A thesis submitted to the Faculty of the partial fulfillment of the requirements fo in Communication.

December, 1381

-THE PROPERTY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE

COIQLIMCE-GAINING TECHNIQUES IN CONVERSATION:

A NATURALISTIC STUDY

Paula Jane Welldon

University of gelaware in the degree of Master of Arts

COMPLIANCE-GAINING TECHNIQUES I N CONVERSATION:

A NATURALISTIC STUDY

Paula Jane Welldon

Approved :

Professor i n charge of t h e s i s on behalf of t he Advisory Committee

Approved :

Chairman of the Department of Communication

w Approved :

R. X Hurray, ~h .D/ \ Univers i ty Coordinat r f o r Graduate S tud ie s tJ

ACKNOWLEDGEKENTS

With special thanks to:

M.C.H., who gave up Saturdays;

K.M.R., who got up early;

and especially

C.F.C., who stayed up late.

iii

TABLE OF CONTEXTS

(.xAP'nR

I IXTR0I)UCTION AWD STAT1- OF THE PROBLEM

If REVIEW OF BELATED LITERATURE

I11 METHOD

I V RESULTS

V DISCUSSIOS AND IMPLICATIONS

VI D E V n O M E F T AND APPLICATION O F A MODEL FCR CUXVEIlSATIONAL CO?3PLIaMCE-GAINXNG TECHNTQUES

VII CONCLUSIONS ABD RECOMMF21DATIOXS FOR FUTURE iZESJiMCH

REFERENCE NOTES

APPEND1 CES

A PARTICIPANT COKSENT F3RM

B COMPLIANCE-GAINING TECXNLQUES LWDING S CEEXE

C SAMPLE QUESTIONNAIRE FOR USE OF COMPLIANCE-GAINING TECXNIQUES

D SUMMARY OF mWELL AND S C M C T T FACTOR ANALYSIS OF 16 COMPLIANCE-GAINING BEWLYI ORS

E COMBINED FJRN T T ~ FOX EACH FACULTY MEETIi-G

PAGE

1

13

5 1

5 8

73

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE

1 RANK-ORDERING OF COMPLIANCE-GAINING TECHNIQUE PREFERENCE

2 MEAbT SCORES FOR ALL DATA CLASSIFICATIONS FOR ALL COMFLIANCE-GAINING TECHNIQUES (QUESTIONNAIRE)

3 T-TEST RESULTS FOR QUESTIONNAIRE DATA DIFFERELYCES BETWEEN MEAN SCORES FOR ALL TEGTNIQUES

4 TOTAL TURN TIME, NUMBER OF TURNS, PlIEAN TURN LEHGTH AND A W E TURF3 TIMI?, FOR EACfi PAR!IXCIPANT

5 ANOVA SUBGROUP AVERAGE TIMES: SEX X STATUS

6 RESULTS OF THE DUNCAN'S MULTIPLE RANGE TESTS COMPARING ANOVA SUBGROUPS

7 MEAH SCORES FOR FUNCTIONS LISTED IN FACULTY IGETING QITESTI0NNAIR.E

8 NUMBER OF OCCUEENCES OF EACH COMPLIANCE-GAINING TECHNIQUE (2ND DATA-CODING)

9 NDMBER OF COMPLIANCE-GAINING TECHNIQUES USED BY EACH SUBGROUP (2ND DATA-CODING)

PAGE

6 1

COMPLIANCE-GAINING TECHNIaUES IN CONVERSATION:

A NATURALISTIC STUDY

Abstract

This research is an analysis of compliance-gaining techniques used

in naturally-occurring conversation in faculty meetings. The central

concern of the study is the influence of sex, of status and of the

interaction of sex and status on verbal compliance-gaining behavior.

Application of a coding scheme derived from Narwell and ~chmitt's

16 compliance-gaining techniques isolated few compliance-gaining

attempts in 370 conversational episodes, even though participants

reported that compliance gaining was occurring. Total turn time was

calculated for the sex/status subgrouys. Males had significantly more

average turn time per meeting than females. Tenured faculty had

significantly more average turn time than tenure-track and

non-ternre-track faculty; tenure-track faculty had significantly more

average turn time than non-tenure-track faculty. The tenured male had

significantly more average turn tim per meeting than all other

v i i

sex/status subgroups. Although the data analysis was inconclusive, no

significant differences were obtained among subgroups in the use of

compliance-gaining techniques.

As a result of this analysis, a descriptive approach to the data

was proposed, and an original, data-based model of compliance-gaining

techniques was developed. The new coding scheme was applied to the date

from one faculty meeting, and 61 compliance-gaining attempts were

isolated in 82 episodes. One third of the attempts either occurred in a

series with other attempts by the same interlocutor, or occurred as

reaction8 to other techniques by different interlocutors. The technique

Simple Statement was the most used technique. Distribution of

compliance-gaining techniques across the faculty subgroups was fouod to

be essentially even, excluding the department chair, who used far more

techniques than the other subgroups. The number of identifiable

compliance-gaining attempts was believed to reflect the greater validity

of behavior-based coding categoriss.

CHAPTER I: INTRORUCTIOX AND STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

"Every human being is motivated t o i n t e r a c t e f f e c t i v e l y with h i s environment: t he d r i v e t o be i n t e r p e r s o n a l l y coapetent is t h e d r i v e t o produce e f f e c t s on o r i n f luance one ' s world."

( ~ o c h n e r 3 Kel ly , 1974, p. 286)

Overview +nd purpose. The purpose of t h i s research i s t o examine

the use of compliance-gaining techniques i n conversa t ion a s a f f e c t e d by

sex of t he speaker , s t a t u s of t h e speaker , and t h e i n t e r a c t i o n of sex

and s t a t u s . I n o r d e r t o de f ine t h e r o l e of compliance ga in ing i n

i n t e rpe r sona l conmunicetion, i t i s f i r s t necessary to reviesr t h i s

bshavior i n l i g h t of what o t h e r r e sea rche r s have s a i d about

i n t e rpe r sona l power and r e l a t i o n a l c o n t r o l i n i n t e r a c t i o n .

In t e rpe r sona l communication. The process by which human beings

de f ine thease lves and o t h e r s is i n t e r p e r s o n a l communicstion, which ns s

been descr ibed a s " t h e t r a n s f e r of symbolic information which has ss i t s

p r inc ipa l goa l t h e coord ina t ion of human a c t i v i t y i n regsrd t o the

Presenta t ion , development, and v a l i d a t i o n of i nd iv idua l se l f -concepts"

(Cushman 4 Florence, 1974, p. 1 3 ) . People devote nuch energy 20 t h e

cont ro l of i n t e r a c t i o n because i n t e r a c t i o n is t h e primary v e h i c l e of

2

self-definition. Overtly, covertly, knowingly or unknowingly,

in a conversation set out to manage that conversation,

which in turn will manage the relationship, and thus the individual's

self-definition (~aley, 1963; Steinberg & Miller, 1975).

Haley (1 963) states that a fundamental precept of communication

theory is that every individual attempts to control the definition of

the relationship. Once the message is sent from one person to another,

the sender is, by the act of sending itself, seeking to define the

relationship and herself/himself (~atzlawick, Beavin & Jackson, 1967;

Griffin & Heider, 1967). A social situation, established when two

people enter into communication, generates rules and apportions roles to

the participants by virtue of their having set in motion a communication

system (~eusch, 1968). People begin defining the relationship by first

negotiating the comunication system that will govern their continued

interaction. In this view, every act ~f message sending becomes an

interaction maneuver, implying a degree of purposiveness on the part of

the sender, or minimally, a degree of goal orientation (~eusch, 1965;

Marwell & Schmitt, 1967). Further, the receiver, as a necessary

contributor to the definition of the relationship, chooses from an array

of behaviors to respond to the initial message, and this response itself

becomes a maneuver, and so cn shroughout the course of the interaction.

Marvel1 and Schnitf suggest that all behavior is directed at satisfying

an individual's desires through zhe reorganization of the environment,

and consequently that "social behavior becomes the manipulation of other

people t o achieve the g o a l s of t he a c t o r , and t h e s tudy of i n t e r a c t i o n

becoses t h e s tudy of s o c i a l c o n t r o l " (~.350).

Maneuvers may take the form of d e s c r i p t i o n s , a s s e r t i o n s o r d e n i a l s

88 i n t e r a c t o r s work ou t t h e i r s e l f and r e l a t i o n a l d e f i n i t i o n s (~ushman 4

Florance, 1974). Consider, f o r example, t h e f r i e n d / f r iend dyad i n which

Friend #I h a s sl-days sade the d e c i s i o n concern ing Saturday n i g h t ' s

a c t i v i t y : When Friend #1 says , " m y d o n ' t you dec ide what r e should do

tonight?" t h e remark could be 8 c o n v e r s a t i o n a l maneuver aimed a t

de f in ing o r r ede f in ing s e l f ( " I Want t o be l e s s bossy") o r the

r e l a t i o n s h i p ("We should s h a r e decision-making r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s " ) . When

Friend #2 responds, "No, you go ahead and dec ide , " t he maneuver could

de f ine s e l f ( 1 a martyr") o r r e l a t i o n s h i p ( " I l i k e th ings t h e way

they a r e between us"). This S e t of mansuvers inc ludes both a s s e r t i o n s

and d e n i a l s i n both o v e r t and cove r t behav io r s ; and, i n f a c t , both

p a r t i e s a r e a t t e a p t i n g , through t h e i r i n t e r a c t i o n nanauvers, t o con t ro l

t he d e f i n i t i o n of themselves and the r e l s t i o n s h i p . E s s a n t i a l l y , then,

con t ro l is 3 b a s i c i n t e r a c t i o n a l dimension, s o b a s i c , i n f a c t , t h a t i t

unde r l i e s a l l s o c i a l behavior , and thus a l l communicstion.

Control. Control , s lung wi th i n c l u s i o n snd a f f e c t i o n , is c i t e d as

one of t h e bas i c i n t e r p e r s o n a l needs and is defined as " t h s need L-o

maintain a s a t i s f a c t o r y r e l a t i o n with people wi th r a spec t t o con t ro l and

power . . . (which) mani fes ts i t s e l f a s a d e s i r e f o r power, a u t h o r i t y o r

con t ro l over o t h e r s ~ n d t he re fo r2 o v e r one ' s f u t u r e " ( ~ h u t z , 1956, p.

4

177). Elsewhere, power has been def ined a s a t t r i b u t e d power ( ~ c h o p l e r &

Layton, 1974.) ; p o t e n t i a l i n f luence ( ~ a v e n 4 Kmglanski , 1970) ; and

coercion, the a b i l i t y t o ob ta in obedience by force ( ~ e b e r , 1947). I n

the es t imat ion of theae r e sea rche r s , power is the p o t e n t i a l t o do, a c t ,

produce o r determine. Cont ro l , then, is the behaviora l and

psychological extension of power--it is power put i n t o e f f e c t .

Control a l s o has been descr ibed a s the a b i l i t y t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n

r e l a t i o n a l d e f i n i t i o n ( ~ a l e y , 1 963) ; s o c i a l inf luence ( ~ s v e n &

Kruglanaki, 1970) ; dominance ( Brand t , 1980) ; s o c i a l induct ion of

behavior change (Kelman , 1 974) ; and inducing appropr i a t e behaviors i n

o thers ( ~ i p n i s , 1974). The view t h a t any message is an i n t e r a c t i o n a l

maneuver and hence an at tempt t o c o n t r o l , makes c l e a r t he not ion t h a t

every ind iv idua l i s a power-user, s i n c e any a c t of c o ~ m i c s t i o n i s an

a c t of c o n t r o l ( ~ r o s t B Vilmo t , 1978).

The s tudy of s o c i a l c o n t r o l must to a g r a a t ex ten t involve the

Study of ve rba l behavior, because verba l behavior comprises s

s i g n i f i c a n t p a r t of i n t e r a c t i o n . I n conversa t ion , c o n t r o l tvchniques o r

maneuvers can su r face i n any o f s e v e r a l dimensions: who speaks, the

topics introduced, when speaking begins and ends, how o f t e n a speaker

ge t s t o speak, and t h e s o r t s of messages speakers s e l e c t .

5

Control and r s l a t i o n a l d e f i n i t i o n . Any conversa t ion , any

d iscourse , involves two dimensions which are knoirn a s r e p o r t i n g and

cowanding ( ~ a t i r , 1967). The r e p o r t corresponds t o t h e content

dimension of t h e message, and t h e command a s p e c t corresponds t o t h e

imp l i ca t ions 09 t h e message ( ~ a t z l a w i c k et &. , 1967).

Further , t h e r e p o r t p a r t of t h e message is analogous t o t h e b a s i c

proposi t ion o r i d e a t i o n a l conten t of t h e message ( ~ a t z , 1977; Clark &

Clark, 1977; Dore, 1973). I n s h o r t , t h e primary information contained

i n t h e message is i t s repor t . Command desc r ibes t h e a spec t of a message

which s t r u c t u r e s , c i rcumscribes o r imposes behavior between t h e

i n t e r a c t o r s ; t he re , comand is t h e opera t ion which provides r e l a t i o n a l

information t o t h e i n t e r a c t o r s . The comaand func t ion is 3 r e l a t i o n a l

de f in i t i on . For example, cons ider t h e s e two s ta temznts which con ta in

approximat e l g t h e same i d e a t i o n a l information ( ~ r o ~ o s i t i o n ) : a ) "The

proper cooking time f o r t h i s quiche is t h i r t y minutes"; and b) "That

quiche should be done by now; i t ' s been i n t h e oven h a l f an hour."

While t he propos i t ions a r e roughly i d e n t i c a l , t h e two s t a t e s e n t 3 c l e a r l y

s e t f o r t h q u i t e d i f f e r e n t s o r t s of r a l a t i o n a l informs2ion.

