Facework Solidarity,Approbation, and Tact

This study extended Brown and Levinson's model of politeness in order to explain more complicated forms of interaction and proposed three different types of facework: solidarity, approbation, and tact. The effects of three social factors—relational intimacy, power difference, and the right to perform a given act in a given situation—on the three types of facework were examined. Relational intimacy was the strongest positive predictor of facework. Its effect was consistent across different types of facework and across different levels of power and right. The right to perform a certain act and speaker's power decreased facework, but these effects were mediated by relational intimacy, achieving significance mainly in distant relationships. The study also examined the relationships among different types of facework. Respondents used multiple types of facework when multiple face wants were threatened, and the use of one type of facework did not decrease the use of other types.     

Understanding Advice in Supportive Interactions

Previous research on advice in supportive interactions has focused on the influence of facework, and has not systematically considered the effects of advice content. Further, this research has obtained quality evaluations of researcher‐constructed messages rather than assessing the outcomes of naturally occurring advice. The current study examines the relative influence of advice content characteristics (usefulness, feasibility, and absence of limitations), facework, and support‐seekers' receptiveness to advice on advice message quality evaluations and advice outcomes (facilitation of coping, sufficiency of support, and intention to implement the advice). Participants (N = 280) completed questionnaires reporting on a recent instance of receiving advice with regard to a personal problem. Results indicated that the predictor variables had diverse impacts on message evaluations and outcomes. Absence of limitations and support‐seeker receptiveness to advice had the most consistent influence across the dependent variables. Facework had a less consistent influence, but did have a major impact on facilitation of coping.     

Apology versus defense: Antecedents and consequences

Participants imagined themselves in face-threatening predicaments in two studies that examined the reproach and evaluation phases of predicament management. In Study 1, participants gave accounts of their behavior after receiving hypothetical reproaches that were mild/moderate or severe. Results showed that reproach severity influenced perpetrator accounts in opposite ways for females and males. Male perpetrators became more defensive under severe reproach, whereas females became less defensive. Expectations for a future relationship were more negative under severe reproach, and this was more pronounced when the victim was an acquaintance rather than a friend. Individuals high in Self-Determination were less defensive under mild/moderate reproach, but not under severe reproach. In Study 2, participants gave evaluations after receiving hypothetical accounts that varied in responsibility-taking. Results showed that greater responsibility-taking led to more positive victim evaluations and better expected future relationships. The advantage of responsibility-taking was especially pronounced when the perpetrator was a friend, suggesting that friends are forgiven more than acquaintances when they take responsibility and apologize, but not if they fail to do so. Results are interpreted in terms of reciprocal facework and thresholds for face threat.     

Managing Face Concerns in Criticism Integrating Nonverbal Behaviors as a Dimension of Politeness in Female Friendship Dyads

This study seeks to expand politeness theory by investigating the influence of nonverbal behaviors on facework in criticism of a friend. As hypothesized, various cues, including variations in vocal tone, facial expressions and brow movements, gestures, body orientation, and touch, influenced participants' perceptions of politeness in a number of ways. First, mitigating nonverbal behaviors added to assessments of politeness when accompanied by bald-on-record linguistic politeness strategies. Second, subjects perceived aggravating nonverbal cues with and without linguistic politeness similarly. Although verbal politeness was still the bigger factor in perceptions of politeness, the results of this study suggest that facework scholars should also consider how something is said as salient for interpretation of what is said.     

Do Unto Others?

Despite a widespread acknowledgement of the relationship between account offerings and facework, little research has provided evidence showing that different types of accounting moves actually foster diverse assessments of attentiveness to face. Following Goffman (1955, 1967), we coded the primary types of challenges, offerings, and evaluations from interactions between friends who discussed a previous failure event by the speaker. We analyzed the codes—and the complexity of the sequences—for differences in participants’ judgments of attentiveness toward other‐face. Not every accounting form resulted in significant differences; nevertheless, either the speakers or their partners perceived most forms differently in some way. Additionally, elicitors viewed more complex (i.e., longer) account sequences as less attentive to their own negative face, but accounters viewed more complex (i.e., more varied) offerings as more attentive to others’ negative face. Qualitative analyses revealed additional discourse forms that may count as offerings and evaluations, including a more direct form of self‐oriented facework, requests for advice from the accounter, rejections of account suggestions, and requests for information and acceptance.     

