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 situations2. I am able to say “no” without feeling guilty or anxious.3. I can express strong feelings such as anger, frustration or disappointment4. 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 Style1. 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-Esteem1. 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 others8. 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

Documents

Transcript of Final Proposal