1983
DOI: 10.1080/03637758309390157
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Account sequences in conversations between strangers

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

2
67
0
2

Year Published

1992
1992
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 89 publications
(71 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
2
67
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Alternatively, victims may have considered it as a manifestation of wrongdoers' callousness, i.e. as an attempt by a wrongdoer to manipulate them and persuade the public to exonerate them (Holtgraves, 1989;McLaughlin et al, 1983). People consider wrongdoers' remedial behavior as informative regarding their motives and character (Schmitt et al, 2004), and it is likely that victims therefore attributed wrongdoers' admission of guilt without apology to character flaws.…”
mentioning
confidence: 93%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Alternatively, victims may have considered it as a manifestation of wrongdoers' callousness, i.e. as an attempt by a wrongdoer to manipulate them and persuade the public to exonerate them (Holtgraves, 1989;McLaughlin et al, 1983). People consider wrongdoers' remedial behavior as informative regarding their motives and character (Schmitt et al, 2004), and it is likely that victims therefore attributed wrongdoers' admission of guilt without apology to character flaws.…”
mentioning
confidence: 93%
“…Second, most of the psychological research regarding apology has been in social psychological studies, where apology is traditionally seen as a form of remedial behavior, that is an attempt to explain the harmful act so that it becomes acceptable (Cody & McLaughlin, 1987;Goffman, 1968Goffman, , 1971Holtgraves, 1989;McLaughlin, Cody, & Rosenstein, 1983;Ohbuchi et al, 1989). Other forms of remedial behavior are denials, that is, where wrongdoers assert their innocence; excuses, as when wrongdoers minimize their responsibility; justifications (legitimization) of behavior and finally admissions of guilt without excuses.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This appears to be the case; the more severe the offence, the more elaborated (face preserving) the account (Gonzales et a McLaughlin, Cody and Rosenstein, 1983). The more aggravating (or face-threatening) a reproach, the greater the need for the speaker to support his or her own face.…”
Section: Accountsmentioning
confidence: 87%
“…The more aggravating (or face-threatening) a reproach, the greater the need for the speaker to support his or her own face. McLaughlin, Cody and Rosenstein (1983) and Schonbach (1990) found that aggravating reproaches tend to be followed by aggravating accounts -that is accounts with little or no face support for the hearer. Insofar as interpersonal variables such as status influence the degree of face-threat, these interpersonal variables should have a predictable effect on accounts.…”
Section: Accountsmentioning
confidence: 96%
See 1 more Smart Citation