• Anderson, L. R., & Blanchard, P. N. (1982). Sex differences in task and social-emotional behavior. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 3, 109139.
  • Bales, R. F. (1950). Interaction process analysis: A method for the study of small groups. Reading , MA : Addison-Wesley.
  • Carli, L. L. (1989). Gender differences in interaction style and influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 565576.
  • Chronicles. (1994, September 5). Time, 144(10), 20.
  • Clark, R. A. (1993), Men's and women's self-confidence in persuasive, comforting, and justificatory communicative tasks, Sex Roles, 28(9/10), 553567.
  • Dindia, K. & Allen, M. (1992). Sex difference in self-disclosure: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 106124.
  • Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (1991). Gender and emergence of leaders: A meta-analysis. Journal of Personality ad Social Psychology, 60(5), 685710.
  • Herring, S. C. (1993). Gender and democracy in computer-mediated communication. Electronic Journal of Communication, 3(2), 117.
  • Herring, S. (1994, June). Gender differences in computer-mediated communication: Bringing familiar baggage to the new frontier. Keynote talk at American Library Association Annual Convention. Miami , Florida .
  • Herschel, R. T. (1994). The impact of varying gender composition on group brainstorming performance in a GSS environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 10(2), 209222.
  • Hewes, D. E. (1986). A socioegocentric model of group decision-making. In R. Y.Hirokawa & M. S.Poole (Eds), Communication and Group Decision-Making (pp. 265292). Newbury Park , CA : Sage Publications, Inc.
  • Hiltz, S. R. & Turoff, M. (1993). The network nation : human communication via computer. Cambridge , MA : MIT Press.
  • Kanter, R. M. (1977). Men and women of the corporation. New York : Basic Books.
  • McGrath, J. E. (1984). Groups: Interaction and performance. Englewood Cliffs , NJ : Prentice-Hall.
  • McGrath, J. E., Arrow, H., Gruenfeld, D. H., Hollingshead, A. B., & O'Connor, K. M. (1993). Groups, tasks, and technology: The effects of experience and change. Small Group Research, 24(3), 406420.
  • McGrath, J. E., & Hollingshead, A. B. (1993). Putting the “group” back in group support systems: Some theoretical issues about dynamic processes in groups with technological enhancements. In Jessup, L. M., & Valacich, J. S. (Eds.), Group support systems: New perspectives (pp. 7896). New York : Macmillan.
  • Mulac, A., Wiemann, J. M., Widenmann, S. J., & Gibson, T. W. (1988). Male/female language differences and effects in same-sex and mixed sex dyads: The gender-linked language effect. Communication Monographs, 55, 315335.
  • Rafaeli, S. & Sudweeks, F. (Coordinators) (1993a). ProjectH Codebook. [On-line]. Available::
  • Rafaeli, S. & Sudweeks, F. (Coordinators) (1993b). ProjectH Summary. [On-line]. Available:
  • Rafaeli, S. & Sudweeks, F. (Coordinators) (1993c). ProjectH Technical Report. [On-line]. Available:
  • Savicki, V., Kelley, M., & Lingenfelter, D. (1996), Gender and small task group activity using computer mediated communication, Computers in Human Behavior, 12209224.
  • Savicki, V., Kelley, M., & Lingenfelter, D. (in press). Gender, group composition and task type in small task groups using computer mediated communication. Computers in Human Behavior.
  • Shaffer, D. R., Pegalis, L. J., and Cornell, D. P. (1992). Gender and self-disclosure revisited: Personal and contextual variations in self-disclosure to same-sex acquaintances. Journal of Social Psychology, 132(3), 307315.
  • Tannen, D. (1990). You just don't understand. New York : Ballantine Books.
  • Tannen, D. (1994). Gender gap in cyberspace. Newsweek, May 16, 54.