Responses to refusals of requests: Face threat and persistence, persuasion and forgiving statements

International Journal of Phytoremediation

Volumn 52, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 347-356

  Johnson, Danette Ifert ^a   Roloff, Michael E ^b   Riffee, Melissa A ^c  

^a ITHACA COLLEGE   (United States)

^b NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c EMERSON COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

Face threat; Persistence; Politeness theory; Refusals

Indexed keywords

EID: 34548359984     PISSN: 15226514     EISSN: 15497879     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01463370409370205     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Baxter, L. A., 1984. An investigation of compliance-gaining as politeness. Human Communication Research, 10: 427–456.
2. Besson, A. L., Roloff, M. E., and Paulson, G. D., 1998. Preserving face in refusal situations. Communication Research, 25: 183–199.
3. Brown, P., and Levinson, S. C., 1987. Politeness: Some universals in language usage, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
4. Cai, D. A., and Wilson, S. R., 2000. Identify implications of influence goals: A cross-cultural comparison of interaction goals and facework. Communication Studies, 51: 307–328.
5. Craig, R. T., Tracy, K., and Spisak, F., 1986. The discourse of requests: Assessment of a politeness approach. Human Communication Research, 12: 437–468.
6. Davidson, J. A., 1990. “ Modifications of invitations, offers and rejections ”. In Interaction competence, Edited by: Psathas, G., 149–179. Washington, D.C.: University Press of America.
7. deTurck, M. A., 1985. A transactional analysis of compliance-gaining behavior: Effects of noncompliance, relational contexts and actors’ gender. Human Communication Research, 12: 54–78.
8. Ifert, D. E., and Roloff, M. E., 1996. Responding to rejected requests: Persistence and response type as functions of obstacles to compliance. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 15: 40–59.
9. Ifert, D. E., and Roloff, M. E., 1998. Understanding obstacles preventing compliance: Conceptualization and classification. Communication Research, 25: 131–153.
10. Johnson, D. I., Roloff, M. E., and Riffee, M. A., 2004. Politeness theory and refusals of requests: Face threat as a function of expressed obstacles. Communication Studies, 55: 406–417.
11. Kunkel, A. D., Wilson, S. R., Olufowote, J., and Robson, S., 2003. Identify implications of influence goals: Initiating, intensifying and ending romantic relationships. Western Journal of Communication, 67: 382–412.
12. Lim, T., 1990. “ Politeness behavior in social situations ”. In Seeking compliance: The production of interpersonal influence messages, Edited by: Dillard, J. P., 75–86. Scottsdale, AZ: Gorsuch Scarisbrick.
13. Meyer, J. R., 2002. Contextual influences on the pursuit of secondary goals in request messages. Communication Monographs, 69: 189–203.
14. Roloff, M. E., Janiszewski, C. A., McGrath, M. A., Burns, C. S., and Manrai, L. A., 1988. Acquiring resources from intimates: When obligation substitutes for persuasion. Human Communication Resaerch, 14: 364–396.
15. Schegloff, E. A., 1988. Presequences and indirection: Applying speech act theory to ordinary conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 12: 55–62.
16. Wilson, S. R., Aleman, C. G., and Leatham, G. B., 1998. Identify implications of influence goals: A revised analysis of face-threatening acts and application to seeking compliance with same-sex friends. Human Communication Research, 25: 64–96.
17. Wilson, S. R., and Kunkel, A. W., 2000. Identity implications of influence goals: Similarities in perceived face threats and facework across sex and close relationships. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 19: 195–221.