No abstract

No abstract

The concept of group face has been used to explain facework that relates to members of in-groups. Hahn and Hatfield (2011) looked at situations in which a family member of a Speaker commits a possible offense towards a Hearer. They tested the prediction that collectivist Koreans would apologize for the family member at a greater rate than individualist Americans who would be focused upon individual face not group face. This prediction was not confirmed as the chance of an apology for the two groups was not significantly different among the university students participating. Interpreting speaker responses in such triadic interactions, however, was difficult because there was no comparison point to classic dyadic interactions. Without this comparison the facework performed could be unrelated to group face. The current paper creates this comparison point by adapting the methods of Hahn and Hatfield for dyadic interaction. A Discourse Completion Task was given to 80 speakers. There was no significant difference in apology rates between the two countries in either the triadic or dyadic studies, plus a complex interaction of each factor with Gender. The results argue for the significance of face management of individuals and groups not in immediate interaction, which has implications for the distinction of face and identity.

No abstract

No abstract