The Effects of Onset and Offset Responsibility on Affects and Helping Judgments1

Attributional studies of helping have examined perceivers affective responses and helping intentions as a function of responsibility (controllability) for the onset of a problem. This study extended the analysis to a responsibility for the solution (offset) of a problem and examined how the cause of both the onset and the offset of a problem determined perceivers' affective responses and helping intentions. One hundred and eighty subjects participated in the study. The subjects read one of three stories regarding the target person's behavior at the onset of falling behind in school (“sick” vs. “effort” vs. “no effort”) and reported their perceptions of the cause of the problem, affective responses, and helping intentions. Then they read one of three stories regarding the target person's behavior for the offset of the problem (“sick” vs. “effort” vs. “no effort”:' and responded again to the previously administered scales. Results indicated (a) that the final responses were strongly determined by the offset information. and (b) that sickness at the time of the onset led to negative affect and less helping intention when the offset information was “no effort.” The latter effect is discussed within the context of the moral judgment. Furthermore, structural equation analyses for the responses after the offset information revealed (a) that Weiner's “attribution-emotion-helping” model was applicable. and (b) that the effect of the effort perception on the helping intention was mediated by anger and pity.     

Face, Honor and Dignity in the Context of Colon Cancer

Illness narratives from patients with colorectal cancer commonly record patterns of change in social relationships that follow the diagnosis and treatment of the condition. We believe that these changes are best explained as a process of facework, which reflects losses of face on the part of the patient, and which assists in the creation of new faces that convey new senses of identity. Facework is familiar in the work by E. Goffman (1955) and has been extensively reworked since his time. There is considerable agreement that face is a pervasive and universal constituent of all social interaction, and that it expresses the subject's view of the way he or she would like to be considered by others in interactions. Ho's concept of multiple faces negotiated dynamically according to social context is particularly useful in understanding the purpose and techniques of facework (D. Y.-F. Ho, 1994). We propose a model of face that uses dignity as the face-expression of personal attributes and acquisitions, and honor as the face-expression of systemic capabilities and attainments. This model can be used to examine individual variations in response and adaptation to colon cancer and its treatment, and it provides a useful means of teaching health care workers about the experience of illness.     

Tell Me What I Wanted to Hear: Confirmation Effect in Lay Evaluations of Financial Expert Authority

In real life, people engage in interactive decision processes by consulting with experts. However, before taking advice, they must recognise the authority of an expert to assess the quality of the advice. The main goal of this research was to investigate how the confirmation effect affects lay evaluations of the epistemic authority of financial experts. Experiment 1 showed that lay people tend to ascribe greater epistemic authority to those experts whose advice confirms people's opinions, both measured and manipulated. Experiment 2 revealed that when participants' own opinions are not salient, people tend to evaluate experts' authority as higher when their advice confirms social norms. In Experiment 3 we jointly investigated the effects of participants' own opinions and social norms on the evaluations of authority. When both sources of expertise were made salient, decision‐makers favoured advice confirming their own beliefs and used it to evaluate experts' authority. Three interpretations of the role confirmation plays in the experts' authority evaluations are proposed: (1) self‐defensive strategies; (2) processing fluency; and (3) psychological consequences of naïve realism. The paper discusses practical implications of the results. We propose that increasing consumers' knowledge about biases might protect their evaluations of financial advice from being susceptible to the confirmation effect.     

Good Guys Can Finish First: How Brand Reputation Affects Extension Evaluations

This research investigates how consumer evaluations of brand extensions are affected by two distinct types of brand reputation: a reputation for social responsibility built through commitments to societal obligations, versus a reputation for ability developed by delivering quality offerings. Through six studies, we establish that while the two reputation types equivalently influence high fit brand extensions, a reputation for social responsibility (vs. ability) leads to more favorable responses toward low fit brand extensions by inducing a desire to support and help the company that has acted to benefit consumers. Furthermore, the facilitative effect of social responsibility on low fit brand extension evaluations is more prominent among consumers who value close relationships and caring for one another's well‐being (i.e., those with high communal orientation), and tends to dissipate when social responsibility initiatives are tainted with self‐serving motives (i.e., when these initiatives are aligned with the brand's core offering).     