Compliance gaining. Marwell and Schmitt po in t ou t t h a t even i f

in te rac t ion-as-soc ia l -cont ro l is too broad a gene ra l i za t ion , i t i s

nevertheless t r u e t h a t people devote much time and energy t o t r y i n g to

get o t h e r people t o respcnd i n ways they want. For t he purposs of t h i s

ressarch, t h i s e f fo - t a t g e t t i n g o t h e r people t o respond i n des i red ways

is ca l led compliance gaining.

According t o Kipnis { 1974). power begins with a power mot iva t ion

("an aroused need s t a t e t h a t can be s a t i s f i e d by inducing appropr i a t e

behaviors i n o t h e r s w ) , which cause8 t h e power t o become a c o n t r o l

a t tempt , i.e., a reques t f o r compliance. Thus, conpl iance ga in ing is

one s p e c i f i c man i f e s t a t ion of con t ro l . Power i s t h e underlying

motivat ion of c o % t r o l , and c o n t r o l is t h e underlying mot iva t ion of a

compliance-gaining at tempt .

One poss ib l e conclusion of t h i s reasoning i s t h a t a c e r t a i n

percentage of human i n t e r a c t i o n involves messages designed f o r ga in ing

compliance of o the r s . While compliance ga in ing may appear t o be a more

ove r t o r b l a t a n t r e l a t i o n s 1 a c t i v i t y than t h e gene ra l commsnd a spec t of

meseages, i t is r e l a t e d t o t h e command a s p e c t of messages because of i t s

inherent imp l i ca t ions of r e l a t i o n a l d e f i n i t i o n and c o n t r o l . However,

compliance-gaining as a r e l a t i o n a l v a r i a b l e does a d d i t i o n a l l y suggest

the not ions persuasion and p e r s u a d a b i l i t y ; and persuas ion , i n t u r n ,

implies t h e "conscious at tempt by one i n d i v i d u a l t o change the

a t t i t u d e s , b e l i e f s o r behavior of another i n d i v i d u a l . . . through t h e

transmission of some maassge" ( ~ e t t inghaus, 1930, p. 4 ) . Obviously

t h i s cons t ruc t r ep re sen t s , a t base, i n f l u e c c a ; snd compliance-gaining

attempts a r e a t tempts st r e l a t i o n a l i n f luence .

A t i s s u e , then , ape ques t ions regard ing what c o n s t i t u t e

compliance-gaining messages, how t h s s e messages d i f f e r from one another ,

and what f a c t o r s determine who u s e s which type o f compliance-gaining

7

massages and i n what contexts: That which c o n s t i t u t e s a

compliance-gaining attsmpt i n one context might no t i n another ,

dependiw on t h e s t a t u s o f t h s p a r t i c i p a n t s . For example, t he ques t ion

"DO you want t o go t o the s to re?" when d i r e c t e d t o a c h i l d from a mother

might be a c l e a r o rde r t o go t o the s t o r e . When d i r e c t e d from one

spouse t o another , i t msy be merely a r eques t f o r information o r

c l a r i f i c a t i o n . One way t o examine xho u s a s which type of

compliance-gaining a t tempts i s t o examine the e f f e c t s of s t a t u s on

compliance-gaining behavior. S i m i l a r l y , because t h e sex v a r i a b l e

appears t o s i g n i f i c a n t l y in f luence many behaviors , t h i s v a r i a b l z i s one

to cons ider when at tempting t o examine d i f f e r e n c e s i n compliance-gaining

messages. A number of r e sea rche r s sugges t t h z t s way t o approach these

quest ions is t o examine t h e e f f e c t s o f speaker s t a t u s and speaker sex on

coaversat ion (Thorne Ek Henley , 1975 ; Lakof f , 1 975 ; Zimmerman 4 Wts t ,

1975; Pa r l ee , 1979). This , thsn , is t h e aim o f t h i s research.

S t a t u s inf luence; The ques t ion of who uses a compliance-gaining

technique and i n which s e t t i n g s is p a r t i a l l y addressed within the

dimension of s t a t u s . Inf luence can be obtained through exchanges of

competency, wherein t h e i n f l u e n c e r can f u r t h e r a n o t h e r ' s goa l by v i r t u e

of h i d h e r s k i l l , o r through exchanges of m a t e r i a l goods o r ues l th .

Addit ional ly, inf luence can be exerc ised because of a parson ' s " r igh t , "

pos i t i on , t o ask f o r compliance and bscause of a t s r 3 e t ' s

"obi ig3t ionH to comply ( ~ r e n c h 3 Rsven, 1953; Raven I Kruglanski, 1973;

Raven, 1974). According r;o Michener and Burt (1 976 3 , l ag i t imlcy d i f f e r s

froa other f o r m of power bscsuse i t cen te r s i n t h e context o f the gmup

and can opera te only within the group. These researchers f u r t h e r def ine

the l e g i t i n a t e influence s i t u a t i o n a s a h i e r a r c h i c a l one i n which those

of super ior s t a t u s genera l ly inf luence those of subordinate s t a t u s . I n

the legitimacy condit ion, compliance-gaining techniques might l o g i c a l l y

proceed from the power of t h e pos i t ion , i.e., t h e s t a t u s o f the

influence??, a s opposed t o the power of the ind iv idua l i n the posi t ion

( ~ i c h e n e r % Bart , 1974).

A s i t u a t i o n t h a t c o n t r a s t s the d i f ferance bstween these two powers

be the case of the teacher who asks f o r and receives cooperation

from s tudents i n obeying a "No Smoking" regula t ion while i n t h a t

teacher 's c l a s s ; ho-daver, t h e sanre teacher could conceivably exerc ise

l i t t le o r no influenca (obta in ing l i t t l e o r no compl.iance) with the same

request made t o s tudents dr inking st the l o c a l tavern. Legitimacy,

then, with its a t tendant s t a t u s va r iab le , is both role- and s i tua t ion-

specif ic . Where S ta tus is c lea r -cu t , as is of ten the case i n

organizst ional h ierarchies , compliance-gaining s t r a t e g i e s nay d i f f e r

from those used where s t a t u s i s ambiguous.

Michener and Burt underscore the f a c t t h a t i n na tu ra l s ~ t t i n g s ,

influence can be mul t i -d i rec t ional . Fox and !%ore (1979), i n t h e i r

devs lopen t of an e x p c t s t i o n s t a t e s model, describe power and p res t ige

i n a group i n t a r n s of four behaviors: ac t ion oppor tuni t ies ,

Perfomance outputs, agreement and d i sagreemnt , and acceptance o r

rejection of influence. They suggest that these behaviors result from

selflother expectations based on specific and diffuse characteristics.

Specific characteristics include skills and talents, and diffuse

characteristics include sex, race and status characteristics. This

definition of status does not imply the same legitimacy that

hierarchical status does; and, in fact, discussions of status

inconsistency (in which persons are ranked as both low and high in

status depending on the status characteristics) do not generally include

status clarified or legitimized by title or position within the group

(~rosbie, 1979).

In social settings, status of individuals must be inferred from

status cues of either the specific (e.g., skills) or diffuse

characteristics (e.g., sex) suggested by Fox and Moore. Lacking any

sort of overt, unambiguous status markers (such as badges or titles),

interactors in social situations would be most likely to assume what is

socially or stereotypically the norm. Thus issues of sex and race could

be integral in influencing an individual's status detelminations, and an

individual's choice of compliance-gaining techniq~e. Once status

assumptions are made, interaction patterns may tend to reflect those

assuinptions. In general, verbal behavior reflects the nature of sex,

class, racial and ethnic dominance; it is a subtle social indicator of

f.

10

Sex inf luences . In r ecen t y e a r s s o c i a l s c i ence has begun' t o

t h e d i f f e r ences between male and female behavior. L i n g u i s t i c

p r e e a t i c s and contemporary i n t e r p e r s o n a l comnunication s tudy a r e

add res s ing sex as a v a r i a b l e which in f luences language and i n t e r a c t i v e

s t y l e . Nonverbal behaviors appear t o r e f l e c t d i f f e r e n t i a l use of

i n f luence ( ~ e n l e y , 1975). Males and females show marked d i f f e r e n c e s i n

s e l f -d i sc losu re , touching behavior and i n t e r r u p t i n g behavior such t h a t

the behaviors of malee p a r a l l e l high power behaviors , and those of

femsles , low power. In male/femsle dyads, gender h s s s s i g n i f i c a n t

impact on power s t r a t e g i e s . Men perce ive themselvea a s having g r e a t e r

power and women, l e s s power; t hus men use d i r e c t , b i l a t e r a l s t r a t e g i e s

i n e x p e c t a t i o n of compliance, whi le women use i n d i r e c t , u n i l a t e r a l

s t r a t e g i e s ( ~ a l b o 8 Peplau , 1 990) . The c o n t r o l dimension of

r e l a t i o n s h i p s is of primary importance i n t hese s t u d i e s and has

imp l i ca t ions f o r t h e e f f e c t s o f poorerfulneas/powerlessness on

male/female s e l f - d e f i n i t i o n . Lakoff (1975). i n h e r d i scuss ion of

language, p o i n t s ou t t h e d i s p a r i t i e s i n English t h a t " r a f l e c t i n ( t h e i r )

P a t t e r n of usage t h e d i f f e r e n c e between t h e r o l e of women . . . and

t h a t of men" (p. 49). There can be l i t t l e doubt t h a t language and

speech s t y l e a f f e c t t he way people de f ine themselves and d e f i n e o t h e r s

(Erikson e t a l . , 1973). A s n r e s u l t , sex- ro le s t e r e o typing is an

cons ide ra t ion i n the a n a l y s i s of c o n t r a s t s between male and

speech s t y l e s .

Conventional sex-role s te reotypes include not ions of female

powerlessness, a s r e f l e c t e d i n "weaker sex" desc r ip t ions ranging from

the female i n o rgan iza t iona l s e t t i n g s who "lacks t r u e l eade r sh ip

po ten t i a l , " t o the one i n t h e "Coldpower" commercial who smiles happi ly ,

simperingly (and s i l e n t l y ) when a masculine voice-over advises her how

to do the laundry (a r e f l e c t i o n of s o c i a l s e t t i n g ) . I n the l a t t e r

example, the unseen male has somehow a g r e a t e r s t a t u s than the v i s i b l e ,

but b ra in le s s , female. The communication s t y l e s , inc luding

compliance-gaining and compliance-giving, simply r e in fo rce what i s

already there : Men a r e l i s t e n e d t o ; women a r e n ' t . The Language and

s t y l e of t h i s c o m e r c i a 1 make t h i s poin t c l e a r .

Despite the research done i n a v a r i e t y of contexts ranging from

courtrooms ( ~ r i k e o n et g., 1978) t o i n t i a a t e dyads ( ~ a l b o & Peplau,

1980), many quest ions regarding t h e i s sue of male versus female

communication s t i l l remain. And, indeed, many ques t ions regarding the

ac tua l behaviors people use i n " g e t t i n g t h e i r own way" remain. A

cen t ra l concern of t h i s research i s t o t r y t o determine what a c t u a l l y

k: g takes place when people t a l k t o people. It is not enaugh t o i n f e r

e n t i r e p r o f i l e s of behavior and complete s t r a t e g i e s on the b a s i s of 1

9ues t iomai res administered a f t e r the f a c t . Na tu ra l ly -occur~ ing

behaviors i n na tu ra l s e t t i n g s would seem t o be the bes t i nd ica to r s of

what i t i s t h a t people do when they i n t e r a c t with one another

e ( ~ r e e n b e r ~ , 1975 ; Pearce, 1977; Hickson, 1977) , To thoroughly examine t L. F power, i n f lue tce oz con t ro l , a n a l y s i s of face-to-face i n t e r a c t i ~ n i s

a essent ia l .

I

12

I n t e r a c t i o n of sex and s t a t u s . I n s o c i a l s i t u a t i o n s , s t a t u s can be

a very s u b t l e , ambiguous v a r i a b l e , whereas sex of speaker gene ra l ly is

not. Like o t h e r mani fes ta t ions of s t e reo typ ing , given a l ack of

r e l e v m t cues regarding one ' s s t a t u s i n a conversat ion, t r a d i t i o n a l

s te reotypes p reva i l . Thus women can be expected t o t a l k l e e s , i n t e r r u p t

l e s s , o f f e r more top ic s and more reinforcement than men do because women

do not have t h e same "legi t imacy," a s defined by French and Raven, t h a t

men do ( ~ a k i n s & Eakins, 1978). These behaviors a r e gene ra l ly expected;

the ambimi ty of s t a t u s would tend t o produce soc ia l ly - sc r ip t ed

in t e rac t ions between males and females, with males being more powerful

and females being l e s s powerful. Natural ly-occurr ing conversat ion

should provide some i n s i g h t i n t o t h e e f f e c t s of s t a t u s and sex on

speaker conversa t ional s t y l e , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n terms of

compliance-gaining techniques. However, whether o r not i n t e r a c t i v e

maneuvers employed by males and females r e s u l t from innate

predispos i t ions is , a s y e t , unc lear . These s t y l e s may r e s u l t from

speakers' a t tempts t o seek consis tency between t h e i r behavioral

enactments and o the r s ' behavioral expecta t ions . I n e i t h e r case , the

e f fec ts of s t a t u s and sex cannot e a s i l y be addressed by observing

conversations i n s o c i a l gkt t inga where s t a t u s ambiguit ies e x i s t . Thus

research is needed t h a t s epa ra t e s these s t a t u s and sex v a ~ i a b l e s i n some

natural context where t h e s t a t u s h i e ra rchy i s c l e a r .

