Interactional Adjustment: Three Approaches in Language and Social Psychology (original) (raw)
Related papers
Communication Accommodation Theory: When Social Interactions in the Target Language Matter
Only recently has the main focus of SLA researchers shifted from analyzing recurrent errors second language learners make in stereotypical manners to the social and communicative aspects of interactions that second language learners are repeatedly involved in with either native speakers (NS) or non-native speakers (NNS) of the target language (Zuengler 223). According to Jane Zuengler “this shift toward learner’s interactionally situated research can be credited, in large part, to theoretical assertion by Krashen (1981,1982) that comprehensible input from the L2 learner’s interlocutor is crucial for language acquisition to take place (223)”, a hypothetical claim which has encouraged a numerous number of contemporary SLA researchers to concentrate more on the dynamic of these social interactions and their plausible role in second language acquisition. Given that the second language learners’ communicative interaction with native speakers has a crucial role in enhancing learners’ ling...
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1986
Speech acts (Searle, 1975) can be performed either directly or in various indirect ways. It is argued that (a) the appropriateness of this choice is affected by the process of face management and the relative status of the speaker, and (b) the choice of how to perform speech acts will encode social information. A written scenario format was used, and in Experiment 1, subjects rated direct and indirect questions and replies as a function of the status of the target interactants, and the extent to which the requested information was face threatening. Perceptions of the appropriateness of replies, but not the questions, varied as a function of face threat. The effects of status were in the predicted direction for both questions and replies, but significant only for the perceived politeness of questions. Subjects in Experiment 2 rated the scenario interactants and their relationships as a function of the use of direct and indirect replies and rated possible rejoinders to these replies. Inferences of status, liking, and closeness varied as a function of the reply type used, and indirect replies were more likely to be accepted than to be questioned when there was an obvious reason for their use (i.e., to manage face). Language use is a unique and central feature of social interaction. How people talk is shaped by ongoing social processes, and can also serve as a means for affecting those processes (Clark, 1985; Smith, Giles, & Hewstone, 1980). In this way language use may be considered an important component of many traditional social psychological processes such as identity maintenance, interpersonal attraction, status negotiation, and so forth. However, with few exceptions (e.g., Higgins, 1981; Premo & Stiles, 1983), little empirical attention has been paid to the role of language use in social interaction. The purpose of the present research is to make some beginning moves in this direction. Language use can be viewed as a game (Higgins, 1981; Wittgenstein, 1953), and like most games, players have options for making their moves. That is, speakers have choices regarding how to phrase their utterances. These choices, rather than being random, can be viewed as being affected by, and used to affect, social processes. The focus of the present research was on the role played by certain linguistic choices in social interaction. Work in speech act theory (Searle, 1969,1975) will be reviewed first, as it provides one way to conceptualize linguistic choices.
Linguistic style accommodation between conversationalists is associated with positive social outcomes. We examine social power and personality as factors driving the occurrence of linguistic style accommodation, and the social outcomes of accommodation. Social power was manipulated to create 144 face-to-face dyadic interactions between individuals of high versus low power and 64 neutral power interactions. Particular configurations of personality traits (high self-monitoring, Machiavellianism and leadership, and low self-consciousness, impression management and agreeableness), combined with a low power role, led to an increased likelihood of linguistic style accommodation. Further, greater accommodation by low power individuals positively influenced perceptions of subjective rapport and attractiveness. We propose individual differences interact with social context to influence the conditions under which non-conscious communication accommodation occurs.