The impact of politeness and relationship on perceived quality of advice about a problem

Advice is a common but potentially problematic way to respond to someone who is distressed. Politeness theory (Brown & Levinson, 1987) suggests advice threatens a hearer's face and predicts that the speaker‐hearer relationship and the use of politeness strategies can mitigate face threat and enhance the effectiveness of advice messages. Students (N=384) read 1 of 16 hypothetical situations that varied in speaker power and closeness of the speaker‐hearer relationship. Students then read 1 of 48 advice messages representing different politeness strategies and rated the message for regard shown for face and for effectiveness. However, neither speaker‐hearer relationship nor politeness strategies was consistently associated with perceived threat to face or perceived advice effectiveness. We suggest revisions to politeness theory and additional factors that may affect judgments of face sensitivity and advice effectiveness.     

Victim and Observer Characteristics as Determinants of Responsibility Attributions to Victims of Rape1

Two field studies were conducted to investigate the influence of observer and victim characteristics on attributions of victim and assailant responsibility in a rape case. In the first study, male and female subjects completed a measure of rape myth acceptance and were presented with a rape account after which they were asked to attribute responsibility to victim and assailant. In the second study, a new sample was asked to attribute responsibility to victim and assailant on the basis of one of two rape accounts in which victim's pre-rape behavior was manipulated. Results showed that both rape myth acceptance and victims' pre-rape behavior influenced the degree of responsibility attributed to victims and assailants. No significant effects of subject gender were found. A more complex conceptualization is suggested of the link between observer and victim characteristics in social reactions to and evaluations of rape victims.     

Juvenile Competency and Responsibility: Public Perceptions

The current study examined the relationship between knowledge of adolescent brain development and attitudes about juvenile competency, responsibility, likelihood to recidivate, and rehabilitative capacity. In addition, it examined what factors—a juvenile's age, the type of crime committed, or the immediacy of the crime—influenced participants' perceptions. Participants displayed some knowledge of adolescent brain development and social maturity, and tended to see adolescents as not ready, emotionally or psychologically, to handle the proceedings of adult court or a jury trial. However, a delay in criminal behavior (immediate vs. next morning) and type of victim (targeted vs. random) heavily influenced ratings of responsibility, likelihood to recidivate, and rehabilitative capacity. Implications for jury decision making and public policy are discussed.     

Divergent Perceptions of Jail Inmates and Correctional Officers: The “Blame the Other-Expect to Be Blamed” Effect1

Inmates and correctional officers in a Lwnty jail made attributions of responsibility and predicted each other's attributions in response to four hypothetical stimulus incidents varying in severity of the inmate's intentional misbehavior and the severity of the officer's intentional retribution. When the misbehavior and retribution were moderate, subjects blamed both participants about equally. However, both over- and underreactions to the stimulus inmate's misbehavior elicited defensiveness, with both officers and inmates more likely to attribute responsibility to their opposite role character. In addition, both inmates and officers appeared to respond defensively to severe but equitable retributions. Subjects blamed each other, and, anticipating the other's defensiveness, expected to be blamed. Examination of the data suggested that subjects may have responded stereotypically rather than empathetically, and that defensiveness impeded rather than facilitated predictive accuracy. Results were consistent with previous research, increasing the generality of the “blame the other-expect to be blamed” effect. Additional analyses indicated that inmates were more likely than officers to notice mitigating circumstances when considering the inmates' responsibility. Three recommendations were made which may help to forestall inmate reactivity to retributions: (1) Jail personnel should have objective and clear definitions as to what constitutes major and minor infractions; (2) inmates should be aware of these criteria; and (3) jail personnel should be sensitive to mitigating circumstances and moderate their retribution or anticipate possible reactivity from inmates.     

The Effects of Effort on Helping the Physically Disabled

Abstract

Interactions with physically disabled people often elicit both the desire to avoid the stigmatized and dependent person and feelings of responsibility to help the disadvantaged. This study examined the effort required to help, the helper's gender, and the help received by disabled and nondisabled confederates in searching for a lost object. One confederate was actually disabled and totally dependent on others for completing the helping task, but the other confederate was not disabled. Results indicated a significant interaction of effort and confederates' level of ability. Post hoc tests indicated no differences in helping disabled and nondisabled confederates in the low-effort condition, but, in the high-effort condition, the disabled confederate received significantly more help. These findings suggest that when costs of helping were low, decisions about helping each confederate did not appear to differ; but when costs were high, feelings of social responsibility outweighed both the additional effort involved and tendencies for avoidance in decisions to help the disabled confederate.     

Model's Race: A Peripheral Cue in Advertising Messages?

