A comparison of face-to-face and electronic peer-mentoring: Interactions with mentor gender Kimberly A. Smith-Jentsch a, * , Shannon A. Scielzo a , Charyl S. Yarbrough b , Patrick J. Rosopa c a University of Central Florida, Department of Psychology, 4000 Central Florida Boulevard, Orlando, FL 32816, USA b Rutgers the State University of New Jersey, John J. Heldrich Center for Workforce Development, Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy, 30 Livingston Avenue, New Brunswick, NJ 08901, USA c Department of Psychology, College of Business & Behavioral Science, Clemson University, 418 Brackett Hall, Clemson, SC 29634-1355, USA Received 1 April 2007 Available online 4 March 2008 Abstract The present study compared the relative impact of peer-mentoring that took place either face-to-face or through elec- tronic chat. Prote ´ge ´s were 106 college freshmen randomly assigned to a senior college student mentor and to one of the two communication modes. Fifty-one mentors interacted with one of these proteges face-to-face and one solely through elec- tronic chat. Electronic chat resulted in less psychosocial support, career support, and post-mentoring protege self-efficacy for those with male but not female mentors. Analyses of coded transcripts revealed that males condensed their language to a greater extent than did females in the electronic chat condition relative to the face-to-face condition. Dyads in the elec- tronic chat condition had more interactive dialogue than did those in the face-to-face condition. Finally, dialogue inter- activity predicted post-mentoring self-efficacy but only for those who communicated through electronic chat. Ó 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Keywords: Peer-mentoring; Formal mentoring; Electronic communication; Self-efficacy; Gender effects 1. Introduction 1.1. Formal peer-mentoring The term ‘‘mentor” is generally used to refer to an individual of advanced experience who is committed to supporting the development of another less experienced individual, namely the prote ´ge ´(Levinson, Darrow, Klein, Levinson, & McKee, 1978). Mentoring relationships perform two primary functions: psychosocial and career support (e.g., Kram, 1985). Psychosocial support includes activities such as acceptance, role- 0001-8791/$ - see front matter Ó 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2007.11.004 * Corresponding author. E-mail address: kjentsch@mail.ucf.edu (K.A. Smith-Jentsch). Available online at www.sciencedirect.com Journal of Vocational Behavior 72 (2008) 193–206 www.elsevier.com/locate/jvb