13

The problem. The c e n t r a l concern of t h i s s tudy i s t h e in f luence of

sex, of s t a t u s , and of sex and s t a t u s on v e r b a l compliance-gaining

behavior. I n nan-occupational s o c i a l s e t t i n g s , t h e impact of sex o r of

s t a t u s o r of both on conversa t ion cannot be r e a d i l y i d e n t i f i e d , because

research has revealed t h a t males a r e accorded h igher s o c i a l s t a t u s

merely by v i r t u e of being male. I n non-occupational s e t t i n g s , females

cannot a r b i t r a r i l y be assigned h igher s o c i a l s t a t u s so t h a t conversa t ion

could then be examined t o s e e i f t he d i f f e r e n c e s , a s f o r example i n

quant i ty of t a l k , a r e t h e r e s u l t o f e i t h e r t h e sex o r s t a t u s va r i ab l e .

This dilemma can be solved by s tudying a s e t t i n g i n which f e n a l e s

can be i d e n t i f i e d a s having higher s t a t u s then some males. The

occupational s e t t i n g provides observable status d i s t i n c t i o n s i n t h e form

of occupational p o s i t i o n t i t l e s . A un iv , e r s i t y i s such a s e t t i n g . The

question, then, is what e f f e c t w i l l s t a t u s ( a s i nd ica t ed by a pe r son ' s

t i t u l a r pos i t i on wi th in a department) o r sex o r both s t a t u s and sex have

i n determining the s p e a k e r ' s compliance-gaining a t tempts i n

CWVersation?

The mechanism through which compliance ga in ing w i l l be explored is

a coding scheme based on t h e compliance-gzining techniques proposed by

Marwell and Schmitt . The techniques a r e :

Promise: if you comply, I w i l l reward you.

2 * Threat: I f you do not comply, I w i l l punlsn you.

3 , Expertise-positive: If you comply, you will be rewarded because of the nature of things.

4. Expertise-negative: If you do not comply, you will be punished because of the nature of things.

5. Liking: Actor is friendly and helpful to get target in "good frame of mind" so that s/he will comply with request.

6. Pre-giving: Actor revards target before requesting compliance.

7. Averaive Stimulation: Actor continuouely punishes target, making cessation contingent on compliance.

8. Debt: You owe me compliance becatme of past favors.

9. Moral Appeal: You are immoral if you do not comply.

10. Self-feeling-positive: You will feel better about yourself if you comply.

11. Self-feeling-negative: You will feel worse about yourself if you do not comply.

12. Altercaeting-positive: A person with good qualities would comply.

13. Altercaeting-negative: Only a person with bad qualities would not comply.

14. Altruism: I need your compliance badly, so it would be altruistic of you to do it for me.

15. Esteem-positive: People you value will think better of you if you conply.

16- Esteem-negative: People you value will think worse of you if you do not comply.

Sycophantic Flattery: Because you are such a wonderful person, you will waat to comply.

Camaraderie: Since we are all in this together, you will want to comply.

15

See Appendix D for xarwell and ~chmitt's first- and second-order

For a complete description of the coding scheme, see Appendix B.

"Coding information added to original Marwell and Schmitt list of

compliance-gaining techaiques by researcher.

The following research questions a 6 structured to explore the

influences of sex and status and their interaction on conversational

compliance-gaining attempts, assessed through the Marwell and Schmitt

typology and total turn time measures. The faculty meeting setting is

which these questions will be

Research Questions:

1 - Will males and females differ in their use of and preferecce for

compliance-gaining techniques?

2 * status or occupational position be e fsctor ir. determining

trends in the use of and prsference for conplisnce-gaining

I

16

3 . Will any particular compliance-gaining technique be used more than

other techniques by the group as 3 whole?

4. will participants respond to the compliance-gaining questionnaire in

a manner consistent with their previously recorded catural verbal

behaviors?

5. Will compliance-gaining techniques in conversation tend to f o m

clusters, or etrategies, defined as "groups of techniques towards

which potential actors tend to respond similarly"? (#axwell &

Schmitt, !967; p. 351)

6. Will the techniques recorded in sctual conversation tend to fall

predominantly within any one of the Mardell and Schmitt first- and

second-order factors? (see Appendix D for description of first- and

second-order factors .)

7. Will measures of total talking time (suggested as an indication of a

speaker's social power by Eakins and ~akins), rsflect status and sex

differences of the speakers, and will this measure correspond to the

speaker's use of compliance-gaining techniques?

I~plications. The implications of the problem snd related research

questions are extensive. To begin with, as Miller et al. (1977)

"Ugg*st, if compliance-gaining strategies used by intersc tors can be

u-bir3uou~ly specified in natural settings, researchers interested in a

17

host of persuasive problems and situations could use this vehicle for

their investigations. Furthermore, compliance-gaining techniques as a

part of conversational strategies in general could augment an

social control, reflect credibility and enhance status (and

perhaps Self-esteem). In the hands of the psychologist, or counselor,

or co~unicologist these strategies and techniques could be taught to

others for use in a variety of interpersonal or organieational settings.

Indeed, if the current trend in "assertiveness training" continues,

conversational compliance-gaining techniques may become useful,

teachsble behaviors for effective , assertive comnunication. Finally, if

status and sex appear to have no effect on use of compliance-gaining

techniques then perhaps the conclueions regarding power and

powerlessness heretofore ascribed to these two variables could stand

renewed scrutiny and exploration.

The succeeding chapters of this investigation will first review the

literature relating to power and social control, status, sex

stereotyping, coapliance-gaining strategies, and arguments for

mturalistic study of communication. Next, the methods for data

measurement and analysis will be described. Then, the

of the data analysis, discussion of the results and implications

the results will be detailed. A proposal and application of a

dnta-baned coding scheme will follow. Finally, conclusions and

recommendations for future research will be discussed.

CHAPTER 11: REVIEN OF RELATED LITERATURE

To fully illustrate the magnitude and pervasiveness of power,

status and sex stereotyping in their impact on behavior, an exploration

of the research pertaining to each of the factors is required. A number

of researchers suggest that these variables are key influences on

conversation, the primary mechanism through which people define their

bahavior (~horne d Henley , 1975 ; Lakof f , 1975 ; Zimaerman & West , 1 975 ;

Parlee, 1979). If people define their behaviors through conversation, a

key consideration for examining any specific conversational behavior is

the enviroument in which the conversation occurs. An attempt to focus

what happens in real-world settings should include analysis developed in

those settinge; to explore naturally-occurring compliance-gaining

attempts, naturally-occurring behavior should bs the data base. Since

the aim of this research is to analyze compliance-gaining attempts in

conversation, an examination of the research which srgues for

naturalistic conversational analysis is requirad.

19

The power concept su r faces i n a number of d i f f e r e n t i n t e r a c t i o n a l

but of s p e c i f i c importance is t h e l i t e r a t u r e involving t h e

u9e of power i n r e l a t i o n s h i p s ( p a r t i c u l a r l y power bases) , i n

and i n s o c i a l environments. Within these contexts the re

are re la ted i s s u e s which warrant a c l o s e r look: the r o l e of power as it

pertains t o c o n f l i c t s i t u a t i o n s , and power use a s a f fec ted by user sex.

Although researchers o f t en equate power with s t a t u s , an occasional

invest igat ion of s t a t u s a lone is a v a i l a b l e i n the l i t e r a t u r e . A key

consideration underlying t h i s s tudy is t h e e f f e c t of s t a t u e on behavior

and perceptions of behavior. To h igh l igh t these e f f e c t s and perceptions

of s t a t u s , s t u d i e s on reasons f o r s t a t u s incons is tency and emergence,

the r e l a t ionsh ip of comunica t ion s t r a t e g i e s t o s t a t u s , t h e r o l e o f

s t a t u s i n organiza t ions and in t e rpe r sona l r e l a t i o n s h i p s , and t h e

in t e rac t ive e f f e c t s of s t a t u s and sex on the use of power a s i t is

expreesed verbal ly w i l l a l s o be reviewed.

A t h i r d s i g n i f i c a n t a rea of t h e l i t e r a t u r e review focuses on sex

stereotyping. This diecussion t r e a t s sex s t e reo typ ing as a form o f

s te reotyping and includes s t u d i e e involving sex-typed

~ ~ a r a c t e r i a t i c s , unconscious sex s tereotyping, and both s o c i a l and

OccuPational e f f e c t s of sex s tereotyping.

20

A four th research a rea revieved i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e is compliance

gaining. This po r t ion of t h e l i t e r a t u r e d iscuaa ion c e n t e r s on s t u d i e a

of the use of compliance-gaining techniques i n varying s i t u a t i o n s ,

o f techniques t h a t form s t r a t e g i e s , and i n t e r a c t o r s '

o f compliance-gaining s i t u a t i o n s .

The f i n a l s e c t i o n of t h e l i t e r a t u r e review w i l l cover t h e

des i r ab i l i t y of n a t u r a l i s t i c s tudy and conversa t iona l a n a l y s i s aa a

research method.

Pover i n r e l a t i onsh ips . Discussions of power and c o n t r o l tend t o

insp i re images of power co r rup t ing its wie lders o r t he d e s t r u c t i v e

e f f ec t s of power used abus ive ly by enemies. However, power is a basic

d y w i c of any r e l a t ionsh ip . May ( 1972) suggest8 t h a t ntuch of human

behavior is t h e c o n f l i c t between power (which he de f ines as " e f f e c t i v e

ways of i n f luenc ing o t h e r s , ach iev ing t h e sense i n i n t e r p e r s o n a l

relat ion9 of t h e s ign i f i cance of one 's s e l f " ) (p . 20) and powerlessness.

This Point of view sugges ts t h a t powsr is c rea t ed by t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p s

that occur between ind iv idua l s ; t hus power is a r e l a t i o n a l a t t r i b u t e as

Opposed t o 9 c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of t he ind iv idua l ( ~ e n l e y , 1977; Blau,

lg64; Kipnis, 19743 F ros t & Yilmot, 1978). The e f f e c t i v e n e s s of any

Projection of power by a n ind iv iduz i i s determined wi th in the boundaries

Of the r e l e t i onsh ip ; in s h o r t , power p r o j e c t i o n ( c o n t r o l ) depends

0x1 its i n t e r p r e t a t i o n by l n t e r a c t o r a ( ~ n s t , 1977). The f a c t

21

that a s tatement l i k e , "Is t h a t a t h r e a t o r a promise?" oan be an

par ry i n verba l power s t r u g g l e s i n d i c a t e s t h a t power must be

defined r e l a t i ona l ly . Raven and Kruglanski ( I 970) a t a t e t h a t power

Usem need t o a n t i c i p a t e the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of any p a r t i c u l a r power base

and avoid those bases which would be i n e f f e c t i v e i n inf luencing a

target. Thus the behavior of t h e t a r g e t is an e s s e n t i a l cons idera t ion

in power choice. For example, i f t he r e l a t i o n s h i p between power-user

and t a rge t were one of s a d i s t t o masochist, a " t h r e a t " of phys ica l

coercion used by the s a d i s t t o o b t a i n compliance could w e l l be

intezpreted by the masochist a s a "promise" of revard f o r f a i l u r e t o

a n y power exchanges s u b t l y in f luence s o c i a l behaviors snd a r e

bu i l t i n t o i n t e r a c t i o n norms. The bases of power desc r ibe r e l a t i o n s

between those who inf luence and c o n t r o l and those who a r e inf luenced o r

controlled.

Power bases. Fr ieze , Parsons, Johnson, Ruble and Zellman ( 1978),

building on the work of French and Raven, desc r ibe s i x power bsses which

are apparent i n e i t h e r d i r e c t o r i n d i r e c t power use: 1 ) reward, which

the a b i l i t y t o g ive p o s i t i v e sanct ions ; 2) coercion, which

invO1~es the a b i l i t y t o g ive negat ive sanct ions ; 3) r e f e r e n t , which

refers t o i d e n t i f i c a t i o n r e s u l t i n g from f a m i l i a r i t y o r l ikeablef iess; 4 )

expert* which is derived from supe r io r knowledge o r s k i l l s ; 5)

legitioates which is considered t h e r i g h t , by v i r t u e of pooi t ion , t o

:,. . . -6

22

influence o the r s ; and a f i n a l power base, 6 ) informational , which

involves t h e a b i l i t y t o provide explanat ions f o r the b e n e f i t derived

from another 's change. The l eg i t ima te power base i s the one which

involves t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s ove r t r i g h t , through r u l e s and norms, t o

exercise inf luence o r c o n t r o l ; thus l eg i t ima te power forms a primary

power base i n organiza t ions ( ~ e b e r , 1949). Legitimate power i n t h i s

sense i s synonymous wi th a u t h o r i t y (Koehler , Anatol & Applbaum, 1976).

I n an organiza t ional s e t t i n g , power and c o n t r o l can de r ive from an

ind iv idua l ' s h i e r a r c h i c a l placement wi th in the organiza t ion

(organizat ional s t a t u s ) , t he a l l i a n c e s an ind iv idua l forms, t h e

competence an ind iv idua l d i sp lays and the r e l a t i v e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n o r

decent ra l iza t ion of the decision-making (Kanter , 1977; Henn.ig & Jardim,

1977; Harragan, 1977). The power s t r u c t u r e of an organiza t ion somewhat

formalizes who must y i e l d t o inf luence a t tempts and who is e n t i t l e d t o

make influence at tempts or r e s i s t inf luence a t tempts ( ~ o e h l e r , Anatol

Applbaum, 1976). I n s h o r t , organiza t ional h i e r a r c h i e s provide a

ready-made framework f o r "power of pos i t ion" leg i t imized by an

indiv idual ' s r o l e ( ~ i c h e n e r and Burt, 1974).

Power i n s o c i a l s i t u a t i o n s . Both wi th in the organiza t ion and

within broader s o c i a l s i t u a t i o n s , power and the n e e d . f o r con t ro l assume

enormous importance i n personal def l n i tims of self-worth.

Structurally-based power has been es t ab l i shed a s a causa l l i n k Setween

the intarpersonal bargaining process and perceived personal competence

in involving manipulations of network c e n z r a l i t y ( ~ t o l t e ,

-6 '.