Based on the Elaboration Likelihood Model and Social Categorization Theory, an experiment examined minority viewers' use of racial cues on exposure to product advertising. A total of 160 Black adults from a southeastern city rated a garment bag advertisement that featured either a White or a Black model and contained either strong or weak message arguments. Consistent with both theoretical notions, product and advertising evaluations were more favorable given a Black than a White model, but only for Black participants who identify strongly with Black culture. Blacks who identify weakly with Black culture evaluated the product and advertisement similarly given a White or a Black model. The results also showed that the Black model's race motivated Blacks, particularly those with strong racial attitudes, to process the message in a biased manner. In particular, the Black (versus White) model's race positively influenced the Black participants' thoughts about the product, which in turn yielded more favorable product evaluations. The findings suggest that Blacks appear to engage in biased processing (and not simple cue processing) when exposed to Black models in advertising messages.     

Group performance and interpersonal evaluations as determinants of egotistical attributions in groups1

Group members often try to claim personal credit for the successes of their group while avoiding blame for group failures. Two experiments examined the effects of evaluations from their fellows on such egotism in groups. In Experiment 1, 96 subjects participated in four-person, problem-solving groups, and, after completing the group tasks, rated the competency and worth of each of the other group members. Subjects then received bogus written feedback indicating that the group had either succeeded or failed, and that the other members had considered them: (a) the most competent member of the group, (b) the least competent, or (c) of average competence. Group performance and personal evaluations interacted in influencing subjects' perceptions of their personal performances, relative responsibility for the group performance, and potency within the group, generally supporting predictions derived from self-esteem and equity theory. Subjects claimed more responsibility for success than for failure only when they were favorably evaluated by their peers, and claimed the least responsibility for group success when they were unfavorably evaluated. The latter acceptance of negative peer evaluations was examined in Experiment 2, which manipulated the consensus of the evaluations given 76 high or low self-esteem subjects. Regardless of their self-esteem or the consensus of the evaluations, subjects again seemed to accept unfavorable evaluations. High self-esteem subjects did, though, rate their personal performance and relative responsibility higher than low self-esteem subjects.     

Evaluation Bias in the Business Classroom: Evidence Relating to the Effects of Previous Experiences

We found that teaching evaluations were assigned as a function of the professors' gender and students' previous experience with a female professor. Based on the professor's style of organization, enthusiasm, credibility, and effectiveness, and students' willingness to take a course with the professor, students assigned higher evaluations to male professors than female professors. Previous experience with a female faculty member was found to be a relevant variable influencing perceived credibility, organization, and effectiveness evaluations. The findings imply that exposure to women in positions of responsibility may reduce stereotypical attitudes regarding women's ability to function in gender-atypical roles.     

Evaluating advisors: A policy‐capturing study under conditions of complete and missing information

Decision‐makers' relative preferences for various advisor characteristics were investigated in two multilevel policy‐capturing studies. The characteristics under consideration were: advisor expertise, advisor confidence, advisor intentions, and whether that advisor was the sole available source of advice. In Study 1, decision‐makers had access to all relevant information about the advisors. In contrast, some relevant information about the advisors was systematically made unavailable in Study 2, which allowed an investigation of the effect of missing information on decision‐makers' evaluations of advisors. Results from both studies indicated that advisor expertise and intentions were most important in promoting decision‐makers' positive evaluations of advisors, that this effect was even more pronounced under conditions of missing information, and that advisor expertise and intentions also interacted synergistically. Given that expertise and good intentions are determinants of an advisor's trustworthiness, the results highlight the interpersonal nature of advice giving and taking. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

How expert witnesses' counterfactuals influence causal and responsibility attributions of mock jurors and expert judges

Past research has shown that counterfactual (“If…then…”) thoughts influence causal and responsibility attribution in the judicial context. However, little is known on whether and how the use of counterfactuals in communication affects lay jurors' and judges' evaluations. In two studies, we asked mock lay jurors (Study 1) and actual judges (Study 2) to read a medical malpractice case followed by an expert witness report, which included counterfactuals focused on either the physician, the patient, or external factors. Results showed that counterfactual focus had a strong effect on both lay jurors' and judges' causal and responsibility attributions. Counterfactual focus also moderated the effect of outcome foreseeability on responsibility attribution. Discussion focuses on how counterfactual communication can direct causal and responsibility attribution and reduce the importance of other factors known to influence judicial decision‐making. The potential implications of these findings in training programs and debiasing interventions are also discussed.