When the man had noted in the example, that his wife was upset, he was frustrated that she had not simply told what she wanted. He feels this species as game play. For women, however, the situation was so, that she had shown concern for the needs of her husband, while he had ignored her. She was not upset, because she had not had their way, but because he, felt it themselves as they, not interested, what would like to transform it. According to the most people, women talk too much. However, study after study showing that men talk more than women.
This applies especially to public speaking. H. M. leet-Pellegrini psychologist examined whether gender or expertise is crucial, who behaves dominantly in talks. She found same-sex and mixed pairs and asked the parties to discuss how violence on television has on children. In some cases, she made one or one of the partners learned by informed prior to recording of the conversation about important facts.
So one could assume that the more specialized GesprachsteilnehmerInnen talked longer, more frequently interrupted, and less time related to support the less well informed GesprachsteilnehmerInnen. In fact, it was so that the better informed GesprachsteilnehmerInnen were talking about more than the others. However, the more specialized men were talking about more than the more specialized women. Also as regards the supporting conversational, expertise had a different effect on men and women. Leet-Pellegrini was assumed that those who had no expertise, would spend more time to show the more informed GesprachsteilnehmerInnen consent and support. This was also so, except in cases where a woman was the more informed conversationalist. In this constellation, the more informed women showed far more support than their worse informed male conversation partner. Women not put in contrast to the men as a means of power their knowledge, but tried to downplay it and to compensate for extreme tuning to conduct on the contrary.