Before Breaking Bad News: Relationships Among Topic, Reasons for Sharing, Messenger Concerns, and the Reluctance to Share the News

Dibble, Jayson L.; Sharkey, William F.

doi:10.1080/01463373.2017.1286363

Cited by 11 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Fourth, we applied a research paradigm where either sender or receiver was responsible for the issue at hand, following the impression management model. Although disapproval and disappointments are the most salient topics regarding the delivery of bad news (Dibble & Sharkey, 2017), externally rooted positive or negative messages could pronounce relational goals even more in a desire for joint celebration or mutual comfort.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, in negative situations, we assume that people choose channels with a higher buffer effect for self-locus than other-locus situations for two reasons: first, the negatively valenced episodes of our paradigm, "confess" and "accuse," represent two instances that Brown and Levinson (1987) characterize as primarily threatening the speaker's or the hearer's face, respectively (Wilson et al, 1998). Second, people reportedly feel more reluctant when they are themselves the locus of the situation (Dibble & Sharkey, 2017). Regarding positive situations, we expect a similar effect of locus for another two reasons: First, Brown and Levinson (1987) compared the face threat of bringing good news about oneself (because it also indicates little care for the other) with the delivery of bad news about the recipient, an act which reportedly elicits reluctance.…”

Section: Locus Of the Issuementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In close relationships, however, the concern for self-presentation decreases (Brown & Levinson, 1987), selforiented motives fade (Dubois et al, 2016), and the transmission of bad news is more likely (Weenig et al, 2001). Moreover, a concern for the relationship itself, instead of self or other, might be decisive in close relationships (Ledbetter & Herbert, 2020), leading to the avoidance of buffering media out of considered appropriateness Westerman & Westerman, 2013), moral responsibility (Weenig et al, 2014), or as a means to signal the strength of the relationship (Dibble & Sharkey, 2017). Thus, although reluctance in the delivery of bad news has also been reported equally for friends and strangers (Dibble & Levine, 2013) and different channels (Dibble, 2018), we do not expect this reluctance to be represented in the actual choice of channels.…”

Section: Relationship Of the Interlocutersmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Buffer Effect

Tretter

Diefenbach

2022

Journal of Media Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The mediating nature of communication technologies (e.g., telephone, voice message, or chat) can buffer the experience of conversations by establishing a figurative shield between sender and receiver. From a psychological perspective, this buffer effect may affect senders’ communication channel choices depending on their respective communication goals. Building on the impression management model of strategic channel use ( O’Sullivan, 2000 ), we examine how valence and locus of a message and the interlocutors’ relationship lead to differences in the buffer effect people establish through their channel choices. In two vignette-based, mixed-design studies, participants indicated which channel they would choose to communicate with a receiver in different situations, depending on the valence of the episode (positive vs. negative; Studies 1 and 2), who is at the center of the issue (self vs. other; Studies 1 and 2), and their interpersonal closeness (friend vs. acquaintance; Study 2). In Study 1, people chose channels with a higher buffer effect for negative (vs. positive) issues and episodes that focused on themselves (vs. the receiver). Study 2 supported a moderating effect of relationship. While people still chose channels with higher buffer effects for negative (vs. positive) issues in the acquaintance condition, the opposite was true when people were to communicate with friends. We attribute this to the higher salience of relational compared to self-presentational communication goals under increasing interpersonal closeness. The present studies expand the impression management model by focusing on the subjective buffer effect of communication channels and introducing the decisive role of relationship in its application.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Locus Of the Issuementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Relationship Of the Interlocutersmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Buffer Effect

Tretter

Diefenbach

2022

Journal of Media Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Studies have identified that effective communication of health related information to patients and their families can reduce violence against healthcare 7-9. However, most of the people are reluctant to communicate any potentially disturbing or stressful information; considering it to be “Bad News” 10,11. Breaking bad news may lead to disappointment, distress and aggression in the receiver(s) and has a high potential to provoke violence depending on contextual factors 10,11…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, most of the people are reluctant to communicate any potentially disturbing or stressful information; considering it to be “Bad News” 10,11. Breaking bad news may lead to disappointment, distress and aggression in the receiver(s) and has a high potential to provoke violence depending on contextual factors 10,11…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Breaking Bad News: A contextual model for Pakistan

Baig¹,

Tanzil²,

Ali³

et al. 2018

Pak J Med Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives:The purpose of the study was to identify the sequence of violence that ensues after breaking bad news and develop a contextual model of breaking bad news and develop a model contextual for Pakistan.Methods:A qualitative exploratory study was conducted using Six FGDs and 14 IDIs with healthcare providers working in the emergency and the obstetrics and gynecology departments of tertiary care hospitals of Karachi, Pakistan. Data was transcribed and analyzed to identify emerging themes and subthemes using thematic content analysis.Results:Impatience or lack of tolerance, lack of respect towards healthcare providers, unrealistic expectations from healthcare facility or healthcare staff were identified as main reasons that provoked violence after breaking bad news. A conceptual five step model was developed to guide communication of bad news by the health care providers. On initial testing the model was found to be effective in de-escalation of violence.Conclusion:Communication of bad news requires application of specific approaches to deal with contextual challenges for reducing violence against healthcare.

show abstract