1887
image of The quick termination of verbal conflicts expressed through disagreement
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This paper considers verbal conflicts at the workplace and asks how team members negotiate conflict termination. Our corpus consists of meetings where computer scientists discuss the progress of projects they are working on, a context where conflict resolution is crucial for the continuation of work. Following the literature, we define conflicts as continued disagreement. The analysis focuses on conflict termination formats that show whether a conflict can be resolved as well as episode length and disagreement mitigation that indicate the severity of the conflict. Power relations among participants are also discussed. Our results show that most conflicts end after two or three disagreements. Among the termination formats, submission is the most frequent, followed by stand-off and compromise. We further show that participants minimize conflicts by concluding them as soon as someone indicates their unwillingness to concede, whereas the pattern of conflict minimization varies with the termination format that participants negotiate.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jlac.00112.put
2024-06-24
2024-07-20
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Angouri, Jo
    2012 “Managing Disagreement in Problem Solving Meeting Talk.” Journal of Pragmatics(): –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2012.06.010
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.06.010 [Google Scholar]
  2. Antaki, Charles
    1994Explaining and Arguing: The Social Organization of Accounts. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Asmuß, Birte, and Sae Oshima
    2012 “Negotiation of Entitlement in Proposal Sequences.” Discourse Studies(): –. 10.1177/1461445611427215
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445611427215 [Google Scholar]
  4. Baxter, Leslie. A.
    1982 “Conflict Management: An Episodic Approach.” Small Group Research(): –.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bilmes, Jack
    1988 “The Concept of Preference in Conversation Analysis.” Language in Society(): –. 10.1017/S0047404500012744
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500012744 [Google Scholar]
  6. 1995 “Negotiation and Compromise.” InThe Discourse of Negotiation: Studies of Language in the Workplace, ed. byAlan Firth, –. Oxford: Elsevier. 10.1016/B978‑0‑08‑042400‑2.50009‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-042400-2.50009-1 [Google Scholar]
  7. 2014 “Preference and the Conversation Analytic Endeavor.” Journal of Pragmatics: –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2014.01.007
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.01.007 [Google Scholar]
  8. Boden, Deirdre
    1994The Business of Talk: Organizations in Action. Cambridge: Polity Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Bou-Franch, Patricia, and Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich
    2014 “Conflict Management in Massive Polylogues: A Case Study from YouTube.” Journal of Pragmatics: –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2014.05.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.05.001 [Google Scholar]
  10. Boyle, Ronald
    2000 “Whatever Happened to Preference Organisation?” Journal of Pragmatics(): –. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(99)00060‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00060-0 [Google Scholar]
  11. Button, Graham, and Wes Sharrock
    1996 “Project Work: The Organisation of Collaborative Design and Development in Software Engineering.” Computer Supported Cooperative Work: –. 10.1007/BF00136711
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00136711 [Google Scholar]
  12. 2000 “Design by Problem Solving.” InWorkplace Studies: Recovering Work Practice and Informing Systems Design, ed. byPaul Luff, Jon Hindmarsh, and Christian Heath, –. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511628122.004
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511628122.004 [Google Scholar]
  13. Coulter, Jeff
    1990 “Elementary Properties of Argument Sequences.” InInteraction Competence, ed. byGeorge Psathas, –. Washington, DC: University of America Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Davidson, Judy
    1984 “Subsequent Versions of Invitations, Offers, Requests, and Proposals Dealing with Potential or Actual Rejection.” InStructures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. byJ. Maxwell Atkinson, and John Heritage, –. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Dersley, Ian, and Anthony Wootton
    2000 “Complaint Sequences within Antagonistic Argument.” Research on Language & Social Interaction(): –. 10.1207/S15327973RLSI3304_02
    https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327973RLSI3304_02 [Google Scholar]
  16. Fernández-Amaya, Lucía
    2021 “Online disagreement in WhatsApp groups: A comparative study of Spanish family members and work colleagues.” Discourse & Communication, (): –. 10.1177/17504813211017711
    https://doi.org/10.1177/17504813211017711 [Google Scholar]
  17. Fisher, B. Aubrey
    1974Small Group Decision Making: Communication and the Group Process. New York: McGraw-Hill.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Garcia, Angela
    1991 “Dispute Resolution without Disputing: How the Interactional Organization of Mediation Hearings Minimizes Argument.” American Sociological Review(): –. 10.2307/2096258
    https://doi.org/10.2307/2096258 [Google Scholar]
