{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017391304347826087, 'fraction_numerical': 0.001932367149758454, 'mean_word_length': 5.556962025316456, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 1, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Effects of Sex Dialects and Sex Stereotypes on Speech Evaluations

Two studies examined the effects of male and female 'dialects' and sex stereotypes on speech evaluations. Although sex-linked language effects have explained more evaluative variance than stereotypes, the persistence of these effects across a range of conversational contexts is uncertain. Study 1 supported the dialect hypothesis across two stimulus conversations but did not support the stereotype hypothesis. Study 2 found dialect and stereotype effects to be conversation-specific. Men's speech was rated higher in dynamism and socio-intellectual status than women's speech in only one of four conversations. Attributed male speakers were rated as more dynamic than attributed female speakers in two work settings. The conversation-specific nature of dialect and stereotype effects suggested a reconceptualisation of men's and women's speech as interactional achievements and a need for research on contextual cues in work environments that evoke stereotyping.