礼貌与突发坏消息时的不确定性沟通

IF 2.1 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL Discourse Processes Pub Date : 2023-08-09 DOI:10.1080/0163853X.2023.2245310
Harry T. Clelland, M. Haigh
{"title":"礼貌与突发坏消息时的不确定性沟通","authors":"Harry T. Clelland, M. Haigh","doi":"10.1080/0163853X.2023.2245310","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Uncertain language can be used to express genuine uncertainty but can also be used to manage face (e.g., by softening bad news). These conflicting motivations can create ambiguity in health communication. In this preregistered two-part experiment, participants assumed the position of a health specialist and wrote a letter communicating either a certain or an uncertain medical diagnosis. This was addressed to either a patient (high face threat) or the patient’s family doctor (low face threat). Letters written under high face threat contained more words and more dispreferred markers (e.g., sorry, unfortunately) than those written under low face threat. The number of explicit hedges (e.g., possibly, maybe) did not differ as a function of face threat. Time taken to write the letters was elevated only in the condition where face threat was high and the diagnosis was uncertain, suggesting that the joint pressures of communicating uncertain information in a tactful way increased the task demands. Our data demonstrate that participants spontaneously produced dispreferred markers (but not explicit hedges) to manage face and that face management is more taxing under uncertainty. Ratings from a second set of participants indicate that face management strategies did not affect the perceived meaning or manner of the message. For open materials, data, and code, see https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/ZU2AN.","PeriodicalId":11316,"journal":{"name":"Discourse Processes","volume":"60 1","pages":"479 - 501"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Politeness and the communication of uncertainty when breaking bad news\",\"authors\":\"Harry T. Clelland, M. Haigh\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/0163853X.2023.2245310\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Uncertain language can be used to express genuine uncertainty but can also be used to manage face (e.g., by softening bad news). These conflicting motivations can create ambiguity in health communication. In this preregistered two-part experiment, participants assumed the position of a health specialist and wrote a letter communicating either a certain or an uncertain medical diagnosis. This was addressed to either a patient (high face threat) or the patient’s family doctor (low face threat). Letters written under high face threat contained more words and more dispreferred markers (e.g., sorry, unfortunately) than those written under low face threat. The number of explicit hedges (e.g., possibly, maybe) did not differ as a function of face threat. Time taken to write the letters was elevated only in the condition where face threat was high and the diagnosis was uncertain, suggesting that the joint pressures of communicating uncertain information in a tactful way increased the task demands. Our data demonstrate that participants spontaneously produced dispreferred markers (but not explicit hedges) to manage face and that face management is more taxing under uncertainty. Ratings from a second set of participants indicate that face management strategies did not affect the perceived meaning or manner of the message. For open materials, data, and code, see https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/ZU2AN.\",\"PeriodicalId\":11316,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Discourse Processes\",\"volume\":\"60 1\",\"pages\":\"479 - 501\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Discourse Processes\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2023.2245310\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Discourse Processes","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2023.2245310","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要不确定语言可以用来表达真正的不确定性,但也可以用来管理面子(例如,软化坏消息)。这些相互冲突的动机可能会在健康沟通中产生歧义。在这个预先注册的由两部分组成的实验中,参与者扮演了健康专家的角色,并写了一封信,传达了某种或不确定的医学诊断。这是针对患者(高脸威胁)或患者的家庭医生(低脸威胁)。在高脸威胁下写的信比在低脸威胁下的信包含更多的单词和更多的反驳标记(例如,对不起,不幸的是)。明确对冲的数量(例如,可能,可能)与面部威胁的函数没有差异。只有在面部威胁较高且诊断不确定的情况下,写信所需的时间才会增加,这表明以委婉的方式传达不确定信息的共同压力增加了任务需求。我们的数据表明,参与者自发地产生了反驳标记(但不是明确的对冲)来管理面部,并且面部管理在不确定性下更为繁重。第二组参与者的评分表明,面部管理策略不会影响信息的感知意义或方式。有关打开的材质、数据和代码,请参见https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/ZU2AN.
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Politeness and the communication of uncertainty when breaking bad news
ABSTRACT Uncertain language can be used to express genuine uncertainty but can also be used to manage face (e.g., by softening bad news). These conflicting motivations can create ambiguity in health communication. In this preregistered two-part experiment, participants assumed the position of a health specialist and wrote a letter communicating either a certain or an uncertain medical diagnosis. This was addressed to either a patient (high face threat) or the patient’s family doctor (low face threat). Letters written under high face threat contained more words and more dispreferred markers (e.g., sorry, unfortunately) than those written under low face threat. The number of explicit hedges (e.g., possibly, maybe) did not differ as a function of face threat. Time taken to write the letters was elevated only in the condition where face threat was high and the diagnosis was uncertain, suggesting that the joint pressures of communicating uncertain information in a tactful way increased the task demands. Our data demonstrate that participants spontaneously produced dispreferred markers (but not explicit hedges) to manage face and that face management is more taxing under uncertainty. Ratings from a second set of participants indicate that face management strategies did not affect the perceived meaning or manner of the message. For open materials, data, and code, see https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/ZU2AN.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
4.50%
发文量
27
期刊介绍: Discourse Processes is a multidisciplinary journal providing a forum for cross-fertilization of ideas from diverse disciplines sharing a common interest in discourse--prose comprehension and recall, dialogue analysis, text grammar construction, computer simulation of natural language, cross-cultural comparisons of communicative competence, or related topics. The problems posed by multisentence contexts and the methods required to investigate them, although not always unique to discourse, are sufficiently distinct so as to require an organized mode of scientific interaction made possible through the journal.
期刊最新文献
Children’s understanding of referential nominal metaphors: a path to the heart of text comprehension An interactional practice of registering expectation discrepancy: the use of the turn-initial token are in Japanese Does the gender asterisk (“Gendersternchen”) as a special form of gender-fair language impair comprehensibility? Russ Tomlin, attention, working memory, reference, and referential choice Introduction: special issue in honor of Walter Kintsch
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1