2 3

,978). For example, persons at the center of networks rate themselves

higher in self-perceptions of competence than those located on the

network's periphery. Power as a function of a person's roles, statuses

and power-dependence relations has been established in studies of-social

exchange processes in families; the thrust of these investigations

centers on reward power and a person's perception of reward distribution

as commensurate with expectation (~smond, 1978). Blau (1964)

differentiates between power and exchange as being two separate

considerations in human relations, and argues that rewards are not part

of power. But others have argued that social exchange relations are

really subsets of power relations since a successful influence attampt

includes benefits and costs (~aldwin, 1978). Social exchange relations,

like those found in networks and families, can be conceptualized as

power relations.

In this view of power, which assumes the development of strategic

relations in which the power-user weighs rewards and costs to self,

control includes several variables that determine whether relationships

are collaborative, negotiated or conflicted.' These variables include:

the extent to which the individuals involved perceive aach other as

having similar or dissimilar objectives; the degree to which one can

independently; "issue priority"; time, as it relates to she period

during which inclividuals must act; and legitinacy, as the extent to

which an individual has inherent and ackncwledged power to act within a

sit~ation (~orcsjwer , 1978). This discussion of strategy includes

2 4

s eve ra l of t h e e lements o f c o n t r o l a l l uded t o p r ev ious ly .

Power and c o n f l i c t . The u se o f power i n a s o c i a l con t ex t can

a f f e c t coopera t ion among i n t e r a c t o r s and c o n f l i c t r e s o l u t i o n . I n one

study, p a r t i c i p a n t s i n t e r a c t e d w i th o t h e r s who e i t h e r c o n s i s f e n t l g

cooperated o r competed, o r a l t e r n a t e l y competed and cooperated. I t was

found t h a t low-power persons a c t e d more c o o p e r a t i v e l y , showed more

a t t r a c t i o n f o r , and were w i l l i n g t o f a c i l i t a t e o t h e r ' s outcomes t o t h e

ex ten t t h a t t h e o t h e r had cooperated w i t h t h e low-power i n d i v i d u a l . In

c o n t r a s t , a high-power p e r s o n ' s coope ra t i venes s was una f f ec t ed by t h e

ac t i ons of low-power persons ( ~ j o s v o l d & Ohan, 1979) . The under ly ing

theme of t h i s r e s e a r c h i s t h a t unequal power and unequal coope ra t i on

i ncen t i ve s a r e r e l a t e d .

Power and compliance. D i f f e r e n t t ypes o f s o c i a l power, e . g . ,

reward, coe r c ion , e t c . , l e a d t o d i f f e r e n t e x p e c t a t i o n s about compliance

and s a t i s f a c t i o n among persons on whom va ry ing t y p e s o f i n f l u e n c e a r e

used. I n a s t udy of head and s t a f f n u r s e s , head n u r s e s expected more

compliance on t h e p a r t o f s t a f f nu r se s t han s t a f f n u r s e s p r ed i c t ed t hey

would g ive . Ta rge t s of power naneuvers were shown t o be more s e n s i t i v e

t o t h e type of power used t han were powerholders. Both head and s t a f f

p e r c e i - ~ e d t h e u s e o f l e g i t i m a t e , coe r c ive and e x p e r t power a s

leading t o iow s a t i s f a c t i o n ; bu t s t a f f n u r s e s expected f a r l e s s

satiscaction t han head nurses . S t a t u s was shown $ 3 a f f e c t o n e ' s

Perceptions o f power use (Fonta ine & Beerman, 1977) .

25

The e f f e c t s of power motivat ion on an i n d i v i d u a l ' s use o f power is

unclear . Kipnis (1 974) d i s c w s e s power motivat ion a s t h e need

a person experiences t h a t can be s a t i s f i e d only by causing o t h e r s

t o behave i n c e r t a i n ways; consequently, t h i s need state could r e s u l t

from an i r r a t i o n a l impulse, from percept ion of ro le -appropr ia te

behaviors ( a s i n t h e case o f l e g i t i m a t e a u t h o r i t y ) , o r from some i n n a t e

universa l d r ive . Kipnis p o i n t s ou t t h a t i n t h e case of o rgan iza t iona l

involvement, i n d i v i d u a l s s e e i n s t i t u t i o n s ss the determiners of t h e

au thor i ty s t r u c t u r e . An i n d i v i d u a l ' s "need f o r absolut ion" upon

exert ing inf luence may have its coun te rpa r t i n an i n d i v i d u a l ' s need t o

perceive h imsel f /herse l f a s having inf luence . I n an i n d u s t r i a l

simulation, Fodor and Farrow (1979) found t h a t s u p e r v i s o r s high i n t h e

need f o r power perceived themselves as e x e r t i n g g r e a t e r i n f luence on the

work of t he group. This f i nd ing Fs somewhat analogous t o t h e r e s u l t s of

the Fontaine and Besman rasearch.

Sex d i f f e rences i n power. Power use is inf luenced by e f f e c t i v e n e s s

and evaluat ion by o t h e r s a s we l l a s power motiva t ion and need f o r power.

Sex ro l e expec ta t ions r e g u l a t e behavior, determining the appropr ia teness

Of male/fenrale behaviors. Behaviors enacted c o n t r a r y t o expec ta t ions

may be seen negat ive ly , and use of power is no exception. Sex

a t e r e ~ t ~ ~ e ~ show women a s being noncompstit ive and nonaggressive; thus

'Omen a r e a t t r i b u t e d with Less d i r e c t , more manipula t ive use of power

(''isre at ale, 1978). According t o F r i eze e t ale, even i f a roman is

a d a s s e r t i v e , i t has been s o c i a l l y expedient f o r h e r t o appear

weak. Although Harragan (1977) suggests that the use of power by women

in organizational settings may be limited by their lack of experience as

team players, other writers suggest that all the knowledge of

and hierarchies will not advance a woman in the power plays

of organizational interaction, since, by the way she speaks, she is seen

as less credible than her male counterpart (~lias, 1980; Lakoff, 1975;

Miller & Swift, 1977; Parlee, 1973). This low-power, lack of

credibility effect of women's conversational styles may be the rasult of

actual word choice (as in the use of tag questions and intensifiers),

total talking time, nonverbal paralanguage, features of submissiveness,

interruptions and silences (Eakins 8 Eakins, 1975; Thorne 24 Henley,

1975; Zimmerman and West , 1975). One provocstive study used three

"female" linguistic forms (tag questions, qualifiers and compound

requests) as stimuli presented by both male and female speakers. In

ratings of person perception, those using "female" forms were seen as

less assertive with speaker sex not a significant factor (~ewcombe ti

Arkoff, 1979).

STATUS

Much of the literature addressing the issue of status tends to fall

into two general types: social status, as defined by the social

~itua*i3n, and hierarchical status, as found in organizational Settings*

The operati?nalizatioo of status is by as neans clear-cut, however.

lany of the factors irhich infl:~enca in individual's poxer or control

also inf luence an i n d i v i d u a l ' s s o c i a l s t a t u s , o r a t l e a s t t h e way t h a t

ind iv idua l i s perceived by o t h e r i nd iv idua l s .

S t a t u s and behavior. Aside from the usua l phys i ca l a r t i f a c t s of

s t a t u s , (such a s f a s t e r c a r s , greener lawns, l a r g e r desks , o f f i c e s wi th

windows) , s t a t u s i s o f t e n prescr ibed by behaviors. Leadership,

asser t iveness , competence and even phys i ca l l o c a t i o n o r group p o s i t i o n

can descr ibe a kind of s t a t u s s i t u a t i o n ( ~ i c h e n e r & Burt , 1974; F r i e z e ,

e t &., 1978; Henley, 1977). Research i n smal l group behavior o f t e n - c i t e s s t a t u s a s a p i v o t a l i n t e rven ing v a r i a b l e i n person percept ion.

Michener and Burt found when negat ive s a n c t i o a s were permiss ib le f o r

high s t a t u s persons, s t rong sanc t ions received more compliance than weak

sanctions. For behavior i n gene ra l , i t has been found t h a t e s t d a t e s of

an ind iv idua l ' s cu r r en t performance a r e based on t h a t person ' s

a l ready-establ ished s t a t u s w i th in the group ( ~ h e r i - f , White L? Harvey,

1955).

In a s tudy of s t a t u s i n experimental ly produced groups, t o y s a t

~ummer camp were pu t i n t o i n t e r a c t i v e s i t u a t i o n s conducive t o n a t u r a l

group formation; once groups had formed and s t a b i l i z e d , t he boys were

asked t o judge one ano the r ' s t a sk performance. Resu l t s tended t o

ind ica te t h a t t he higher an i n d i v i d u a l ' s s t a t u s w i t h i n t h e group, t he

greater t he tendency of o t h e r s t o overes t imate h i s performance; and

Conversely, t he lower h i s s t a t u s , the l e s s of a tendency t o overest imate

r and, indeed, i n some cases , an inc rease i n t he tendency t o underest imate

2 8

his performance s heri if, White & ifarvey, 1955). While t h i s s tudy

revealed a number of compelling group behaviors , t he primary f i n d i n g

seems t o h i g h l i g h t t h e e f f e c t s of s t a tus - - in s h o r t , nothing succeeds

l i k e success. I f an ind iv idua l is perceived a s having gr 'eater s t a t u s ,

performaace percept ions of o the r s a r e accordingly high.

This p a r t i c u l a r case i s i l l u s t r a t i v e of balance theory, which i s a

s ign i f i can t fo rce i n a t t i t u d e formation eider, 1945). B r i e f l y ,

a t t i t udes toward an indiv idual and a pe r son ' s a t t i t u d e s toward a c t s

performed by t h a t i nd iv idua l a r e i n t e r r e l a t e d . I n order t o reduce

imbalance, t h e boys i n t h e Sher i f s tudy perceived t h e performance of

t he i r peers such t h a t high s t a t u s and good performance percept ions

Like balance theory, s c r i p t theory o f f e r s a poss ib le explanatLon

for the symmetry between s t a t u s and evalua t ion of performance. A s c r i p t

i s a coherent sequence of events expected by an ind iv idua l , and a s c r i p t

can involve the indiv idual a s p a r t i c i p a n t o r observer . A t t i t udes toward

a Person a r e s a i d t o cons i s t of an ensemble of s c r i p t s concerning t h a t

Person i ~ b e l s o n , 1976). The r e s u l t s of the boys' camp study suggest

that s c r i p t s were conceived f o r i nd iv idua l s high i n s t a t - ~ s , and those

crFpts , i n order to remain c o n s i s t e n t , l a t e r determined evalua t ions of

erfOrmance* The p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t s c c i a l s c r i p t s snd s t a t u s may be

re inforc ing ilnderscores t h e inpor tance cif s t a t u s a s a

i n in te racxion . High s t a t u s , a t l e a s t s o c i a l l y , seems t o

29

be its own reward.

Status and,' compliance. Intuit ively , tha relation between

and s t a t u s appears t o Be c l e a r . It is g e n e r a l l y be l ieved

tha t those h ighe r i n s t a t u s a r e good a t ga in ing compliance of lower

s t a t u s o t h e r s , and t h a t t h e s e h igh s t a t u s persons a r e no t s o good a t

omplying when i t becomes t h e i r turn t o be t h e lower s t a t u s o the r s . One

reason posi ted f o r high s t a t u s persons ba ing f r e e r i n regard t o

compliance is t h e concept of " i d i o s y n c r a t i c c r zd i t sW--p r iv i l eges of

position--which al low noncompliance with t h e norms of t h e group. I n a

study undertaken wi th h o s p i t a l personnel , i n v e s t i g a t o r s attempted t o

discover i f , i n f a c t , h ighe r s t a t u s persons exerc ised i d i o s y n c r a t i c

c r ed i t s with regard t o a reques t t o s i g n one ' s name when t ak ing a cup of

coffee. Higher s t a t u s persons revealed themselves t o be l e s s l i k e l y t o

comply than lower s t a t u s persona. The r eaea rche r s specula ted t h a t s i n c e

the pressure t o comply was no t very s t r o n g ( t h e use of a v r i t t e n

o t i ce ) , t h e h ighe r s t a t u s persons used t h e i r i d i o s y n c r a t i c c r e d i t s i n

not complying co ow ell, Lederman, Owen 4 Solomon, 1978). This research

sUt3geSt8 t h a t h ighe r s t a t u s persons f e e l somewhat l e s s pressure t o

confom t o the norms of t h e group ( o r the s i tua t ion- -organiza t iona l i n

this case) . Furthermore, h igh s t a t u s can c o n s t i t u t e a power base,

giving ind iv idua l s g r e a t e r l a t i t u d e i n i n f luence at tempts .

IdrosYncratic z r e d i t s can be used i n t h e e x e r c i s e of i n f luence a s wel l

in f a i l l l r e t o comply with inf luence attempks ( ~ r i e z e e t sl., 1978).

' idea of i d i o s y n c r a t i c c r e d i t s is an important concept t o cons ider i n

I

3 0

any discussion of a c t u a l d i f ferences i n t a l k between high and lou atatus

per.ona because i t ampl i f ies t h e r e l a t i o n between compliance and status-

s t a t u s emergence. From the research on s t a t u s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ,

some of the behaviors which combine t o ganera te 3 person's s t a t u s have

been i so la ted . Among these observable behaviors are: s o c i a l l y

distributed chances t o p e e o m ( a c t i o n oppor tun i t i e s ) , problem-solving

(performance), communicated evalua t ion

(agreement/df sagreement), and acceptance o r r e j e c t i o n of inf luence.

