Face Negotiation Theory Humanist Ontology with S S Epistemology Axiology Intercultural communication theory 1 Goals a To explain how members of different cultures manage negotiate conflict b Stella Ting Toomey i Chapter Intercultural Conflict Styles A face Negotion Theory 1988 ii Chapter The Matrix of Face An updated Face Negoition Theory 2005 2 Concepts a Face i A metaphor for the public image we display an identity two people conjointly define during social interaction social interaction negotiation with others ii Face is a universal concept All cultures have face but may negotiate interactions in other ways 1 The image of self that people display in their conversations with others Goffman 1967 2 A projected image of one s self and the claim of self respect in a relationship Ting 3 A favorable self worth and or projected other worth in interpersonal situations Oetzel Toomey 1988 Ting Toomey et Al 2000 iii Can be interpreted in two ways 1 Face Concern Interest in maintaining one s face or the face of others a Whose face do we want to put emphasis on 2 Face Need Desire to be associated or disassociated from others a Positive The desire to be liked and admired by others b Negative The desire to be autonomous and unconstrained by others we do not b Facework Occurs when a person s positive or negative face is threatened want the other person restricting our behaviors i Defined as actions taken to manage face concerns and needs of oneself and or another 1 Actions we take when our face is threatened or when we are threatening someone else s face ii Three types of Facework 1 Tact Respect for another s autonomy avoid directives and for them to do whatever they want to do a Negative faceneed 2 Solidarity Accept the other as an in group member a By addressing the fact that the other person is an in group member and you are alike in the same way you are dealing with positive face needs because you want to be liked 3 Approbation Facework Minimizing blame and maximizing praise c Culture The collective beliefs of members of a social system House 1981 i Beliefs or values that all members of a social system share ii Culture is NOT static it can vary across many variables iii Culture Variability 1 Individualistic Cultures Focus is on individual needs preferences and identity a United States Great Britain Canada the Netherlands etc b Preserve authenticity of their own face negative face 2 Collectivistic Cultures Focus is on group needs preferences and identity a China Japan Latin American countries Mexico etc b Preserve their own face and the face of others positive face d Conflict The perceived and or actual incompatibility of values expectations processes or outcomes between two or more parties over substantive and or relational issues i Impacts of Conflict 1 Can damage the social face of individuals 2 Can reduce harm relational closeness ii Conflict Management Styles Obliging integrating compromising avoiding dominating 1 Ting Toomey does not believe that there is a best management style but that they differ with cultures 2 People are either concerned with their own face or the face of the other person a Obliging High concern for the face of others b Avoiding No concern for either parties face c Integrating High concern for the faces of both people i Win win situation best style of management d Compromising It s just an okay management style if the matter is really i No one really wins we both give up to get a little e Dominating High concern for your own face important 3 Assumptions a Face is important in interpersonal interactions individuals negotiate face differently across cultures b Certain acts Face Threatening Acts threaten one s projected self image ie face i People can say things that are face threatening 1 Direct Directly telling someone what they are doing wrong these are more damaging to Face face is threatened 2 Indirect Not saying directly that you re doing someone wrong but you hint at it ii Face Saving Actions Efforts that we have to avoid embarrassment or predicament before our 1 Example As a teacher on the first day of classes you tell the class that you re going to mispronounce their names ahead of time so that the class doesn t laugh at you but corrects it instead iii Face Restoration Strategy used to preserve autonomy and avoid loss of face AFTER you were already embarrassed 1 Example Coming up with excuses c The management of conflict is mediated by face and culture 4 Explanation a Culture Variability Face Needs Concerns Conflict Strategies Styles i We all come from different cultures Based on the cultures from which we come we have different face needs and concerns Because we have different face needs and concerns we may choose different conflict management styles b Individualistic Cultures Self Face Negative Face Dominating Management Strategies i Cultures such as American are more concerned with their own face and will use more dominating strategies to get what they want c Collectivistic Cultures Other Face Mutual Face Pos Neg Face Obliging Avoiding Compromising Integrating i Collectivistic cultures such as Japan care about others faces first and are likely to pick any strategy that is not dominating and allows the maintenance of both faces 5 Some Research Findings a Americans use more dominating styles of management b Taiwanese other Asian cultures use more integrating styles c Chinese use more obliging d Chinese use more avoidance and compromising 6 Critique a Heuristic b Scope Boundaries are CLEAR i Boundaries Conflict Culture c Parsimoniously stated d Logically consistent e Validity face are too general 7 Assumptions a Ontological i Real Choice Yes ii Experience Social Individual Social iii Contextualized Yes b Epistemological More socially scientific c Axiological Value Free i The cultural dimension of individualism collectivism may not fully explain cultural differences ii Other issues pertaining to face needs may exist but are not identified positive face negative
View Full Document
Unlocking...