  19. Gibson, David R.
    2012Talk at the Brink: Deliberation and Decision during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Princeton, NJ : Princeton University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Goodwin, Marjorie Harness
    1983 “Aggravated Correction and Disagreement in Children’s Conversations.” Journal of Pragmatics(): –. 10.1016/0378‑2166(83)90089‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(83)90089-9 [Google Scholar]
  21. 1990He-said-she-said: Talk as Social Organization among Black Children. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Gouran, Dennis, and John Baird
    1972 “An Analysis of Distributional and Sequential Structure in Problem Solving and Informal Group Discussions.” Speech Monographs(): –. 10.1080/03637757209375734
    https://doi.org/10.1080/03637757209375734 [Google Scholar]
  23. Greatbatch, David, and Robert Dingwall
    1997 “Argumentative Talk in Divorce Mediation Sessions.” American Sociological Review: –. 10.2307/2657457
    https://doi.org/10.2307/2657457 [Google Scholar]
  24. Gruber, Helmut
    1998 “Disagreeing: Sequential Placement and Internal Structure of Disagreements in Verbal Conflicts.” Text and Talk(): –.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Heritage, John, and Geoffrey Raymond
    2005 “The Terms of Agreement: Indexing Epistemic Authority and Subordination in Talk-in-Interaction.” Social Psychology Quarterly(): –. 10.1177/019027250506800103
    https://doi.org/10.1177/019027250506800103 [Google Scholar]
  26. Holmes, Janet, and Maria Stubbe
    2015Power and Politeness in the Workplace: A Sociolinguistic Analysis of Talk at Work. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315750231
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315750231 [Google Scholar]
  27. Hutchby, Ian
    2001 “‘Oh,’ Irony and Sequential Ambiguity in Arguments.” Discourse & Society(): –. 10.1177/0957926501012002001
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926501012002001 [Google Scholar]
  28. 2006Media Talk: Conversation Analysis and the Study of Broadcasting. Maidenhead, United Kingdom: Open University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Jarzabkowski, Paula, and David Seidl
    2008 “The Role of Meetings in the Social Practice of Strategy.” Organization Studies(): –. 10.1177/0170840608096388
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840608096388 [Google Scholar]
  30. Kakavá, Christina
    2002 “Opposition in Modern Greek Discourse: Cultural and Contextual Constraints.” Journal of Pragmatics(): –. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(02)00075‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00075-9 [Google Scholar]
  31. Kangasharju, Helena
    2002 “Alignment in Disagreement: Forming Oppositional Alliances in Committee Meetings.” Journal of Pragmatics(): –. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(02)00073‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00073-5 [Google Scholar]
  32. (2009) “Preference for Disagreement? A Comparison of Three Disputes.” InTalk in Interaction: Comparative Dimensions, ed. byMarkku Haakana, Minna Laakso, and Jan Lindström, –. Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Koczogh, Helga Vanda
    2012 “The Role of Gender in Verbal Disagreement: A Study of Disagreement Strategies Employed by Hungarian Undergraduate Students.” Gender Studies(): –. 10.2478/v10320‑012‑0042‑5
    https://doi.org/10.2478/v10320-012-0042-5 [Google Scholar]
  34. Koester, Almut
    2006Investigating Workplace Discourse. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203015742
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203015742 [Google Scholar]
  35. Kotthoff, Helga
    1993 “Disagreement and Concession in Disputes: On the Context Sensitivity of Preference Structures.” Language in Society(): –. 10.1017/S0047404500017103
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500017103 [Google Scholar]
  36. Locher, Miriam A.
    2004Power and Politeness in Action: Disagreements in Oral Communication. Berlin: de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110926552
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110926552 [Google Scholar]
  37. Luhmann, Niklas
    1983Soziale Systeme: Grundriß einer allgemeinen Theorie. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Mackenzie, Adrian
    2006Cutting Code: Software and Sociality. New York: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Mahoney, Michael S.
    2011 “What Makes Computer Science a Science?” InScience in the Context of Application, ed. byMartin Carrier, and Alfred Nordmann, –. Dordrecht: Springer. 10.1007/978‑90‑481‑9051‑5_23
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9051-5_23 [Google Scholar]
  40. Maynard, Douglas W.
    1985 “How Children Start Arguments.” Language in Society(): –. 10.1017/S0047404500010915
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500010915 [Google Scholar]
  41. Messmer, Heintz
    2003Der soziale Konflikt. Stuttgart: Lucius & Lucius. 10.1515/9783110512069
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110512069 [Google Scholar]
  42. Mikkelsen, Elisabeth N., and Stewart Clegg
    2018 “Unpacking the Meaning of Conflict in Organizational Conflict Research.” Negotiation and Conflict Management Research(): –. 10.1111/ncmr.12127
    https://doi.org/10.1111/ncmr.12127 [Google Scholar]
  43. Muntigl, Peter, and William Turnbull
    1998 “Conversational Structure and Facework in Arguing.” Journal of Pragmatics(): –. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(97)00048‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(97)00048-9 [Google Scholar]