These behaviors a r e bel ieved t o be the consequence of underlying

ae l f lo ther expectat ions. Power and pres t ige-order i n task-oriented

groups a re bel ieved t o m e r g e from these four behaviors (FOX & Roore,

1979). A t t h 8 lament, research i s under way t o t e a t t he r e l i a b i l i t y of

these behaviors as measures of s t a t u s . Noticeably absent from

discussione of s t a t u s emergence and status-organizing processes is any

mention of commuaication/relational s t y l e .

Ervin-Tripp (1974) discovered t h a t these s t a t u s d i s t i n c t i o n s do

Occur with r e spec t t o t h e use of d i r e c t i v e s by adu l t s . D i rec t ives a r e

whose i n t e n t i o n is t o e l i c i t s e r v i c e s o r goods o r t o r e g u l a t e

bahavior of o t h e r s i n sose way. There were cons i s t en t d i f f e r e n c e s i n

the types of d i r e c t i v e s speakers used t h a t r e s u l t e d aa a funct ion of the

3 i tua t i o n , p a r t i c u l a r l y with respect t o superior/subordinate

"lationships. For ins tance , the s ta tement , "I need e match, * which

SNin-Tri~~ c l a s s i f i e s as s personal nsed s ta tement , is ?mnambiguously s

directive when addressed from a superior to a subordinate. A

subordinate would be more likely to use an inbedded imperative, such as,

"could YOU give me a match?" The consistent social distribution found in

the use of directives suggests that speaker status and receiver status

are important considerations in the study of interactions.

Status and communication strategies. Since status impacts on

behavior, it must therefore influence verbal behavior and the selectiori

of communication strategies. In the sociolinguistic view, setting,

.events, situations and participants determine an individual's choice of

language style, from intimate , style to frozen style (~oos, 1959).

Social and linguistic features combine to offer alternative

communication stratgies which are selected by speakers. Semantic,

grammatical and phonological alternatives are predictably patterned on

he basis of the social system (91om & Gumperz, 1972). The social

stern would necessarily include some provision for status cf speaker

and status of speaking style. Described earlier, the research of

Emin-Tripp (1974) into adult directives, showing consistent social

strib~tion in use of directives, supports this conclusion.

Status in organizations. As a aubsystem within a larger social

yste?n, the organization or institution can reflect changes in

9diti0nal ststus definitions. The hierarchical arrangemert for

cigiOn-m~ing in mafiy organizations makas the superior-subordina te

fairly unambiguous. Yowever, the influx of women into

32

o,cupational s e t t i n g s has somewhat confused t r a d i t i o n a l occupational

,tatus scores; f o r ins tance , when t h e t r a d i t i o n a l male l abor fo rce

scores were compared t o scores t h a t included both men snd wonen, status

scares f o r c l e r i c a l persons and c ra f t spe r sons reversed showing an

increase i n s t a t u s f o r craftsmen, and a decrease f o r c l e r i c a l persons

(powers 3 Holmberg, 1978). These authors suggest t h a t t r a d i t i o n a l

occupational s t a t u s neasures need r e v i s i n g s i n c e the sex composition of

the work force has changed. In measuring occupational s t a t u s p r i o r t o

1970, researchers cons i s t en t ly ignored the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of women;

occupational s t a t u s sco res were baaed 03 c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t h e male

Labor force. Vhen women were accounted f o r , t h e p r e s t i g e l e v e l of

various occupations a l t e r e d , a s f o r example, profess ional occupations

which showed lower scores.

S ta tus , sex and power. Income, education and h ierarchic31 p o s i t i o n

are aaong the determinants o f s t a t u s , both s o c i a l l y and

organi&ationally, However, a c r i t i c a l poin t t o consider , e spec ia i ly i n

the organizat ional s e t t i n g , is t h a t s t a t u s can be rzinforced by more

than the s o c i a l perceptions of o thers . Many times s t a t u s snd power a r e

synonymous, s ince the determinants of power use ( r e sources ,

expertise, confidence, e tc . ) a r e of t e n possessed by high s t a t u s persons

('rieze a1 1978). Higher s t a t u s gene ra l ly means more power access - -. 9

Vice-~er3a. A c e n t r a l s o c i a l cons t ruc t o f s t a t u s , houever, :hat nay

Or may not imply power, is sex ( ~ e n l e ~ , 1977; Bradley, 1990).

J u s t being a a l e i a p l i e s h igher s t a t u s 3 cognit ive a r t i f a c t

. - , il..

3 4

begins; differences between male and female infants are

attributed along traditional sex stereotypic lines, i.e., girl babies

are seen by parents as softer, calmer, less active, etc., than boy A

babies% Nowever, the infants in the study were, in reality, comparable

in terms of weight, activity, time of birth, etc. These findings

indicate that one cannot realistically isolate behaviors in terms of

biology versus socialization.

Sex-typed characteristics. A necessary step in the discussion of

sex stereotyping is the isolation of those characteristics that are

sex-typed. While this literature review is by ro means extensive enough

to include all sex-typed variables, a few are certainly worth specific

mention. Some of the actual terms used to describe typical men and

women need to be examined. Women are supposed to be poised,

well-mannered, pleasant, lovabls, modest, submissive, senti~ental, vain,

moody, spontaneous and suppportive, just to name a few (~iller 3 Swift,

1977; Eakins & Eakins, 1978). Iqsles, in contrast, are viewed as frank,

courageous, ambitious, aggressive, dominant, outspoken, stubborn,

rational, hard-headed and authoritative (~iller & Swift, 1977; Eakins

Eakins, 1978). Male stereotypes, as these adjectives suggest, tend to

be more socially desirable than female stereotypes. Who would not

rather be viewed as rational, courageous or frank if the only other

choice was to be seen as lovable, sentimental and pleasant? Although

these ~f adjectives would lead one to believe there are strong,

cOnsiszent differences between males and females, this is a2parently not

3 5

the case. When Frieze - et - al. summarized sex-difference. research

findings, they found that the differences between males and females in

,uch stereotyped characteristics as aggression, verbal and math skills,

and emotionality were moderate, not strong, or the findings were largely

inconclusive, as opposed to consistent.

Sex stereotypes and the "nonconscious ideology." The major

difficulty of sex stereotyping resides not in the fact that such

attributional differences exist, but in their utter subtlety. Even

individuals who profess to be open-minded may, in fact, be motivated to

discriminate between males and females simply because egalitarianism is

a veneer, and a deeper belief, or nonconscious ideology, prevails no em &

Bem, 1971 ). This idea of nonconscious stereotyping has been illumlnsted

in a number of studies.

In a study involving clinical judgments of mental health, traits

that characterized healthy, mazure individuals varied as a function 3f

sex* This finding illustrated a rather powerful instance of

doubls-bind: Women cannot be mature, healthy women and mature, healthy

adults at the same time. Mature, healthy women were characterized as

more submissivs, less independent, less aggressive, etz. As the

researchers poignantly comment, these are odd characteristics to

attribute to healthy anyone. Further, clinicians were much less likely

to attribute healthy adult traits to f. amales, and much more likely to

attribute these traits to males (Brgverman, Clarkson, Rosenkrantz 8

36

,gel, 1970). c l i n i c i a n s ' percept ions of behavior should be

contaminated by sex s te reotyping; t he f a c t t h a t such contamination

ccors i l l u s t r a t e s t h e power of t h e nonconsciousideo1og;y.

other example of unconscious s t e reo typ ing i s o f fe red i n the

oldberg experiments ( 1 968) . I d e n t i c a l a r t i c l e s were evaluated by

emale readers, and when t h e author was given a female name, Joan T.

the a r t i c l e s were seen a s c o n s i s t e n t l y l e s s va luable than the

e a r t i c l e s supposedly authored by John T. McKay. Goldberg sugges ts

hat these f indings show t h a t women automat ica l ly see t h e i r d i f f e r e n c e s

rom men a s de f i c i enc ie s .

The unconscious power and pervasiveness of sex s te reotyping appears

study a f t e r s tudy; and an explanat ion f o r t h i s pervasiveness and

asons why these s t e reo types p e r s i s t a r e sugges2ed by Nisbe t t and

i l son (1977). I n t h e i r a n a l y s i s of ve rba l r e p o r t s of mental processes,

eY essen t i a l ly descr ibe the f a c t t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s simply do not r e a l l y

know 'fihy they th ink what they think. An i n d i v i d u a l ' s cognitive

t r a t eg ie s a r e not e a s i l y accessed nor e a s i l y described.

Nisbett and Wilson conclude t h a t higher order mental processes

uch as those involved i n eva lua t ion , judgment, problem-solving and the

itiation of behavior" cannot be d i r e c t l y observed by ind iv idua l s

gaged i n those a c t i v i t i e s (P . 232). Rather , rhen asked t o sxp la in

a r r ived a t c e r t a i n behaviors i n var ious experimental set-ups ,

bJec'.s invaked a priori causa l l i n k s be t r een o behavlor and a

3 7

cu l tu ra l ly supplied ru l e . For example, when s u b j e c t s were asked t o

four i d e n t i c a l p a i r s o f nylon s tockings f o r q u a l i t y , they

s e l e c t e d t h e right-most p a i r a s being t h e beat. Upon

in t emiewing , however, t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s e i t h e r d id not

mention pos i t i on a s inf luencing t h e i r choice , o r , when asked d i r e c t l y ,

they denied t h a t t h e pos i t i on o f t h e o b j e c t s inf luenced t h e i r choice.

They explained t h e i r behavior through cogn i t ive causa l l i n k s o t h e r than

the apparent s t imulus cause.

The implications of such f ind ings r a i s e a ques t ion regarding a t

what point a cogn i t ive system can be breached, s o t h a t new information

instead of e x i s t i n g a te reotypes can be u t i l i z e d .

Effec ts of sex s tereotyping. Sex s t e reo typ ing may exact z o s t s from

those who at tempt t o depar t from a n t i c i p a t e d sex-typad behaviors.

Social pena l t i e s a r e incurred by e i t h e r s ex f o r v i o l a t i n g sex-role norms

(costr ich, Fe ins t e in & Kidder, 1974) ; y e t o t h e r research has shown t h a t

en Sex-roles a r e reversed, pe r sona l i ty and s t a t u s a t t r i b u t i o n s a r e

130 reversed ( ~ e i s , Jennings ( ~ a l s t e d t ) , Corrado-Taylor & Brown, note

In soae cases , observers ' s o c i a l judgments s r e c o a t r o l l e d by sex

t e r e o t ~ ~ e s such t h a t ove r t cues of l eade r sh ip s r a discountsd i n favor

the s tereotype ( p o r t e r , Geis , & Zennings, note 3). This r e s u l t

eest3 how ind iv idua l s perceptua l ly reso lve r o l e v i o l a t i o n s ; t he

head Of the t ab le" cue was discounted i n favor o f t h e sex-role

3 8

stereotype when a female occupied that leadership position in a

.iXed-sex group. The tendency toward this type of dissonance reduction

bas alarming implications for women in organizational Settings- For

instance, the tendency to treat all females as secretaries results in

women taking over secretarial and clerical duties to conform to

expectations (~arra~an, 1977). Women in organizations may be pressured

into social tasks involving stereotypes, such as getting coffee, doing

Xeroxing and the like ( ~ e n n i ~ & Jardim, 1977) Kanter (1 977) refers to

this type of stereotype-to-behavior progression as role entrapment,

which seems a reasonable label, considering the difficulties women have

in breaching organizational networks.

Once a woman makes it into the supervisor's position, the

stereotype does not necessarily fade. A study of the influence of

sex-role stereotypes on evaluations of male-female supervisory behavior

has shown that these stereotypes do impact significantly on perceptions

of some supervisory styles; for example, reward style was rated as more

effective when used by males than females (~osen & Jerdee, 1973). These

two researchers also found that managers tend to make personnel

decisions using traditional male-female stereotypes (~osen & Jerdee,

One study, however, found a somewhat more positive relationship

supervisory positions and occupant behavior. Male and female

occupying parallel positions were evalunted and les~ribed by

-

3 9

Subordinates a s exh ib i t ing s i m i l a r p a t t e r n s of leadersh ip behavior and

similar l e v e l s of e f fec t iveness . Les t t h i s r e s u l t be too l a r g e l y

construed a s a p o s i t i v e t r end , t h e s tudy a l s o noted t h a t similar

behaviors by male and female supe rv i so r s l e d t o d i f f e r e n t outcomes:

Males tended t o advance r ap id ly a s a r e s u l t of e f f e c t i v e n e s s and

influence; but f o r females, r a t e of advancement appeared v i r t u a l l y

unrelated t o e f f ec t iveness ( D ~ Y % S t o d g i l l , 1972).

The preceding s e c t i o n of t he l i t e r a t u r e review on the e f f e c t s of

sex-stereotyping concludes t h e d i scuss ion of t h e v a r i a b l e s p re sen t ly

under examination. These v a r i a b l e s , power, s t a t u s and sex-role

stereotyping, have been shown t o be key in f luences on human i n t e r a c t i o n .

The d iscuss ion now focuses on l i t e r a t u r e r e l a t i n g more s p e c i f i c a l l y

t o the methods by which these v a r i a b l e s may be s tudied i n in t e rpe r sona l

communication and on the s p e c i f i c behavior , compliance ga in ing , t h a t i s

the focus of t h i s research.

LATIONAL COPPMUNICATION AND COMPLIANCE-GAINING

Relat ional communication. The advantage t o r e l a t i o n a l

municat ion a n a l y s i s inc ludes the f a c t t h a t i t focuses on

aatural l~-occurr in.g, ongoing i n t e r a c t i o n , and i t o f f e r s a systemic view

Of behavior. The b a s i c premise of r e l a t i o n a l approaches

O cornmicat ion i s t h a t "people become aware of themselves only wi th in

he of t h e i r s o c i a l r e lh t ionsh ips* ( ~ i l l a r d Rogers, 1976, p.

