Analysis of Negative Behaviors in Computer-mediated Communication

About Face Threat:

An Analysis of Negative Behaviors

in Computer-mediated Communication

Marie L. Radford, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Rutgers University

(mradford@rutgers.edu)

Jocelyn A. DeAngelis, Ph.D., Adjunct Professor, Rutgers University

(jocelyn.scils@rutgers.edu)

Gary P. Radford, Ph.D., Professor, Fairleigh Dickinson University

(gradford@fdu.edu)

Lynn Silipigni Connaway, Ph.D., Senior Research Scientist, OCLC

New York State Communication Association

October 21-23, 2011

Virtual Reference (VR)

o

Web-based chat &  instant messaging (IM) CMC

reference services

o

VR encounters capture full  transcript of

interaction between reference librarian & user

o

VR interactions complex & fraught with possibility

of misunderstandings & miscommunications

Interaction Ritual:

Essays on Face-to-Face Behavior

Erving Goffman

1922-1982

“On Face-Work: An

analysis of Ritual

Elements in Social

Interaction

”

(1967)

Face-Work

“Much of the activity occurring during

an encounter can be understood as

an effort on everyone’s part to get

through the occasion and all the

unanticipated and unintentional

events that can cast participants in an

undesirable light, without disrupting the

relationships of the participants”

(Goffman, 1967, p. 41)

Face Defined

•

Positive social value person claims

•

Self-image in terms of approved social

attributes

Face-Work in Encounters

•

Face is 

located

 in 

flow of events

o

Feelings about face reinforced by

encounters

o

If better face established –

feel good

o

If expectations not fulfilled – 

feel bad or

hurt

o

Neutral experience – 

expected, not

memorable

Face-Work, continued

•

Positive Face - Having and Maintaining Face

o

According to Goffman: “A person may be said to 

have, 

or 

be in

, or

maintain

 face when the line he effectively takes presents an image of him

that is internally consistent…that is confirmed by evidence conveyed

through interpersonal agencies in the situation” (p. 7).

o

Face is constructed both by ourselves and is also given to us by others in

how one is treated.

o

When one is “in face” he/she responds with feelings of confidence,

security, relief, and assurance, can hold his/her head up, and can openly

present himself/herself to others.

Types of Positive Face-Work

•

Face-work

 helps achieve success in interpersonal

communication encounters

o

To “give face”

 is in the process of making someone look good, giving

them a better 

line 

than they had previously established.

o

To “

save face”

 one may use a sense of humor or otherwise defuse

situations that threaten face.

o

Poise is described as being very important in face-work because,

“through poise the person controls his embarrassment and hence the

embarrassment that he and others might have over his embarrassment”

(Goffman, p. 13).

•

Face-saving practices

 vary within different cultures

and subcultures and are chosen from a socially

constructed and circumscribed “repertoire” of

rituals (Goffman, 1967, p. 13).

Face Threat = Negative Face-work

Face Threat

o

Communication threatens face of interactants

Types

o

Losing Face

•

Person caught in embarrassing or damaging position

(e.g., in a lie or inappropriate behavior)

o

Wrong Face 

or 

Out of Face

•

Experience shame

•

Possible to maintain confidence, if others cover (e.g.,

one makes faux pas & others pretend not to notice)

•

Poise

 is ability to conceal wrong face or out of face

Face-Work in VR

•

Goffman provides powerful frame to

analyze VR encounters

•

Face & face-work appear in flow of

transcript (event)

•

Analysis identifies instances or lack of face-

work

Methodology

•

Data from Institute of Museum & Library Services Grant of

$684,996

•

“Seeking Synchronicity: Evaluating Virtual Reference services

from user, non-users, and librarian perspectives”

o

Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey and OCLC,

Online Computer Library Center, Inc.

o

Project duration: 2 ½  Years (10/05-3/08)

o

4 phases including transcript analysis

Sample Selection

•

850 VR transcripts randomly selected from 479,673

transcripts (8/04-11/06)

•

746 usable transcripts qualitatively analyzed &

coded

•

1 transcript selected to illustrate face-threats in VR

•

“Physics” - “The Accelerating Bumper Car”

Duration: 17 min., 8 sec.

Findings “Physics”

•

The “Physics” example, both the U and L symmetrically exclude a

greeting ritual from the initial interaction.

