes (M=8.77,
SD=3.30), R(11)=0.88, CV=1.79, OV=4.22.
were greater than the measures of central tendency for self-esteem (M=32.46, Me=32, Mo=36 &
29). The measures of dispersion for assertiveness (R=29, V=66.64, SD=8.16) were greater than
the measures of dispersion for self-esteem (R=9, V=9.94, SD=3.15). As predicted by the
hypothesis, the Pearson-product moment correlation found that the mean of assertiveness

(M=62.46, SD=8.16) differed significantly from the mean of self-esteem (M=32.46, SD=3.15),
R(11)=0.93, CV=1.79, OV=8.32.
were less than the measures of central tendency for communication style (M=61.31, Me=63,
Mo=52 & 63). The measures of dispersion for assertiveness (R=29, V=66.64, SD=8.16) were
greater than the measures of dispersion for communication style(R=17, V=36.57, SD=6.05). As
predicted by the hypothesis, the Pearson-product moment correlation found that the mean of
assertiveness (M=62.46, SD=8.16) differed significantly from the mean of communication style
(M=61.31, SD=6.05), R(11)=0.95, CV=1.79, OV=5.66.
Discussion
The data collected from this study’s pilot test suggests that there is a strong positive
correlation between a woman’s self-esteem and assertiveness. It suggests there is a strong
negative correlation between a woman’s gender attitude and assertiveness. It also suggests there
is a strong positive correlation between a women’s communication style and assertiveness. All of
the above was predicted in the study’s initial hypotheses.
Drawing from those results, assertiveness may stem from how a female wants a man to
perceive her, due to the strong negative correlation between gender attitudes and assertiveness.
The data collected suggests that if a female has weak gender attitudes, believing that women
should not be subject to men, she will have strong levels of assertiveness. The data also suggests
that if a woman has strong levels of gender attitudes, suggesting she believes women should be
subject to men, she will have weak levels of assertiveness. Previous research supports with this
correlation, suggesting that gender role expectancies play a significant role in how males and
females interact with one another (Duran & Carveth, 1990). If a female believes a man should be

dominant, and that she should be polite and reserved, she is likely not to be assertive. Further,
the data also suggests that there is strong, positive correlation between self-esteem and
assertiveness. If a female is extroverted, and has higher levels of self-esteem, she will likely
choose to communicate assertively. When females engage in self-liking, they are likely to share
with those around them, therefore become assertive in nature (Chengting, 2015). If she has
lower levels of self-esteem, and does not engage in self-efficacy, she is likely not to be assertive.
Finally, previous research suggests that the communication style of women is usually
passive (Hartley, 1999), which would then lead them to communicate less assertively because
they attempting to be well mannered and polite. Data from this study aligns with that research,
suggesting there is a positive correlation between communication style and assertiveness. In
other words, the data proposes that if a woman has lower levels of communication style,
insinuating she is not aggressive, she is less likely to communicate assertively would aligns with
what Hartley indicates in his research.
However, though the study did show significance, limitations do exist. The study could
be improved and show greater significance, by making less of the questionnaire items situational.
There is the slight chance women may have not been relying on their gut feeling when answering
the questionnaire items, and instead thinking of situations which would support their long term
goal (Pfafman & McEwan, 2014). This may have skewed some of the participant’s answer
choices. If a woman has an agenda, and a long-term or short-term goal to achieve, she may use
the communication style needed to achieve that goal rather than her natural communication style.
She may also not depend on her self-esteem, nor her gender roles, to help her achieve that goal.
These women may be modifying their gender attitude, their self-esteem, and their
communication style based on the situation. Because there was no form of measurement to