40

Relational approaches to communication assume a co-defining or

co-orientation of individuals engaged in interaction. Millar & Rogers

(1976) identify three transactional dimensions of relationships:

control, trust and intimacy. The control dimension in this relational

is visible in behaviors exhibited by both persons in a

communication dyad; thus the researchers advocate a coding scheme which

includes both content and relational aspects, and which will reveal

message sequences and transactional patterns. The coding scheme

developed by Millar and Rogers (1 976) has been used in the study of

communication patterns in marital dyads. In additional studies building

on the Millar and Rogers work, the measurement procedures outlined by

Rogers and Farace (1975) could be applied to other interpersonal

transactions since relational analysis requires dyadic interaction as a

One researcher in relational communication, Roloff (1 976) ,

integrates two important research concepts: control and compliance

gaining- First, he suggests that the transactional dimension, control,

manifest as strategies that are attempts to obtain relational

Second, he discusses as a typology of behavior for obtaining

these rewards the compliance-gaining techniques of Narwell and Schmi t t

=-

41

~ ~ ~ ~ l i ~ n c ~ - g a i n i n g behavior. Ae previously shown* compliance

gainag is one behavior through which attempt3 at relational control can

be Compliance gaining also has been shown to be a suitable

topic for relational communication analysis. This sgction of the

literature review centers on studies of compliance-gaining behavior,

beginning with the prototypical study of Marwell and ~chaitt.

Using a questionnaire aethod, Harwell and Schmitt explored the

possibility of using assorted compliance-gaining techniques in four

different situationa. Sixteen possible behaviors, each designed to

describe a technique, were presented; respondents were asked to rate

how likely they would be to use each of the techniques. (see Appendix B

for the list of techniques.) The researchers defined a strategy as "a

group of techniques towards which potential actors tend to respond

similarly" ( p 351). When factored, the techniques loaded into five

clusters: rewarding activity, punishing activity, expertise, activation

of impersonal commitments, and activation of personal commitments.

Second-order factors included: tendency to use socially acceptable

techniques sad tendency to use socially unacceptable techniques. There

to be significant correspondence between clusters of

com~liance-gaining techniques and the French and Raven power bases.

and Schnitt suggest that respondents may segment

cm~liance-gaining techniques in terms of types of interpersonal poxjr ;

a rdault. an individual may completely reject techniques or

stntegies because s/he does not have the power to use them or because

42

the techniques themselves are too unsavory.

The taxonomy described by Marwell and Schmitt provided the basis

for a study by Miller - et - al. (1 977), who found that the use of

strategies was highly situation specific, and that clusters of

compliance-gaining behaviors varied drastically by situation. Miller et

al. used a broader population sample for their research than did

Marwell and Schmitt; but like Marwell and Schmitt, the researchers used

data developed from responses to the 16 pre-formulated

compliance-gaining categories cited previously. In this study, however,

preference for strategies was sought in the following situations:

noninterpersonal (non-intimate) , short-term consequences;

noninterpersonal , long-term consequences ; interpersonal (intimate) ,

short-term consequences; and interpersonal, long-term consequences.

The preference for strategies varied depending on whether a situation

was interpersonal or not, and on the duration of consequences. One

conclusion of the study was that further research into both situational

and individual variables in compliance-gaining technique use is needed

to more fully illuminate the interaction of source and situation in

control strategy selection.

In order to exploze source variables, Falbo (1977) developed a

6-strategy coding scheme for compliance-gaining behavior. Through

inductive method, the strategies obtained were: assertion, bargaining,

complomise, deceit, emotion-agent, emotion-target, evasion, expertise,

A

4 3

fait accompli, hinting, persistence, persuasion, reason, simple

statement, thought manipulation, and threat. The strategy

was based on the combination of intuitions of eight

experts, and 91% of the strategies reported in essays on "HOW I get my

pay" were codable in this scheme. The expectations of relations between

personality variables and power-strategies were substantiatad; moat

notably, positive peer ratings occurred with the use of rational

strategies, and low peer ratings occurred with indirect and nonrational

strategies. These results were obtained when personality measures were

projected onto the scaling of power strategies. Although the coding

scheme proved viable for the analysis, situational influences were not

generally considered in this study.

Perceptions of compliance-gaining situations were studied by Cody

and McLaughlin (1 980) through mu1 tidimensional analysis. Two

dimensions, Intimacy and Resis tance/Unf riendly , appeared across the

persuasive situations which were developed from situations offered by

respondents in pretesting. Four additional dimensions were found:

Personal Benefits, Consequences, Dominance, and Rights. Including the

Mfller - et _ al. situations in their study, Cody and McLaughlin

factor-analyzed respondents' perceptions of nine compliance-gaining

Situations. The results indicated significant differences in

Perceptions of compliance-gaining, based on the six dimensions in each

The aim of this research was to develop scales for measuring

Cam~liance-gaining; and the researchers come somewhat closer to a

44

dataabased mdel of situational factors since their initial situations

from a corpuo of essays written by participants.

~ U i l d i w from this research into the role of environment in message

*tratem selection. multidimensional scaling of compliance-gaining

.trategies has been attempted (~ody, Mchughlin, & Jordan. 1980). ~ o d p

t . address the issue of whether or not the Nanell and Schnitt

ara relevant to interpersonal communication and whether the

strategies they suggest are exhaustive. They argue that prefomulated

are of limited relevance since reepondeata may indicate s low

likelihood of uee for socially unacceptable techniques, and yet may

include those techniquee when they are asked to write essays about their

compliance-gaining behavior. The researchers asked participants to

rite about compliance-gaining strategies they would employ in three

ifferent situations: The first situation involved R higher level of

nthacy and a lower level of resistance to persuasion than the second

nd third situationa, and also involved long-term consequencee; the

situation involved a higher level of situation apprehension and

%-tern consequences; and the third situation was a negotiation

with short term consequences. When analyzed, the responses

Or the first situation resulted in eight strategies: threat, hinting,

in*1e statement-question, altruism, deceit, disclaimsr, simple

atement, and reason. Responses to the second situation resulted in

3trat3gies : negative esteem, hinting, suggest negative

ltem'ti~e. t cooperation, reason. simple statement , threat, coercion,

45

inaction. Responses to the third situation resulted in eight

,trategies: inaction, expertise claims, negotiate, reason, deceit,

flatteq, negotiating alternatives, simple statement. These results

indicate that the Marwell and Schmitt typology is only marginally

to compliance-gaining situations since only three of the

IvIarwell and Schmitt techniques (threat, altruism, and negative esteem)

were found in this analysis. The researchers suggest that the

scaling has revealed a more representative set of

compliancs-gaining behaviors in differing situations.

Although the work of Cody -- et al. enlarges on previous explorations

in compliance-gaining, few studies have investigated or described the

actual verbal behaviors involved in manipulation, compliance-gaining or

persuasion (~rimshaw, 1980). In attempting to describe these verbal

behaviors, Grimshaw suggests that one needs to find the sociological

variables that determine verbal manipulation, and one needs to determine

the semantic mapping of strategies. In a largely descriptive study, he

concludes that the sociological constraints on verbal manipulation are

utilie (to the participants) , power, and affect in the relationships

Smon63 Participants. The verbal behaviors GrLmshaw lnbels for persuasion

compliance-gaining are: ask, beg, cajole. con, order, persuade, and

These behaviors are more globai and less finely tuned than

suggested by Cody & &. and Marwell and Schitt. Grinshaw

appears $0 be labelling styles of verbal compliance-gaining as opposed

O specific behaviors. Nevertheless, he approaches persuasion

4 6

the b a s i s of typing poss ib l e v e r b a l i z a t i o n s a s opposed t o behavior

in general, and h i s broader ca t egor i e s a r e i m p l i c i t l y ev ident i n t h e

tppologies suggested by o t h e r researchers .

m e s t u d i e s of H i l l e r -- e t al. and Cody 2 g. emphasize both

s i t u a t i o ~ l and ind iv idua l v a r i a b l e s , and both conclude t h a t f u r t h e r

work is needed t o unaover t h e i n t e r a c t i o n o f source and s i t u a t i o n i n

s t r a t e g y se l ec t ion . M i l l e r &. po in t o u t t h s t use of

coapliance-gaining techniques is h igh ly s i t u a t i o n a l l y bound, and t h s t

the in t e rac t ion of source v a r i a b l e s wi th s i t u a t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s accou~ l t s

fo r as much o r s o r e v a r i a t i o n i n behavior than does each s e t of

a r iab les alone. To inc rease understanding of t h i s i n t e r a c t i o n ,

natural ly-occurr ing s i t u a t i o n s need t o be examined f o r

ompliance-gaining attempts. These s i t u a t i o n s w t l l a l low f o r t h e

non-manipulated i n t e r a c t i o n o f Bource and s i t u a t i o n a l var iab les . This

onclusion providee an argument f o r comunica t ion research i n

a t u r a l i s t i c s e t t i n g s with na tura l ly-occurr ing behavior.

ATU~ISTIC COMMUNICATION STUDY

Hatu ra l i s t i c s tudy i n communication. I n s o f a r a s the s tudy of

Ompliance-gaining behavior is concerned, s e v e r a l researchers have

Oncluded t h e i r d iscuss ion with reconmendations t h a t a c t u a l

Oapliance-gaining behavior be examined. Falbo ( 1977) argued f o r

ductive study i n t o compliance-gaining behavior and developed a coding

based on open-ended essays. Likewise, Cody and McLaughlin (1980)

* / 1

4 7

methods f o r de r iv ing compliance-gaining s i t u a t i o n s ; and

the l a t e r research of Cody - e t - a l . used open-ended essays t o f i n d

= l u s t e r s of s t r a t e g i e s . These open-ended methods of i n q u i r y come

c l o s e r t o n a t u r a l i s t i c methods than does the research of

n a m e l l and Schmitt which r e l i e s on preformulated compliance-gaining

s t ra teg ies a s t h e b a s i s f o r r e a c t i v e da ta . However, Marwell and Schmit t

themselves s t r e s s t h e need f o r us ing d i f f e r e n t types of respondents and

"concrete behavior i n s t ead of ve rba l r epo r t s " (P. 364).

Miller 2 g. i n t h e i r exp lo ra t ion of compliance-gaining message

s t r a t e g i e s noted t h a t f u r t h e r research should at tempt t o account f o r t h e

in te rac t ion8 of source t r a i t s , s i t u a t i o n a l e f f e c t s , and s t r a t e g y

choices, which a r e all opera t ive i n na tura l ly-occurr ing i n t e r a c t i o n .

F ina l ly , i n developing a system f o r t he measursment of dominance i n

in te rac t ion , Brandt ( 1980) indica ted that "face-to-face" i n t e r a c t i o n i s

the appropriate data-base f o r t he s tudy of dominance; one of h i s

methodological cons ide ra t ions i s t h e use of t h e n a t u r a l i s t i c approach t o

elucidate frame8 of r e f e rence employed by p a r t i c i p a n t s i n t h e con tex t

under investigation. Th i s cons idera t ion , when viewed i n l i g h t of t h e

recomsndations of o t h e r compliance-gaining i n v e s t i g a t o r s , p rovides

bulwark t o arguments f o r t h e a n a l y s i s o f na tura l ly-occurr ing

complian~e-gaining behavior.

~n adequate s tudy of t h e communioation event should inc lude both

the ac to r s ' aeaninge and a d e s c r i p t i o n of t h e i r behaviors. Pearce

(1977) c l a u s t h a t objective and na tura l i s t ic i n q u i r y are complementary,

and t h a t n e i t h e r one is i n i tself s u f f i c i e n t t o develop a theory of

conversation^ T r a d i t i o n a l ques t ionna i r e approaches have been c r i t i c i z e d

8s mechanisms f o r i n v e s t i g a t i n g i n t e r a c t i o n ; t h e argument is t h a t t h e

actual conversat ion needs t o be used a s t h e u n i t o f a n a l y s i s ( ~ r e e n b e r ~ ,

1975). Nofsinger (1977) eees conversa t iona l a n a l y s i s a s de r iv ing from a

n a t u r a l i s t i c perspec t ive , s i n c e " t a l k i s an empi r i ca l f a c t " (p. 12) and

therefore should ba explored as such. F i n a l l y , t h e r e is a need f o r

studying people i n t h e i r n a t u r a l environments, with t h e research

wphasia placed on q u a l i t a t i v e methods aimed a t producing d e s c r i p t i v e

data ( ~ i c k s o n , 1977). Such d e s c r i p t i v e s t u d i e s may y i e l d a foundat ion

f o r fu r the r ca t egor i z ing and, of course, quan t i fy i ag of conversat ion.

L i t ton-Hawes ( 1 977 ) br ings toge the r s e v e r a l p o i n t s of

View--psycholinguistic, s o c i o l o g i c a l , anthropological-- to organize a

complete communication pempec t ive t h a t views t a l k a s both resource and

phenomenon. She a rgues t h a t fonnal d e s c r i p t i o n e x p l i c a t i o n i s needed t o

ude r s t and how t a l k works i n everyday use , and h e r conceptua l iza t ion

r e l i e s on the premises of ethnomethodology.

Wilson (1977) b u i l d s s e v e r a l s t r o n g arguments f o r n a t u r a l i s t i c

i n h i s d i scuss ion of ethnography as a research spproach i n

The r a t i o n a l e f o r e thnograpnic methods inc ludes the b e l i e f

4 9

,.hat to t r u l y understand behavior one must understand i n what context

a r e i n t e r p r e t i n g a c t i o n s o r thoughts. In s h o r t , observable

behavior needs a framework i n which t o be explored. Addi t ional ly Nilson

points out t h a t t h e problem of exper inenter influences--long t h e concern

of q u a n t i t a t i v e analysts--can be minimised i n s t u d i e s of

n a t u r a l l y - ~ ~ ~ ~ r r i n g , non-manipulated behavior.

