Facework Theory Research Articles

Suicide communication events: Lay interpretation of the communication of suicidal ideation and intent

Previous research has shown that a majority of people communicate their suicidal ideas and intent prior to the act of suicide, but very little is known about the way in which these suicide communication events are interpreted by relatives, friends and significant others. A suicide communication event (SCE) is defined as a set of circumstances in which a person expresses suicidal feelings, thoughts, intentions or plans, either directly or indirectly, in interaction with other people in their social environment. In a qualitative study conducted in 2008–9 we collected narratives from people bereaved by suicide. Here we examine these narratives using an analytic framework derived from communication pragmatics and face-work theory. We analysed 14 cases of completed suicide drawn from coroner's case files in London, Southwest England and South Wales. We found that the SCEs described were potentially face-threatening situations requiring face-saving strategies, which often resulted in off-record, indirect, ambiguous, humorous and euphemistic communications. Listeners frequently found it difficult to judge the meaning and intention of utterances referring to suicide. The outcome was often misunderstanding and closure of the communication, limiting the possibility of further support and referral for professional help. SCEs are important elements of the suicide process and we conclude that better understanding of how they occur and the challenges they pose for significant others may provide a basis for strengthening public involvement in suicide prevention. We draw our findings together in a model that could inform public awareness campaigns designed to improve the way people communicate with each other about suicide and distress.

“Facing Threats”: Understanding Communication Apprehensive Instructors' Face Loss and Face Restoration in the Classroom

Noting a lack of qualitative literature devoted to student–teacher interactions, and even less targeting instructor communication apprehension (CA), this study aimed to combine these areas. Interview data were gathered from college instructors who experience CA in the classroom in an effort to garner their unique dealings with face-threatening situations with students. Using the concept of facework as a guide, two main themes arose from data analysis: (a) Threatening Face, and (b) Facing Identity: Managing and Restoring Face. Implications for facework theory and CA conclude this study.

Embarrassing E-mails in Organizations

This study addresses a void in the computer-mediated communication literature by examining how embarrassment is commonly triggered in organizational e-mails. Facework theory is used to examine embarrassment and its implications for professional and organizational image. Twenty-one in-depth interviews were conducted and data referencing embarrassing e-mails were extracted and analyzed for themes. Two types of e-mail faux pas themes were identified: misdirected e-mail and faulty content. Theoretical implications of studying embarrassment in a computer-mediated context are considered.

Responsibility in instruction: Who is doing the learning here?

One of the most challenging elements of being a teacher is that we are considered responsible for our student's learning. And yet, we cannot learn for our students; student learning is an activity done by the student not by the teacher. So, how teachers are responsible for student learning becomes a relevant and interesting question. In what ways can we be responsible for an outcome which, ultimately, is not under our control? The essays by Central States Communication Association teaching award winners for 2002 provide some insights into this issue. Stephen Hunt (2003) argues that teachers are responsible for student learning by actively engaging in practices which research shows makes learning more likely while Lynn Bryant (2003) discusses the teacher's responsibility to not put barriers in the way of learning. Both focus on the processes of communication in and out of the classroom which create or hinder student learning. There is also a third factor affecting communication processes which is controlled by neither teacher nor student that affects learning: the environment in which instruction occurs. Proactive Practices Promoting Learning Much past instructional communication research has focused attention on such teacher communicative behaviors as non-verbal immediacy (e.g., McCroskey, Fayer, Richmond, Sallinen, & Barraclough, 1996), confirmation (e.g., Ellis, 2000), and clarity (e.g., Chesebro & McCroskey, 2001). We know that these behaviors are associated with student learning. Hunt, however, goes beyond a simple focus on individual teacher behaviors and argues that teachers are responsible for implementing communication processes that enable and support student learning. Hunt (2003) draws on Astin's theory of involvement to argue that student involvement facilitates student learning. We would expect that behaviors like nonverbal immediacy also promote involvement--and, in fact, Hunt refers to using such behaviors as an integral part of his pedagogical practices. But he goes beyond a focus on individual behaviors to draw attention to the fact that effective instructional communication is a process. His essay reflects on those pedagogical processes which promote interaction between faculty and student, active student learning, and cooperation among students. He highlights the joint nature of instruction by discussing exchanges of student questions and instructor feedback, instructor expectations and student performance. Hunt's (2003) essay is consistent with the growing emphasis, nationwide, on interactive instructional practices (Shelton, Lane, & Waldhart, 1999). Research has demonstrated that out-of-class faculty-student contact improves student motivation (Jaasma & Koper, 1999) and that instructor use of powerful language increases classroom interaction (Halenta, 1996). Hunt's focus on interactivity, however, argues for the joint responsibility of teacher and student to make learning a success. The teacher sets the stage for learning. It is up to the student to follow through. Avoidance of Barriers to Learning While instructional communication research has investigated factors which promote student learning, less attention has been paid to qualities which hinder student learning. Bryant (2003) draws on facework theory to explain why we might tend to avoid discussing our instructional errors. Her reflection on her own teaching mistakes highlights how a lack of student respect for the teacher can be a barrier to effective instruction. The ongoing tension between student liking and respect and instructor self-disclosure and respect are effectively illustrated in Bryant's analysis as is the role that professional distance plays in maintaining that respect. Bryant's (2003) essay is consistent with the literature on facework, including Kerson-Griep's (2001) analysis of the role that instructor behaviors play in threatening or supporting student face. …

