Reconsidering self‐deprecation as a communication practice

Abstract

‘Self‐deprecation’ (SD) is widely understood within social psychology and popular culture as a form of self‐talk that reflects a cognitive state, such as low self‐esteem or negative self‐regard. However, most research on SD suffers theoretical and methodological problems that fail to account for how its cognitive and linguistic aspects can be reconciled. We know little about SD as it occurs in interactional settings. Utilizing a conversation analytic (CA) perspective that brackets cognitive explanations for linguistic phenomena, this paper draws on more than 100 hours of transcribed recordings of interactions from diverse settings to systematically examine the form and function of a common class of SD: critical comments by a speaker on their current talk or actions (self‐deprecatory meta‐comments; SDMCs). Analyses demonstrate that SDMCs are used in environments of possible or actual interactional trouble, and manage this trouble in different sequential positions. The paper shows that SDs can be treated as a communication practice. Rigorous analysis of SDMCs can enrich understanding of the construction of ‘identities’ in talk. It advances a CA understanding of the ascription of social actions, and the preference for self‐criticism over criticism by others. Findings suggest that widespread advice to self‐deprecate less may be invalid.

Influence of Life Satisfaction on Self-Esteem Among Young Adults: The Mediating Role of Self-Presentation

“… 66 On the contrary, individuals who assume self-depreciative behavior create their own image as being incompetent, insecure, and helpless. 67 Self-deprecation refers to negative self-evaluation, 68 the tendency to denigrate or disparage one’s own capabilities, 69 feeling unworthy or inferior.…”

Talking about breast symmetry in the breast cancer clinic: What can we learn from an examination of clinical interaction?

“…We know that self‐deprecations can be used by speakers to 'do' identity work, by presenting themselves as reflexive, analytic beings, able to recognize the potential criticism of others (in this case, that the patient may be ‘imagining it’), at the same time as inoculating themselves against, and preventing, just such criticism 65 . It appears to be used here to invite clinician alignment at precisely the point where such alignment may be lacking (note the barely audible ‘°°Mmm°°’ on line 35) 67,68 . As before, the surgeon now validates the patient by reassuring her that she has done ‘the right thing’ (lines 40‐47), before attending to the treatment options that can ‘improve that’ (line 50).…”

“…65 It appears to be used here to invite clinician alignment at precisely the point where such alignment may be lacking (note the barely audible '°°Mmm°°' on line 35). 67,68 As before, the surgeon now validates the patient by reassuring her that she has done 'the right thing' (lines 40-47), before attending to the treatment options that can 'improve that' (line 50).…”

Self-description in everyday interaction: Generalizations about oneself as accounts of behavior

“…A few studies have pointed to the trouble management function of self-deprecations (e.g. Speer, 2019;Whitehead, 2013;Niemi, 2016); according to Speer (2019), they work to manage or pre-empt trouble in different sequential positions relative to the (potentially) problematic action sequence. Here, the turn-initial self-generalization can be seen to orient to at least two potential complainables that need to be accounted for: the fact that Kati has drunk a bottle of champagne alone, and, more crucially for the ongoing situation, the fact that she is serving Taru cheap wine.…”