identify what sort of situation the female was basing her answers on, there was no way of
knowing how she answering the questions.
Limitations in the study also could be attributed to the small number and homogeneity of
the participants used to conduct the pilot test. The women surveyed were all from a particular
segment, sororities, which may have caused them to be candidates for groupthink. Cline (1990)
implies that groupthink is “a mode of thinking that people engage in when they are deeply
involved in a cohesive in-group” (pp. 112-113). These women in these sororities are indeed
deeply involved in a closed circle of individuals, which may cause them to all think alike.
Though they are diverse in cultural backgrounds, activities, majors, and ages, they may not be as
diverse in the way they think and view situations. In addition to the threat of groupthink, the
participants may have also been subject to inter-subject diffusion. Because these women knew
they were going to be participating in this study, and they are always in such close quarters, they
may have discussed their personal views on the variables. This may have skewed the results
causing some females to not answer based on their personal feelings but rather the feelings
discussed by the group. Another limitation may have been the time frame given to participants to
complete the questionnaire. Only 20 minutes were given to each participant to answer a 37 item
questionnaire. Participants may have felt rushed which may have resulted in them not answering
each question accurately. They may have also not answered the items accurately because they
felt there was not an appropriate answer that matched their views, which could be attributed with
the chosen levels of measurement. Using a 5-point Likert-type scale does not leave a significant
amount of interpretation, which may cause participants to select an answer they do not feel
comfortable with due to the fact there is a lack of the opportunity to elaborate.

Looking to the future, additional research may instead examine a more diverse population
of women, perhaps looking at women who are actively involved in clubs and organizations and
women who are not. Adding an additional variable could give a more apparent correlation
because the two groups would be less homogeneous, causing their answers to show more
significant variation. Qualitative research may also show greater significance. Like mentioned
previously, women may be more likely to respond to the questionnaire items accurately when
they are based on a particular situation. If the study were to use a focus group approach, the
mediator would have the opportunity to explain a hypothetical situation allowing the participants
to answer the question more accurately because they are able to put themselves into the position,
instead of selecting a Likert-type item such as “strongly agree”. Participants may also be more
motivated to answer the items more accurately because they are discussing their answers, rather
than just circling them on a sheet of paper.

References
(2014). Communication style self-assessment. Retrieved from
http://www.newlineideas.com/communication-style-quiz.html.
Am I Assertive? (2013). [Graphic illustration of graph of assertiveness]. Measuring
assertiveness. Retrieved from
https://blogs.mutualofomaha.com/articles/2013/09/03/measuring-assertiveness/
Chengting Juyuan Lijijun, L. (2015). Self-esteem, gender, and the relationship between
extraversion and subjective well-being. Social Behavior & Personality: An International
Journal, 43(8), 1243-1254.
Cline, R. W. (1990). Detecting groupthink: Methods for observing the illusion of unanimity.
Communication Quarterly, 38(2), 112-126.
Duran, R. L., & Carveth, R. A. (1990). The effects of gender-role expectations upon perceptions
of communicative competence. Communication Research Reports, 7(1), 25-33.
Goodall, H. (2012). Media’s influence on gender stereotypes. Media Asia 39(3), 160-163.
Hartley, P. (1999). Chapter 11: Do men and women communicate differently? Interpersonal
Communication (pp. 181-192). United Kingdom: Taylor & Francis Ltd / Books.
Johnson, A. D., & McCroskey, J.C. (2010). Machiavellianism, biological sex, and
communication orientations. Human Communication, 13(2), 57-67.
Kistler, M. E., & Lee, M.J. (2010). Does exposure to sexual hip-hop videos influence the sexual
attitudes of college students? Mass Communication and Society, 13(1), 67–86. doi:
10.1080/15205430902865336

Mannsson, D. H., Myers, S.A., & Martin, M. M. (2012) Students’ communicative attributes and
their out-of-class communication with instructors. Atlantic Journal of Communication,
20(4), 237-247. doi: 10.1080/15456870.2012.711180
Ockey, G. (2011). Self-consciousness and assertiveness as explanatory variables of L2 oral
ability: A latent variable approach. Language Learning 61(3), 968-989. doi:
10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00625.x
Pfafman, T. M., & McEwan, B. (2014). Polite women at work: Negotiating professional identity
through strategic assertiveness. Women’s Studies In Communication, 37(2), 202-219.
doi:10.1080/07491409.2014.911231
Reid, S. A., Palomares, N. A., Anderson, G. L., & Bondad-Brown, B. (2009). Gender, language,
and social influence: A test of expectation states, role congruity, and self-categorization
theories. Human Communication Research, 35(4), 465-490. doi: 10.1111/j. 1468-
2958.2009.01359.x
Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.

Final Proposal

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (18)

Similar to Final Proposal

Similar to Final Proposal (20)

Final Proposal