Situational Urgency and Conversational Retreat

Conversational Constraint Theory posits that preferred levels of efficiency and social appropriateness for particular conversational encounters fluctuate in response to situational, relational, and personal factors, and these fluctuations alter and determine which behaviors are acceptable tactics for achieving goals in these encounters. This research examines the situational factor of urgency, its influence on minimally preferred levels of efficiency and social appropriateness, and its influence on the acceptability of tactics for unilaterally withdrawing from conversations. A three phase research process finds that (a) efficiency and appropriateness assessments of conversational retreat tactics are goal dependent and within-goal variant, stable over time and across subpopulations; (b) situational urgency increases the preferred level for efficiency only; and (c) situational urgency alters tactical acceptability such that appropriate though less efficient tactics acceptable in nonurgent situations are unacceptable in urgent situations.

[1]  Failure of the Social Desirability Response Set Hypothesis , 1988 .

[2]  Steven R. Wilson,et al.  On the Continued Undesirability of Item Desirability A Reply to Boster, Hunter, and Seibold , 1988 .

[3]  Kathy Kellermann.  Communication: Inherently strategic and primarily automatic , 1992 .

[4]  J. Thayer,et al.  Time urgency: the construct and its measurement. , 1991, The Journal of applied psychology.

[5]  Judith M. Dallinger,et al.  Arguers as editors , 1990 .

[6]  Steven E. Clayman,et al.  The Production of Punctuality: Social Interaction, Temporal Organization, and Social Structure , 1989, American Journal of Sociology.

[7]  William Douglas,et al.  Affinity-Testing in Initial Interactions , 1987 .

[8]  William H. Ross,et al.  The Mediator as Leader , 1990 .

[9]  Susan Kemper,et al.  Memory for the dimensions of requests , 1981 .

[10]  R. Shepard.  Representation of structure in similarity data: Problems and prospects , 1974 .

[11]  D. Korten.  Situational determinants of leadership structure , 1962 .

[12]  H. H. Clark,et al.  Telephone goodbyes , 1981, Language in Society.

[13]  J. Lockard,et al.  Human postural signals: Stance, weight-shifts and social distance as intention movements to depart , 1978, Animal Behaviour.

[14]  Charles R. Berger,et al.  Studies in interpersonal epistemology: III. Anticipated interaction, self‐monitoring, and observational context selection , 1981 .

[15]  J. Lanzetta,et al.  Group Behavior Under Stress , 1955 .

[16]  Arie W. Kruglanski,et al.  Person Perception by Introverts and Extraverts Under Time Pressure: Effects of Need for Closure , 1991 .

[17]  Anat Rafaeli,et al.  Busy stores and demanding customers: How do they affect the display of positive emotion? , 1990 .

[18]  J. Pittam,et al.  Strangers in a Strange Land Interaction Management on Internet Relay Chat , 1997 .

[19]  Elizabeth M. Goering,et al.  Item Desirability Effects in Compliance‐Gaining Research Seven Studies Documenting Artifacts in the Strategy Selection Procedure , 1988 .

[20]  S. Albert,et al.  Ending social encouters , 1978 .

[21]  S. Newell,et al.  The social confrontation episode , 1988 .

[22]  Roderick P. Hart,et al.  The rhetoric of goodbye: Verbal and nonverbal correlates of human leave‐taking , 1973 .

[23]  C. Gallois,et al.  The last ten turns: Behavior and sequencing in friends' and strangers' conversational findings , 1985 .

[24]  A. Kruglanski,et al.  Group members' reactions to opinion deviates and conformists at varying degrees of proximity to decision deadline and of environmental noise. , 1991, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[25]  R. Shepard.  The analysis of proximities: Multidimensional scaling with an unknown distance function. II , 1962 .

[26]  Kathleen Bardovi-Harlig,et al.  Closing the conversation: Evidence from the academic advising session , 1992 .

[27]  S. Kanekar,et al.  Perception of direct versus indirect helping behaviour in a hypothetical criminal emergency. , 1990 .

[28]  Kathy Kellermann,et al.  Strategies of conversational retreat: When parting is not sweet sorrow , 1991 .

[29]  Peter J. Carnevale,et al.  Time pressure and strategic choice in mediation , 1988 .

[30]  Adrian Furnham,et al.  Social Situations by Michael Argyle , 1981 .

[31]  Richard H. Price,et al.  Behavioral appropriateness and situational constraint as dimensions of social behavior. , 1974 .

[32]  P. Carnevale,et al.  Time Pressure and the Development of Integrative Agreements in Bilateral Negotiations , 1986 .

[33]  A. Rafaeli.  When clerks meet customers: A test of variables related to emotional expressions on the job. , 1989 .

[34]  Kathy Kellermann,et al.  Threats, Suggestions, Hints, and Promises: Gaining Compliance Efficiently and Politely. , 1996 .

[35]  Daniel J. Isenberg,et al.  Some effects of time-pressure on vertical structure and decision-making accuracy in small groups , 1981 .

[36]  Ola Svenson,et al.  Choices and judgments of incompletely described decision alternatives under time pressure , 1990 .