Soc io l ingu i s t i c i nqu i ry has a l s o provided r a t i o n a l e s f o r

n a t u r a l i s t i c research, Once the communicative i n t e n t of an i n t e r a c t i o n

is establ ished, t h e c o m u a i c a t o r needs t o eva lua te the l i m i t a t i o n s of

context on h i s /he r choice of communicative s t r a t e g i e s ( ~ u m ~ e r z , 1932).

Similarly, Ervin-Tripp and M i t chell-Kernan ( 1 977) suggested n a t u r a l

conversation a s a source f o r s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s tudy using ethnographic . aethods. These methods he lp t o obvia te t h e d i f f i c u l t i e s of experimenter

influences while they al low f o r t h e access of contextua l information,

fn general, research t h a t is s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s l l y based u t i l i z e d

na tu ra l i s t i c method by observing a c t u a l speech performance and a c t u a l

verbal behavior (Ochs, 1979).

s-ary- The i s s u e s o f power, s t a t u s and sex s t e reo typ ing i a p a c t

On individuals i n a l l of t h e i r i n t e r p e r s o n a l r e l a t ionships.

Onaequently, t h s se va r i ab le s f i g u r e prominently i n a person* s

efinition of s e l f and es t imat ion of self-worth. A l i k e l y mani fes ta t ion

the in t e rac t ions of these f a c t o r s is conversa t ional o r r e l a t i o n a l

tyle as re f lec ted i n an i n d i v i d u a l ' s conversa t ional s t r a t e g i e s . One's

- - -

5 0

style may be as unique as a fingerprint; but in certain

predictable patterns of speaking may occur.

compliance-gaining techniques revealed in natural, ongoing conversation

mag vary as a consequence of an individual's status within the

organization or group, or of an individual's sex. At present, the

predictabili* of compliance-gaining behavior is uncertain. The

question of whether or not a person's status has greater inpact than

traditional stereotypes in terms of directing that person's

converational maneuvers has yet to be explored. Will the power that

goes with greater status, particularly in the organizational setting,

emerge as or be reflected in trends of control techniques in actual

conversation? The aim of this research is to provide some insight into

the effects of sex and status on actual, non-manipulated interaction.

CHAPTER 111: METHOD

Subjects. The participants in this study were a college dean, 13

full-time faculty aembers and six of the full-time graduate students of

the Department of Communication at the University of Delaware.

Participants were categorized by sex and departmental status, i.e.,

tenured, tenure-track, one-year appointment; full professor, associate

professor, assistant professor, instructor, teaching assistant or

graduate fellow. During the entire series of conversational samplings,

the subject population remained relatively stable. However, the dean

was a participant in only one of the faculty meetings in the sample.

Furthermore, the graduate student participants did not remain constant

throughout sampling since the graduate students attended faculty

meetings on a rotating basis consisting of one new student (current year

and one experienced student (prior year appointment).

Wherever these participants occurred, they were accounted for in the

data analysis and addressed in the results section of this research.

-

52

Sampling s t r a t e g y . During t h e per iod from October through December

( ~ ~ 1 1 Semester 19801, r egu la r ly scheduled f a c u l t y meetings--a t o t a l of

five--were tape-recorded i n t h e i r e n t i r e t y . Recordings va r i ed between

a p p r o x ~ a t e l y one hour and one-and-a-half hours i n length. Recordings

were made v i a a concealed tape r eco rde r wi th t h e microphone and recorder

located we l l above eye l e v e l a t t h e conference room t a b l e . Recordings

a t approximately 4 p.m., t h e scheduled beginning of f a c u l t y

meetings, and r an u n t i l t h e conclusion of t he meeting. Although f a c u l t y

members were aware they were being recorded, they were not informed a s

to the purpose o r r a t i o n a l e of t h e research.

The f i r s t recorded f a c u l t y meeting was not used i n t h e d a t a

analysis; r a t h e r , t h i s i n i t i a l record ing was used a s t r a i n i n g m a t e r i a l

for conversat icnal coders s i n c e i t c l o s e l y approximated a c t u a l raw d a t a

gathered l a t e r . This approach a l s o allowed f o r some c o n t r o l of " s o c i a l

des i r ab i l i t y " e f f e c t s on i n t e r a c t i o n a s t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s became used t o

and eventual ly disregarded a " l i ve" microphone p re sen t a t t h e meetings.

Pro tec t ion of source i d e n t i t y was assured t o a l l p a r t i c i p a n t s ;

n te rac tors were i d e n t i f i e d i n t ape t r a n s c r i p t s by f i r s t name only.

I n f o ~ e d consent forms were obtained from each p a r t i c i p a n t p r i o r t o t he

first tapiQ3 s e s s i o n ( s e e Appendix A ) .

. .

53

Recorded m a t e r i a l was examined only by t h e researcher and

assistants; with t h e exception of t h e use of sample s tatements from

which any names were ed i t ed , c o n f i d e n t i a l i t y of i n t e r a c t i o n was

In add i t ion t o p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the f a c u l t y meetings, i n t e r a c t o r s

were asked t o respond t o two modified forms of the Marwell and Schmitt

compliance-gaining ques t ionnai re , which were administered a t two

different times a f t e r the f i n a l tap ing sess ion . Addi t ional ly

par t ic ipants were asked t o respond t o a ques t ionna i r e about f a c u l t y

meeting funct ions ( s e e Appendix F) .

Tape t r ansc r ip t ion . Each tape was. t ranscr ibed and marked t o

ident i fy speakers by f i r s t name only. Transcribed conversat ion was

marked f o r episodes which were defined a s sequences of conversa t ion

which maintained a common focus of a t t e n t i o n o r centered on a common

topic ( ~ a s l e t t , no te 2 ) .

Data ana lys is . To account f o r poss ib l e sex b i a ses i n i n t e r p r e t i n g

frequency o r type of compliance-gaining techniques, two coders ,

ne male and one female, were used. R e l i a b i l i t y between coders was

a f t e r t h e i r i n i t i a l a t tempts t o code the prel iminary t r a i n i n g

material and was found t o be 90%. R e l i a b i l i t y between coders on the

of t he a c t u a l d a t a was 89%. Coders used both t h e recordings and

the t ranscript ions t a code each u t t e rance based on a conversa t ional

scheme adaptad f ram the 16 M a n e l l and Schmi t t Comgliance-Gaining

54

~ ~ ~ h ~ i q u e s (see Appendix B) . The s e l e c t i o n of four s i t u a t i o n s by

l lanre l l and Schmitt ( j o b , family, s a l e s , roommate) was not systematic;

these researchers se l ec ted these s i t u a t i o n s because a v a r i e t y of

techniques could be used i n each . ( a s is more probably the case i n

natural i n t e r a c t i v e contexts ) , and because these s i t u a t i o n s met th ree

1 ) they allow f o r concent ra t ion on short-term compliance (vs.

long-- o r r e p e t i t i v e ) ; 2 ) they vary the ac to r - t a rge t a u t h o r i t y

relat ionships which could influence technique s e l e c t i o n ; 3) they allow

or some empathy on the p a r t of t h e s tuden t s used i n the research

ample. Since t h i s cu r ren t research focuses on a very s p e c i f i c

s i tuat ion, the f a c u l t y meeting, both the ques t ionnai re and the

conversational coding scheme used a s examples probable u t t e rances

ppropriate t o t h a t context ( s e e Appendix c ) .

The dura t ion ( t o the neares t 1 / I0 second) of each p a r t i c i p a n t ' s

utterances was recorded so t h a t a measure of each s u b j e c t ' s t o t a l

urn time could be obtained.

The da ta a n a l y s i s was e s s e n t i a l l y d e s c r i p t i v e and focused on the

1 ) Frequency of p a r t i c u l a r verbal compliance-gaining techniques

the group a s a whole based on tha Marwell and Schmitt f i r s t - and

econd-order f a c t o r loadings ( s e e Appendix D) .

55

2) Contrasts between sex, status variables, noting trends in

compliance-gaining techniques.

3) Relationship of total talking time to frequency of technique

choice by individual interactors.

4) Degree of correlation between participants' responses to the

questionnaire and actual compliance-gaining techniques used in

interact ion.

5) Applicability of the experimental coding scheme to

naturally-occurring conversation.

Frequencies of responses to the questionnaire and frequencies of

strategies as determined by the coded verbal behavior were examined for

effects of the two variables, status and sex.

The two administrations of the questionnaire were compared for

stability in responses by means of a Pearson Product Moment Correlation.

Scores used in the comparison were the responses on the six-point scale

by each participant for each technique, and a comparison using mean

Cores for each participant for the questionnaire as a whole was made

rechniques were rank ordered by mean score of faculty responses to

the 9uestionnaFre. Comparisons of sll sex and status populations for

dif erenfes in responses to the compliance-gaining questionnaire were

56

made bg means of t - t e s t s f o r each p o p l a t i o n comparison f o r each

Tota l t u rn time measures were analyzed through a 2 X 3 f a c t o r i a l

design ANOVA and a n ANCOVA on sex c o n t r o l l i n g f o r s t a t u s e f f e c t s .

Compliance-gaining technique a n a l y s i s based on t h e a c t u a l coded

data from the recordings was performed by means of simple count and

Additional ques t ionnai re d a t a obtained i n the "Faculty Neeting

~ues t ionna i r e" ( ~ ~ p e n d i x G ) was analyzed through mean score comparisons

for each ques t ionnai re item.

The proposed coding scheme der ived from the da ta was analyzed

descr ip t ive ly and on a raw count comparison bas i s .

Research assumptions. The b a s i c assumption of t h e procedures - outlined above was t h a t t h e observa t ion of na tura l ly-occurr ing

in terac t ion allows f o r g r e a t e r e x t e r n a l v a l i d i t y than e l t h e r an

experimental o r manipulated approach t o t h e problem, o r complete

on a behavioral ques t ionna i r e which may be contaminated by

d e s i r a b i l i t y f a c t o r s on t h e p a r t of respondents. However,

Several inherent weaknesses of t h i s method were apparent. F i r s t ,

the a n a l y s i s was p r imar i ly d e s c r i p t i v e a s opposed to

S ta t i s t i ca l . t he f indings may be too open t o i n t e q r e t a t i o n and t h e

considered too s u b j e c t i v e i n na ture . Coder r e l i a b i l i t y , a t

least i n s o f a r a s i s o l a t i n g a c t u a l compliance-gaining techniques,

ameliorated t h i s drawback. Second, t he coding i t s e l f e n t a i l e d gome

degree of inference on the p a r t of t h e coders s i n c e codes were not

t o t a l l y unambiguous, nor were u t t e rances convenient ly d i s c r e t e i n t h e

recorded mater ia l . Also, although prosodic f e a t u r e s were not

transcribed, coders were c e r t a i n l y aware of i n t o n a t i o n contours and

other p a r a l i n g u i s t i c d a t a a s they l i s t e n e d t o t h e tapes . This f a c t may

have had some e f f e c t on t h e coding even though coders were os t ens ib ly

concerned only wi th t h e ve rba l content of t h e u t t e rances . However, t h e

high degree of agreement makes t h i s l i m i t a t i o n neg l ig ib l e .

A f u r t h e r assumption of t h e ou t l ined procedures was t h a t

par t ic ipants would " forge t" t h e f a c t t h a t they were being recorded and

would behave a s they normally d id when unobserved. The l i m i t a t i o n i n

the event t h a t s u b j e c t s were n o t accustomed t o t h e recorder gas t h e

poss ib i l i t y of c o n t m i n a t i o n wi th s o c i a l d e s i r a b i l i t y e f f e c t s made worse

the soph i s t i ca t ion ( a s Communication f a c u l t y ) of t he pa ' r t ic ipants .

CHAPTER I V : RESULTS

TO answer t h e research ques t ions posed i n Chapter I , t h r e e genera l

data s e t s were examined : 1 ) t he ques t ionna i r e d a t a , 2 ) t o t a l t u r n time

data, and 3) the coded d a t a of t h e a c t u a l taped conversat ions.

The ques t ionnai re d a t a was analyzed with a t t e n t i o n t o fou r

specif ic dimensions. The f i r s t , t e s t - r e t e s t r e l i a b i l i t y , was determined

ques t ionna i r e responses over a

eriod of time. The second dimension, rank o rde r t o technique

reference, was analyzed with r e spec t t o t h e genera l f a c u l t y response

or technique preference and t h e relationship of t h a t response t o

a m e l l and S c h m i t t ' s second-order f a c t o r s . The t h i r d and f o u r t h

bens ions explored i n t h e ques t ionna i r e d a t a were d i f f e r e n c e s on

SPonses t o each item on t h e ques t ionna i r e a s a func t ion of t h e sex and

ta tus v'ariables.

Total t u rn time a n a l y s i s included a summary of genera l t u r n t i n e

easures and s p e c i f i c r e s u l t s of t h e s n a l y s i s of var iance performed t o

u s v a r i a b l e s cn t o t a l t u r n

59

The f i n a l a r e a of ana lys i s was the d a t a examined by the coders who

evaluated t h e taped, t ranscr ibed conversat ions. This l a s t s e c t i o n

included both t h e r e s u l t s obtained wi th p a r t i a l coder agreement and

those obtained wi th t o t a l coder agreement.

QUESTIOESNAIRE DATA

Tes t - r e t e s t r e l i a b i l i t y . The compliance-gaining ques t ionna i r e was

administered twice t o the same p a r t i c i p a n t s . Approximately 60 days

elapsed between - t he f i r s t and second t e s t i n g s . Pearson Product Moment

Correlations were computed t o determine t h e t e s t - r e t e s t r e l i a b i l i t y

coeff icient between the f i r s t and second adminis t ra t ions of the

compliance-gaining quest ionnaire . A mean score f o r each p a r t i c i p a n t f o r

each t e s t adminis t ra t ion was obtained. These p a i r s of s co res were used

i n computing t h e f i r s t measure of t e s t - r e t e s t r ~ l i a b i l i t y . The

resul t ing c o e f f i c i e n t of c o r r e l a t i o n was 2=+.79.

