2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijintrel.2010.05.006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Facework in Syria and the United States: A cross-cultural comparison

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
19
0
1

Year Published

2011
2011
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 53 publications
0
19
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Instead, the use of self-defeating humor may be a strategy for minimizing one's perceived weaknesses, failures, and low self-esteem in order to avoid losing one's face. Since the first rule when communicating with people from the Arab world is not to let them lose face (Merkin & Ramadan, 2010), Arabians also value face. The findings on the relationships between facework and humor styles with a sample of Chinese university students in the present study are likely to be generalized to the Armenian and Lebanese contexts.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Instead, the use of self-defeating humor may be a strategy for minimizing one's perceived weaknesses, failures, and low self-esteem in order to avoid losing one's face. Since the first rule when communicating with people from the Arab world is not to let them lose face (Merkin & Ramadan, 2010), Arabians also value face. The findings on the relationships between facework and humor styles with a sample of Chinese university students in the present study are likely to be generalized to the Armenian and Lebanese contexts.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On the other hand, in low-power-distant and individualistic cultures, direct communication is preferred even if it threatens the relationship (Merkin and Ramadan 2010). Thus, the following hypothesis is posed:…”
Section: Sexual Harassmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Gender offers a unique social group for consideration as this categorization is one of the most inescapable and salient social categorizations (Williams, 1984, Gelade, Dobson, & Auer, 2008Goffman, 1977;Merkin & Ramadan, 2010;Stockard & Johnson, 1979) and reflects an institutionalized power structure where masculinity or manhood is considered superior to other groups (Gelade, Dobson, & Auer, 2008;Merkin & Ramadan, 2010). Precarious manhood (Vandello, Bosson, Cohen, Burnaford, & Weaver 2008), an extension of social identity theory as it relates to masculinity, suggests that manhood is a tenuous group status that, in comparison to womanhood, is viewed as an achieved status rather than a biological event.…”
Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning
confidence: 99%