Metadiscourse and the management of relationships during online conflict among academics

Abstract

AbstractThis study analyzes how members of an online academic committee use metadiscourse to manage communicative norms and relationships during conflict. The data analyzed include 67 listserv posts among academics developing a solution to a conference scheduling conflict. Discourse analysis highlights how tensions between the group’s leader and the group members escalate throughout the interactions. The conflict began when the participants opposed the group leader through positively evaluating the content of their leader’s email, yet re-formulating their leader’s proposed communication process. When the group leader ignored members, the members escalated opposition through negatively formulating the leader’s actions, taking overt negative affective stances, asking the leader to change his decision, and withdrawing from the committee without resolving conflict. Analysis of the group’s metadiscourse illustrates that the group members withdrew not because they disagreed with the leader’s solution, but because they oriented to their leader as repeatedly violating academia-specific communication and relational preferences: the group leader attempted to conduct a top-down, closed conversation, while the group members preferred an open discussion among equals. These findings highlight the need to attend to community-specific communication and relational preferences, particularly when online interactions are the primary form of relational maintenance.