Search
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Panel
Browse By Session Type
Browse By Topic Area
Search Tips
Register for SRCD21
Personal Schedule
Change Preferences / Time Zone
Sign In
X (Twitter)
Scholars from multiple methodological traditions have documented changes in adolescents’ language use beginning at early adolescence (e.g., Brown & Gilligan, 1992; Leaper & Smith, 2004; Oransky & Maracek, 2011; Way, 2011). These developmental changes are expressed in boys’ increased use of “emotionally restrictive” language, or patterns of speaking that downplay the emotional content of boys’ narrative speech (Chu, Porche, & Tolman, 2005; Chu, 2004; Aldrich & Tenebaum, 2006). Developmental feminist perspectives attuned to the meanings of boys’ emotionally restrictive language theorize that its use may be indicative of boys’ struggle to retain expression of emotions under a patriarchal structure that discourages sensitivity to and expression of feelings, particularly within interpersonal relationships (Way, 2011; Way et al., 2014). However, the degree to which concealing emotions is incorporated into language socialization processes differs across ethnic communities. Certain communities of color, particularly Black and Asian communities, are more likely to encourage emotional restriction in boys’ language compared to White communities (Hammond & Mattis, 2005; Jones, Buque, & Miville, 2018; Way, 2011). To date, no research has investigated the inter-, and intra-individual variation in emotionally restrictive language use among racially diverse boys longitudinally, as well as how such variation may be linked to social and emotional wellbeing.
We sampled 89 adolescent boys (MTimeOneAge = 11.37) from six New York City middle schools selected because of their racial and socio-economic diversity. Participants were 24.5% African-American, 24.5% Chinese-American, 25.5% Hispanic or Latino, and 23.5% White. Semi-structured interviews and surveys were administered over a six-year period and transcribed verbatim. Protocol topics included questions about daily routines, school and home life, friendships, social identities, and future aspirations. Trained research assistants analyzed interview transcripts for frequencies of words and phrases identified as emotionally restrictive language by previous theorists (“I don’t care,” “It doesn’t matter,” “whatever,” “basically,” and others). The context in which the phrase occurs (i.e., school, friendships, etc.) was coded. Phrases that did not qualify as emotionally restrictive language (i.e., “It doesn’t matter when I wake up on the weekends” as opposed to “He never talks to me anymore, it doesn’t matter.”) were removed. Participants also completed standard social and emotional well-being scales at each time point.
Latent class modeling will be used to identify trajectories of emotionally restrictive language use across 6th, 8th, and 11th grades, and identify the degree to which emotionally restrictive language use predicts social and emotional wellbeing over time. The degree to which participant race and conversational context predicts these growth trajectories will be examined. Our preliminary findings show that emotionally restrictive language increases from 6th to 8th grades, but plateaus from 8th to 11th. White boys used emotionally restrictive language the least compared to other racial-ethnic groups in the sample, whereas Asian and African-American boys were the most likely to use this type of language in their narratives. Across all ethnicities, emotionally restrictive language was most commonly used when boys spoke about their relationships, particularly friendships. The ways in which emotionally restrictive language may be both an accommodation to gender stereotypes and a strategy of resistance will be discussed in depth.