Competence and job stress in general practitioners

A collaborative patient-pharmacist interaction is fundamental to greater patient satisfaction with pharmacy care and improved medication adherence. Effective pharmacist-patient communication occurs when both pharmacist and patient are able to successfully attend to not only the typical tasks and goals of the interaction but also basic face needs that underlie all social interaction; autonomy, competence or esteem, and fellowship. Addressing face needs occurs through conventional and strategic communication strategies that respond to the emerging needs throughout an interaction. Pharmacist-patient interactions are not just about transfer of information and medications. Both parties assess the situation, the others' intentions within the context of their own goals and this influences how they choose to act throughout the interaction. Face-work Theory provides a framework to understand these interaction processes in pharmacist-patient communication.The aim of this study was to determine face needs, threats and the strategic communication strategies used to address these within community pharmacist-patient interactions.This exploratory descriptive study drew upon principles of ethology to first describe naturally occurring behaviour and then to interpret this behaviour within the context of Face-work theory. Twenty-five audio-recorded community pharmacist-patient interactions were collected and analyzed. The average length of these interactions was 3:67 min with a range of 0.39 s–9:35 min.Multiple face needs for both pharmacist and patient were evident in most interactions. Autonomy, competence and fellowship face needs were negotiated in the following contexts: participative relationships, concordant role expectations, sensitive topics, and negotiating expertise and knowledge. Competence face needs for both parties were the most dominant need found in negotiating role expectations. The most common communication strategies used to support face were solidarity based strategies while indirect and depersonalized questions were commonly employed to mitigate face threat.Face-work Theory is a novel approach to understand processes and outcomes of patient-pharmacist interactions in community pharmacies. Linking speech acts with face needs and threats may help to elucidate how pharmacist-patient interactions achieve both task oriented and interpersonal goals.

The Use of Face Work and Politeness Theory

Communication is central to nursing care. There is no framework to link communication theory to actual nursing interactions. Face work refers to ways people cooperatively attempt to promote both the other's and one's own sense of self-esteem, autonomy, and solidarity in conversation. Face work theory provides a means of understanding the context of interaction and the ways in which a nurse and client choose speech patterns based on perceptions offace needs,face threats, and contextualfeatures of power, culture, and social distance. Models of face work as politeness, forms of address, and embarrassment are presented to illuminate how communication is mutually negotiated and how verbal strategies respond to the instrumental demands of the situation as well as the interpersonal needs of both participants. Nurses are often effective in practice due to their intuitive understanding offace work, but this is not explicitly recognized in current research and education.