2016
Within Communication Accommodation Theory, social power is an important influence upon the likelihood of accommodation in communicative behaviours. Across two studies, we explore if the influence of power extends to a non-conscious aspect of accommodation, linguistic style, and to computer mediated forms of communication. We manipulated social power experimentally to create a series of instant messaging conversations between high and low power participants. Low power induced greater likelihood of linguistic style accommodation, whilst in a low versus high power role (study 1) and when participants undertook both roles (study 2). Notably, linguistic style accommodation by individuals in a high power role 'backfired': greater accommodation was associated with a negative impression formed by their conversational partner. The results show robust effects of power in shaping language use across CMC. Further, the interpersonal effects of linguistic accommodation depend upon a complex interplay of social context, social norms, and the communication medium. NOTE. This is the author's version of work accepted for presentation at the 66 th International Communication Association Annual Conference, Fukuoka, Japan, 9-13 th June 2016. This version may not exactly replicate the paper presented at the conference or published in proceedings. POWER AND LINGUISTIC ACCOMMODATION IN CMC 2 When Communication Accommodation Backfires: Interpersonal Effects of Social Power and Linguistic Style Accommodation in Computer-Mediated-Communication In modern life, computer-mediated-communication (CMC) is pervasive and abundant, taking a variety of forms including email, social media, blogs, online community forums and more. How CMC shapes the ways in which we communicate, the development and maintenance of relationships, and the interpersonal effects of changing communication technologies, is an important focus in interpersonal CMC research (Walther, 2011). In this paper, we explore how an individual's level of social power influences language use whilst communicating over instant messaging, a synchronous form of CMC. We frame our work in relation to Communication Accommodation Theory (CAT), examining how linguistic accommodation in association with power influences interpersonal outcomes, in terms of the impression formed by interlocutors of the speaker's personal qualities. As communication forms have evolved, so too have the theories developed to explain and predict communication behaviours. One such prominent theory is Communication Accommodation Theory (CAT) which describes the ways in which people adjust their communication behaviours during social interactions, their motivations for doing so and the social consequences (Giles, Coupland, & Coupland, 1991). Within the CAT framework, convergence describes when people alter their communication behaviours to be more similar to others, whilst divergence describes ways in which people accentuate dissimilarities in communicative behaviours. Convergence is motivated by the desire to gain social approval, whereas divergence represents the desire to emphasise or increase social distance between conversationalists. Convergence in a variety of communicative behaviours is POWER AND LINGUISTIC ACCOMMODATION IN CMC 3 common, and is usually related to positive evaluations of the communication, the individual and the relationship (Soliz & Giles, 2014). Early views of CMC suggested the text-based nature and lack of visual and non-verbal cues rendered the CMC environment detrimental to interpersonal communication. However, later theories and research claim that individuals adapt to CMC to form interpersonal relationships similar in nature to those formed face-toface (see Walther, 2011 for a review). Thus, CAT has been extended from face-toface (FtF) communication to encompass a variety of online or otherwise computermediated interactions (Gasiorek, Giles, & Soliz, 2015). Accommodative behaviours have been observed in asynchronous CMC, in terms of convergence in politeness terms over email (Bunz & Campbell, 2004), and convergence in gendered language use in online discussion forums (Thomson, 2006). Similarly, research has reported
Communication Accommodation Theory: A Brief Review of the Literature
Journal of Advances in Education and Philosophy, 2020
Studies on Communication Accommodation Theory has advanced rapidly in recent years. Communication is an important part of human life and from the beginning of human history, people have always tried to communicate together and to understand the others and make themselves understood. This paper aims to have a brief review on the notion "Communication Accommodation Theory" (CAT), which is an important aspect of different sciences (e.g., Linguistics, sociology, sociolinguistics, and psychology). The concept of Communication Accommodation is used in all people"s social life, for instance, between mother and child, teacher and student, reporter and listener, doctor and patient, and immigrants (newcomers) and citizens, however, this review helps us to have a better understanding through CAT.
Communication accommodation theory predicts that social power plays an important role in influencing communicative behaviors. Previous research suggests these effects extend to linguistic style, thought to be a non-conscious aspect of communication. Here, we explore if these effects hold when individuals converse using a medium limited in personal cues, computer-mediated-communication (CMC). We manipulated social power in instant messaging conversations and measured subsequent interpersonal impressions. Low power induced greater likelihood of linguistic style accommodation, across between- (Study 1) and within-subjects (Study 2) experiments. Accommodation by those in a low power role had no impact on impressions formed by their partner. In contrast, linguistic style accommodation by individuals in a high-power role was associated with negative interpersonal impressions formed by their lower power partner. The results show robust effects of power in shaping language use across CMC. Further, the interpersonal effects of linguistic accommodation depend upon the conversational norms of the social context.
Communicative Competence, Pragmatic Functions, and Accommodation
Communicative competence is that part of our language knowledge which enables us to choose the communicative system we wish to use, and, when that selected system is language, to connect the goals and contexts of the situation with the structures which we have available in our linguistic repertoire through functional choices at the pragmatic level In making these selections, language users accommodate linguistic features both consciously and unconsciously in order to adjust the social distance between the producer and the receiver. When the goal is to communicate with a stranger, to engage in public discourse, the most probable functional selection is to choose linguistic features which mark one's discourse as being acceptable for public discourse, to choose standard English. In part, the feature selection will be unconscious, but to some extent it will be conscious, and will rely on those norms which are publicly discussed, features which incorporate regional and social distinctions as well as notions of correctness and acceptability. Because the selection and use of standard English involves a high level of metalinguistic awareness, it might best be characterized as a communicative level phenomenon rather than a feature or structural level one. 1. independent speech variables are concocted in a social, psychological and linguistic vacuum; 2. listener-judges feature almost as cognitive nonentities; 3. aspects of context are socially and subjectively sterile; and 4. dependent variables are devised without recourse to their situational, functional and behavioural implications. (Giles and Ryan 1982: 210) describe whatever features of speech prove relevant in the given case, and [to] relate linguistic elements to each other in terms of relationships of role, status, task, and the like. Such a linguistics requires foundations in social theory and ethnographic practice (Hymes 1964,1974) as well as practical phonetics and grammar. (Hymes 1985:12) 184 COMMUNICATIVE COMPETENCE