•

In line 1, the U launches into the topic of the query, without an

opening salutation

•

In examples that possess positive face-work, a salutation is

customary in opening a query.

•

In line 4, the U presents the full query, again without any form of greeting

or polite request.

•

Subsequent lines of interaction are open to the U and L to include

additional information, such as a missed greeting, but this does not

take place.

Findings “Physics”

•

Line 5 is the first typed response from the L (line 2 is a

script).

o

The L does show deference toward the U by saying “thank you for

holding,” and also by providing an explanation of the wait time, “I was

working with another patron.”

•

The lack of face-work present on behalf of the L is

evidenced by the omission of a greeting ritual for

the U.

•

The lack of the greeting ritual initiates a series of

face threats that can be seen to hang as a cloud

over the interaction to follow (Goffman, 1967).

Findings “Physics”

•

Line 6: In Goffman’s (1967) terms this question can be

interpreted as a direct face threat

o

 the implication being that the U should not be seeking help with

“homework, ” and that the U should feel shame at not being able to do

his/her own work

•

Line 7: L types, “I'm not an expert on driving so I really can't

answer that”

o

 a disclaimer and acts in the interaction as a type of negative face-work

and a form of rebuff and refusal to offer to help find an answer to the Us

query

Findings “Physics”

•

Line 13:  L inquires to the U as to whether the question for homework

and what the subject is.

o

This line indicates that the L is not fully engaged and is demonstrating a

lack of attention since the first line of the transcript offers the subject of the

question.

•

Line 14: L comes back a second time with a disclaimer

o

This is an attempt to push the U away.

•

Line 15: U acknowledges the L’s unwillingness or inability to help and

requests “another librarian.”

Findings “Physics”

•

Line 17: L continues with more questions to the U, “Are you sure

that’s what your assignment asks”

o

This question to the user’s interpretation of the assignment and

the tone of which can be taken to be condescension

•

Overall, a lack of face-work is evidenced on both the part of

the librarian and the user

o

Face-saving techniques are not utilized

•

Apologies are not present

Findings “Physics”

•

Line 19: L demonstrates a lack of attention to the interaction by

asking for the subject of the question once more.

•

Line 21: L agrees to help the U and pushes a page to the U and in line

23.

•

The initial request is not observed by the L, which leads to the librarian

issuing a face threat to the U to reissue the initial query.

o

This shows that the L may not be taking the question or U seriously or

perhaps not devoting time to the U, which acts to diminish the

importance of the U’s query

o

In turn functions as a lack of concern for the U’s face. Furthermore, this

particular line issued by the L diminishes his/her face in interaction by

showing that the L is not attending to previously issued information.

Findings “Physics”

•

Lines 30-32: the L continues pushing page after

page without any direct interaction with the U

whatsoever.

•

Line 33: the U responds to the L with the statement,

“this isn’t helpful,” which again is disconfirming to

the L.

Findings “Physics”

•

Line 34:  L responds to the U’s dissatisfaction with the help he or she is receiving

•

This a disclaimer, and with other disclaimers on the part of the L in the

physics transcript, are failures to make an appropriate referral for the U

•

Line 35: The L again returns to sending a web page to the U

•

This acts as another barrier in that it demonstrates that the L is ignoring

what the U said, in that the web pages are not helpful.

•

Line 37: L retorts “Maybe you will need to ask your instructor for a clear

understanding.”

•

Chastising

•

Reprimanding

•

Shows poor attitude

•

All are direct face threats

Conclusion

•

Goffman offers powerful way to gain insights into VR

practice & understanding of interpersonal dynamics

in CMC

•

Physics transcript analysis reveals, similar to the FtF

environment, importance of face-work, e.g.,

politeness rituals

•

Expressions of deference & demeanor (Goffman,

1956), are important to success of VR encounters

Future Research

•

Many questions involving participant’s perception

of these interactions remain unanswered

•

New grant: “Cyber Synergy” (10/11-9/13) for $250K

•

Next analyze 500+ transcripts from 2010

•

Developing  theoretical model based on Goffman

End Notes

•

This is one of the outcomes from the project

Seeking Synchronicity: Evaluating Virtual Reference

Services from User, Non-User, & Librarian

Perspectives

•

Funded by IMLS, Rutgers University, & OCLC

Online Computer Library Center, Inc.

•

Web site:

http://www.oclc.org/research/

activities/synchronicity/default.htm

Questions &

Comments?