This document summarizes key communication theories and how gender affects communication styles. It discusses schema theory and how personal, self, role, and event schemas can differ for men and women. Social identity theory is explained in relation to gender group comparisons. The concept of the "generalized other" and cultural expectations of gender are analyzed. Finally, it discusses Goffman's theory of fronts and how people may modify their communication styles to fit gender norms. Overall, the document realizes how the author's own gender affects their communication and expression.

1. 1
G01082866
Com 295-03
Final Exam Paper
What is a theory? A theory allows us to understand a phenomena or reality. The best
theories explain, predict, and control. We learned and discussed many communication theories,
and also how gender may affect them. I definitely realized how gender plays a part in how I
personally communicate, and how others communicate as well, based on their gender.
Firstly I’ll talk about schema theory. Schema theory is how we organize information
about our social worlds. It is patterns of behavior and the understanding of those patterns. There
are four types of schema: personal, self, role, and event.
Personal schema is how we perceive people, such as with physical traits and
psychological/personality traits. I definitely believe there are both physical and personality trait
stereotypes that go along with being either male or female. But not only do males make these
stereotypes about women, and women about men, but also women about other women, and men
about other men. Some examples of these stereotypes would be how women typically expect
men to be “manly” and more “tough” and less emotional, and men typically expect women to be
this nurturing, subordinate, “house wife”. They may also make physical expectations/judgments
on women as well. The “ideal” woman may be described as thin but curvy, and model-looking.
A lot of times men put impossible physical expectations on women. Not to say that it doesn’t
happen the other way around as well, because it definitely does, but I think it has always been
more intense with the expectations of women.

2. 2
Self-schema is about self-perception; how we perceive ourselves. Such as confidence, or
lack thereof. I think this is especially relevant with women. Women are typically a lot more self-
criticizing than men.
Role schema is situational. It has to do with appropriate behavior expectations like with
location/setting, and also role-appropriate behavior like with certain title or relationships. For
example, someone would have a different schema for when they were at work, versus out at a
bar on the weekends. And you would probably have a different schema for how you
acted/communicated around your close friends, versus your parents, or parents-in-law, etc. As far
as this being different with gender, someone who’s female may try to fit the female stereotypes
or “roles” better in a more formal setting, like out to dinner with a mother and father-in-law,
versus being more casual just at home, or at a bar with close friends. It would probably be a very
similar situation with males as well. They would try to be as close to the “mold” as possible in a
more formal setting, and then they would be more relaxed in a more casual setting.
Event schema has to do with common occurrences, such as getting fast food, or a first
date. You talk differently to the person taking your order at Taco Bell than you would to a
sibling or a best friend. You would also probably talk differently to someone you’re on a first
date with than someone you have known for years.
Schemas are developed at a young age and are constantly evolving. As you can see, one
important aspect that may affect how they evolve is gender. Females and males very well can
develop different types or versions of schemas because of their gender, and the characteristics
and/or stereotypes that come with it.

3. 3
Another theory is the Social Identity Theory. In this theory, individuals join together to
form groups. But at the same time, these groups are made of the multiple individuals that
develop singular identities as well. These groups can come in varying sizes; from as small as a
family of four, to as large as the citizens of the United States of America.
The level of accessibility to join a group is what level of porous versus non-porous
borders they have, i.e. easier to join or harder to join. An example of a porous group could be a
fans of a sports team. It is rather easy to change what sports team someone is fan of, and can
typically just require your own words of “I am a fan of ____”. An example of a non-porous
group could be the U.S. government. There are a tremendous amount of steps to get to that level,
and also a tremendous amount of qualifications to even make it to the early steps in the process.
When we become part of a group, we favor our group over other groups. And groups are
constantly comparing themselves to other similar groups. Gender could be a good example here,
both male to female, and male to male and female to female. Sports teams is one thing that
comes to mind for same-gender comparisons. Girls volleyball team A and girls volleyball team B
probably constantly compare themselves to one another. Can we serve better than the other
team? Do we hit harder than the other team? Do they hit harder than us? How can we be better
than them? Same goes for teams consisting of males. There’s no doubt that football team A and
football team B compare themselves to one another and strive to be the better team or “group”.
Even the way females compare themselves versus how the males compare themselves may differ
because of gender. The males are probably likely to take a more aggressive approach. A prime
example of this is fights on the field (or wherever the sport is played). You often hear of hockey
fights, but fist fights on the volleyball court is something you have probably never heard of.

4. 4
Another key piece in communication is the “generalized other”. The generalized other is
basically how “the world” sees us. The expectations of our behaviors impact the evaluation other
people have of us. These expectations can be cultural (role, title/profession, gender, ethnicity,
religion), local (family, group membership, location/region). However, I am going to focus on
the cultural expectations with gender.
There are many cultural expectations that come with being either male or female. Very
broadly, males must “act like a man” and women must be “ladylike”, but what do these consist
of? Starting from birth, these stereotypes already start to occur. Typically, baby boys are dressed
in blue, and baby girls are dressed in pink. If they are dressed the other way around, they will
without a doubt be mistaken for the opposite gender (if they are still at that super young age).
The expectations continue as the child starts to grow. Boys are expected to play with things such
as trucks, trains, or athletic toys/objects. Girls are expected to play with dolls, clothes/makeup,
princess related toys, etc. Of course there are some toys that could go with either gender, but
these gender-specific toys are usually to be expected as well. When a female child reaches a
certain age, like roughly 13, more male-oriented interests may be deemed okay for females, such
as being sporty. However, it doesn’t seem to be as flexible the other way around. If a girl acts
slightly “boyish”, she may simply be referred to as a “tomboy”. This may even be taken as a
compliment with some girls. But if a boy acts “girly”, there is the possibility of him being
referred to as “gay”. Of course that could very well be the case, that that male is simply just gay,
but if the male is straight, that is often seen as the lowest insult he could get. It makes him seem
like he is everything he (in the eyes of society) should not be. Male or female, if you do not fit
society’s norm, you are often ridiculed or singled out for being different. How well or not well
we fit these norms affect how others perceive or evaluate us.

5. 5
Going off of this idea that how well we fit or do not fit society’s gender norms affect how
others evaluate us, people may put up “fronts”. This has to do with “identity expression”, which
came from Erving Goffman. His theory says how humans are actors, and that we play roles in
ways that allow us to control how others perceive us. Our “front” we put on limits our acceptable
behavior, such as masculine versus feminine. We put up these fronts not to deceive others, but to
move forward to a desired identity. A phrase that sort of encompasses this is “fake it until you
make it”. When people see us the way we want them to see us, we can control our
interactions/communication with others and achieve the outcomes we desire. So in terms of
gender, a male on the more feminine end of the spectrum may put on a more manly front so that
they are perceived as fitting the norm, and a female on the more masculine end of the spectrum
may put on a more girly front so that they are perceived as fitting the norm. However, a problem
that could arise in this is consistency. One must remain as consist as possible with any identity
they take on, or they could be seen as “fake”, in which case they may lose control of social
interactions and no longer achieve the desired outcome.
In learning about all these theories and styles of communication, about gender
norms/expectations, and how both of those things coincide, I have come to realize that I
follow/relate to them. Males and females communicate in many of the same ways, but there are
also many gender-specific aspects of communication. Not only just in how that specific
individual communicates based on their gender, but how other perceive them and interpret them
based on what gender they are and the characteristics (or lack thereof) that come with that.
However, there are greater differences among women-women and men-men than women-men.
I have realized and understood that my gender (female) affects how I express myself, present
myself to others, and ultimately, communicate.