  44. Nelson, Christian K.
    2001 “If it sounds too good to be true, it is: A Wittengensteinian Approach to the Conflict Literature.” Language & Communication: –. 10.1016/S0271‑5309(00)00013‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0271-5309(00)00013-6 [Google Scholar]
  45. Nielsen, Mie F.
    2009 “Interpretative Management in Business Meetings: Understanding Managers’ Interactional Strategies through Conversation Analysis.” The Journal of Business Communication(): –. 10.1177/0021943608325752
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0021943608325752 [Google Scholar]
  46. Norrick, Neal R., and Alice Spitz
    2008 “Humor as a Resource for Mitigating Conflict in Interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics(): –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2007.12.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2007.12.001 [Google Scholar]
  47. Pomerantz, Anita
    1984 “Agreeing and Disagreeing with Assessments: Some Features of Preferred/Dispreferred Turn Shapes.” InStructures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. byJ. Maxwell Atkinson, and John Heritage, –. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Pütz, Ole
    2019Talking Collective Action: A Sequential Analysis of Strategic Planning in Anti-Nuclear Groups. Abingdon, UK: Routledge. 10.4324/9780429032110
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429032110 [Google Scholar]
  49. 2021 “Managing Exactness and Vagueness in Computer Science Work: Programming and Self-repair in Meetings.” Social Studies of Science(): –. 10.1177/03063127211010972
    https://doi.org/10.1177/03063127211010972 [Google Scholar]
  50. Rees-Miller, Janie
    2000 “Power, Severity, and Context in Disagreement.” Journal of Pragmatics(): –. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(99)00088‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00088-0 [Google Scholar]
  51. Sacks, Harvey
    1987 “On the Preferences for Agreement and Contiguity in Sequences in Conversation.” InTalk and Social Organisation, ed. byGraham Button, and John R. E. Lee, –. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781800418226‑004
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781800418226-004 [Google Scholar]
  52. Saft, Scott
    2004 “Conflict as Interactional Accomplishment in Japanese.” Language in Society: –. 10.1017/S0047404504334032
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404504334032 [Google Scholar]
  53. Schegloff, Emanuel A.
    1992 “Repair after Next Turn: The Last Structurally Provided Defense of Intersubjectivity in Conversation.” American Journal of Sociology(): –. 10.1086/229903
    https://doi.org/10.1086/229903 [Google Scholar]
  54. Schiffrin, Deborah
    1984 “Jewish Argument as Sociability.” Language in Society(): –. 10.1017/S0047404500010526
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500010526 [Google Scholar]
  55. Sifianou, Maria
    2019 “Conflict, Disagreement and (Im)politeness.” InThe Routledge Handbook of Language in Conflict, ed. byMatthew Evans, Lesley Jeffries, and Jim O’Driscoll, –. London and New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780429058011‑11
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429058011-11 [Google Scholar]
  56. Stalpers, Judith
    1995 “The Expression of Disagreement.” The Discourse of Business Negotiation, ed. byKonrad Ehlich, and Johannes Wagner, –. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110881516.275
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110881516.275 [Google Scholar]
  57. Stromer-Galley, Jennifer, Lauren Bryant, and Bruce Bimber
    2015 “Context and Medium Matter: Expressing Disagreements Online and Face-to-Face in Political Deliberations.” Journal of Deliberative Democracy(). 10.16997/jdd.218
    https://doi.org/10.16997/jdd.218 [Google Scholar]
  58. Tannen, Deborah, and Christina Kakavá
    1992 “Power and Solidarity in Modern Greek Conversation: Disagreeing to Agree.” Journal of Modern Greek Studies(): –. 10.1353/mgs.2010.0203
    https://doi.org/10.1353/mgs.2010.0203 [Google Scholar]
  59. Ten Have, Paul
    2007Doing Conversation Analysis: A Practical Guide. London: Sage. 10.4135/9781849208895
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849208895 [Google Scholar]
  60. Thomas, Kenneth W.
    1992 “Conflict and Conflict Management: Reflections and Update.” Journal of Organizational Behavior(): –. 10.1002/job.4030130307
    https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030130307 [Google Scholar]
  61. Valentine, Kristin B., and B. Aubrey Fisher
    1974 “An Interaction Analysis of Verbal Innovative Deviance in Small Groups.” Speech Monographs(): –. 10.1080/03637757409375867
    https://doi.org/10.1080/03637757409375867 [Google Scholar]
  62. Vine, Bernadette
    2004Getting Things Done at Work. Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.124
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.124 [Google Scholar]
  63. Vuchinich, Samuel
    1987 “Starting and Stopping Spontaneous Family Conflicts.” Journal of Marriage and Family(): –. 10.2307/352204
    https://doi.org/10.2307/352204 [Google Scholar]
  64. 1990 “The Sequential Organization of Closing in Verbal Family Conflict.” InConflict Talk, ed. byAllen D. Grimshaw, –. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/jlac.00112.put
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/jlac.00112.put
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error