In addi t ion , a mean score f o r each ques t ionnai re i tem (ac ross

part ic ipants) was obtained f o r the f i r s t t e s t and f o r t he second t e s t .

pa i r s of s co res f o r t he 17 o r i g i n a l ques t ionnai re i tems were then

used i n computing the second measure of t e s t - r e t e s t r e l i a b i l i t y . The

resulting c o e f f i c i e n t of c o r r e l a t i o n was ~ z f . 9 6 .

Rank order of technique preference. The second admin i s t r a t ion of

he quest ionnaire was examined i n depth s i n c e i t included boih the

14amell nnd Schmitt techniques and the two added techniques,

2 1

6 0

and Camaraderie. Additionally, the second

compliance-gaining questionnaire omitted the names of the techniques and

only the 1-6 rating scale and the technique descriptions with

(see Appendix D for the complete questionnaire. )

Mean scores based on the responses of all participants were

computed for each questionnaire item and a rank ordering of technique

preference was obtained. (see Table 1 .) Based on the mean scores, the

participants showed greatest preference for Camaraderie and least

preference for Aversive Stimulation.

A score of 4.00 placed a technique within the "might possibly not

use" preference range; thus a smaller score indicates some willingness

to use that particular technique. According to the rank ordering of

compliance-gaining technique preference, one-half of the items resulted

n scores of leas thsn 4.00. Of these first nine choices, five were

among those included in Marwell and Schmitt's second-order factor,

(tendency to use socially acceptable tachniques); two choices, Altruism

and - Debt vere included in the second-order factor, (tendency to use

s0cia117 unacceptable techniqaes); and two choices, Camaraderie and

Flattery, were those added to the questionnaire and coding

Scheme by the researcher.

smal :icul

TABLE 1

Rank-Ordering of Compliance-Gaining Technique Preference

chnique Mean ~ c o r e c a ]

Camaraderie

A 1 t ruism

Exper t i se ( p o s i t i v e )

Liking; Al tercas t ing ( p o s i t i v e )

Esteem ( p o s i t i v e )

Se l f - f ee l ing (pos i t ive )

Sycophantic F l a t t e r y

Debt

Exper t i se (negat ive)

Promise

Pre-giving

Se l f - f ee l ing (negat ive)

Esteem (negat ive)

Moral Appeal

Al t e rcas t ing (negat ive)

Threat

hversive St imulat ion

. l e r the mean score , t h e g r e a t e r the preference f o r t h a t

. a r technique .

6 2

sex d i f f e r ences . Mean s c o r e s f o r t h e responses of males and

females f o r each q u e s t i o n n a i r e i t em Were computed* ( s e e Table 2 . ) To

determine if t h e d i f f e r e n c e s between t h e s e s c o r e s were s i g n i f i c a n t ,

t-tests were performed on each q u e s t i o n n a i r e i tem. O v e r a l l , t h e mean

scores f o r males were l e s s t han f o r females on 14 of t h e 18 t echn iques ;

however, t h e t-tests i n d i c a t e d t h a t f o r no techn ique were t h e

d i f fe rences between males and females s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t . ( s e e

S t a t u s d i f f e r e n c e s . For each q u e s t i o n n a i r e i t em, a mean s c o r e f o r

tenured f a c u l t y , t enu re - t r a ck f a c u l t y , and one-year appointments p l u s

graduate s t u d e n t s ( h e r e i n a f t e r de s igna t ed a s "non-tenure-track") was

obtained. ( s e e Table 2 . ) To de te rmine i f t h e d i f f e r e n c e s i n mean s c o r e s

among t h e t h r e e s t a t u s l e v e l s were s i g n i f i c a n t , t-tests were performed

f o r each s t a t u s comparison. The d i f f e r e n c e s i n mean s c o r e s between

s t a t u s l e v e l s were n o t s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t f o r any of t h e

Compliance-gaiaing techn iques . ( s e e Table 3. )

TOTAL TURN T L ~

General measures. Actual t o t a l t u r n t ime (TTT) t o t h e n e a r e s t "10

number o f t u r n s , and mean t u r n l e n g t h (MTL) t o t h e n e a r e s t .10

were t a l l i e d f o r aach i n t e r l o c u t o - . (See Table 4 . ) Alsc inc luded

in T2ble 1 a r e t h e average t u r n t imes f o r each i n d i v i d u a l . These

t i n e s were computed by summing t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s t u r n t imes f o r

Techn iqus

Total

TABLE 2

Mean Scores For All Data Classifications For All Compliance-Gaining Techniques (~uestionnaire)

Tenure- All - Males

.- Females Tenured Track

Non-Tenure Track

TABLE 3

t-Test Results for Questionnaire Data Differences Between Mean Scores for All Techniques

Tenure/#on- Tenure- rack/ Technique Males/~emales Tenured/Tenure- rack Tenure Track Won-Tenure Track

t (df=16) p< - - t (df=7) p< - t (df=10) p< - t (df=l3) p< I

Note: All comparisons show no statistically significant differences in responses to the - questionnaire.

TABLE 4

ocut -

Mea - Tota l Turn Time, Number of Turns,

n Turn Length and Average Turn Time f o r Each P a r t i c i ~ a n t

TTT # of MTL (seconds). - Turns (seconds)

A (chair-male) 4697.1 51 2 9 2 s B (tenured male) 1633.3 256 6.4 ; C ( t - t r ack male) 836.8 274 3 -0

rack . - E (tenured femaie) F ( n t t female) G ( n t t female) H ( t - t rack male)

' I ( n t t male) J ( t - t rack male K ( t - t rack female) L ( n t t female) M ( t - t r ack male) N (male grad) 0 (female grad) X ( dean-f emale)

TTT , a l l p a r t i c i p a n t s f o r a l l meetings a 12501.2 including 8.5 seconds of un iden t i f i ed speakers.

cha i r = departmental cha i r tenured = cur ren t ly a tenured f a c u l t y member t - t rack = cur ren t ly a tenure-seeking f a c u l t y member n t t = a non-tenure-seeking f a c u l t y member ( 1 -year ax grad = graduate s tudents dean = dean of col lege

Average TT

( seconds)

seconds,

1.

66

all the meetings s /he a t t ended , and d iv id ing t h i s number by t h e number

of mee tiws attended.

Because meeting at tendance was ro t a t ed among the graduate s tuden t s ,

all males graduate s tuden t s were t r e a t e d a s one i n t e r l o c u t o r , a s were

all female graduate s tudents . Thus, the graduate s tudent TTT's a r e

actual lg the summed p a r t i c i p a t i o n of a l l graduate s tuden t s of each sex.

(see Appendix E f o r t o t a l t u rn time per meeting.)

The 2 X 3 f a c t o r i a l des ign ANOVA was computed t o determine the

e f fec ts of sex , s t a t u s , and t h e i n t e r a c t i o n of sex and s t a t u s i n

combination on average t u r n time. ( see Table 5 f o r indiv idual e e l 1

average turn times.) The measures used i n the c a l c u l a t i o n were t h e

average turn times f o r each i n t e r l o c u t o r , excluding the p a r t i c i p a t i o n of

the department c h a i r and the dean. These two exclus ions were deemed

necessary s i n c e the person o r persons who nominally c o n t r o l t he meeting

would normally be expected t o dominate t u r n time. ( see Table 4 f o r

TT' s f o r these excluded in t e r locu to r s . )

The department c h a i r and the dean were included i n the f i n a l

a n a l ~ 3 i s , an a n a l y s i s of covariance. This a n a l y s i s looked st the e f f e c t

sex on t o t a l turn time with s t a t u s s t a t i s t i c a l l y cont ro l led .

ion

6 7

TABLE 5

ANOVA Subgroup Average Turn Times: Sex X S ta tus

Average Turn Time (

544.4

115.9

143.5 (s.d.378

210.4

18 .1 (s.d.=22

NTT-females 38.1 (s.d.=43

[a]subgroups with more than one pa r t i c ipan t show standa deviation a s well a s average tu rn time.

TABLE 5

ANOVA Subgroup Average Turn Times: Sex X S ta tus

Average Turn Time

well a s average tu rn time.

seconds)

I .08) [a]

6 8

~ A L Y S I S OF TOTAL TURN TIME

Sex. The r e s u l t s of the ANOVA ind ica t ed t h a t sex has a s i g n i f i c a n t - impact on average tu rn time ( ~ ( 1 - ,8) = 6.039, x<-05) I n gene ra l , males

had a s i g n i f i c a n t l y more average t u r n time pe r meeting than females.

Average t u r n time f o r males was 162.2 seconds (SD - = 175.0 seconds). For

females, t he average tu rn time was 79.8 seconds (SD - = 79.1 seconds).

The r e s u l t s of t he ANCOVA indica ted t h a t even with s t a t u s

s t a t i s t i c a l l y con t ro l l ed , t he sex v a r i a b l e s i g n i f i c a n t l y inf luenced

average turn time. A s i n t h e ANOVA r e s u l t s , the ANCOVA procedure

revealed t h a t the males produced g r e a t e r average t u r n time than the

females ( ~ ( 1 - ,3) = 4.842, Z< .05).

Status. A s with t h e sex v a r i a b l e , t h e s t a t u s v a r i a b l e

s i m i f i c a n t l y influenced averhge t u r n time. A Duncan's Mult iple Range

Test indicated t h a t the d i f f e r e n c e s i n tu rn time when t h e t h r e e s t a t u s

groups were compared were s i g n i f i c a n t a t t he .05 l e v e l i n a l l cases.

(see Table 6 ) . Tenursd f a c u l t y had s i g n i f i c a n t l y more average tu rn time

than d id tenure-track f a c u l t y and non-tenure-track f a c u l t y ; and

tenure-track f a c u l t y showed s i g n i f i c a n t l y more average tu rn time per

meeting than non-tenure-track f a c u l t y . Tenured f a c u l t y average t u r n

time Per meeting was 330.2 seconds (z = JO J .O seconds) ; tenure-track

a c u l t ~ , 156.5 sezonds (g = 75.0 seconds) ; and non-tenure-track

seconds (g = 37.5 seconds) ( ~ ( 2 , 8 ) - = 13.384, g . 0 0 5 ) .

6 9

TABLE 6

Resul t s of the ~ u n c a n ' s Mult iple Range Tests Comparing ANOVA Subgroups

Differences Level of Subgroups Compared Between the Means Significant

175.6 05 298.8 05 123.2 - 05

T-male vs. NTT-males 526.3 95 T-male vs . NTT-females 506.3 .05 T-male vs. TT-males 490 9 05 T-male vs . TT-female 334.0 05 T-male vs. T-female 428 5 - 05 l'T-female vs . NTT-males 192.3 05 TT-female vs. NTT-females 172.3 n.s . TT-female vs . TT-males 65.9 n.s. TII-female vs . T-female 94.5 n.s. TT-males vs. T-female 27.6 n.s. TT-males vs. NTT-males 125.4 n .s . TT-males vs. NTT-females 105.4 n.3. -female vs. NTT-females 77.3 n.s.

female vs. NTT-males 97.8 n. s. T-nales vs. NTT-females 20 .O n . s .

tenured; TT = tenure-track; NTT = non-tenure-track

70

sex X Status. The interactive effects of sex and status also

ielded a significant effect (~(2,8) - = 9.429, p( .OI ) . A computation of

J)uncaIl's Multiple Range Test indicated that six of the 15 comparisons

re significant at the .05 level. (see Table 6 for the results of the

Duncan's Multiple Range test comparing individual cells.) The tenured

le accounted for significantly more average turn time per meeting than

all other cells. The tenure-track female showed the second highest

level of participation; however, she was significantly different from

only the tenured male, who was higher, and the non-tenure-track males

who had a lower average score. Although the tenure-track female showed

eater average turn time than the tenure-track males, this difference

as not statistically significant. Similarly, although the average turn

e of the non-tenure-track females exceeded that of non-tenure-track

es, the difference was not s~atistically significant. All other cell

parisons yielded no statistical significance.

DING OF TAPED CONVERSATION

The approximately 4-1/2 hours of taped conversation yielded 370

isodes. Each episode was coded for compliance-gaining techniques (see

Pendix B for coder instructions and guidelines). Intercoder

iabilit~ for all episodes was 895. For episodes in which coders

reed that techniques were being used, intercoder reliability in

latinf3 the techniques was 62%. Of 370 episodes, 47 episodes resulted

nOn-agreemen% between coders; of these 43 episodes, 5 showed

7 1

intercoder agreement on who was speaking and agreement on the

a technique was being employed, with disagreement on the

technique. The remaining 38 episodes involved dec is ions by

tha t a technique was i n use , with a d e c i s i o n by the o t h e r coder

compliance-gaining at tempt was apparent i n t h e episode. Epis

speaker agreement, technique disagreement a r e a s follows:

Compliance-Gaining Technique Selec ted

Expert ise ( p o s i t i v e ) o r Liking

Expert ise ( p o s i t i v e ) o r Camaraderie

Moral Appeal o r Camaraderie

Nora1 Appeal o r Camaraderie

Tenured Femsle Expert ise ( p o s i t i v e ) o r Camaraderie

Of the remaining 327 episodes, t h e coders agreed t h a t 319

involve any compliance-gaining technique. The e igh t episodes

coded a s containing compliance-gaining a t tempts and t h a t coder

on the techniques and the speaker a r e summarized below:

Compliance-Gaining Technique

Moral Appeal

Exper t i se ( poai t i v e )

Camaraderie

Camaraderie

Expert ise ( p o s i t i v e )

Camaraderie

Camaraderie

Exper t i se ( p o s i t i v e )

f a c t t h a t

type of

one coder

B t h a t no

odes with

d id not

t h a t were

s agreed

7 2

TO summarize, of 327 i n s t ances of i n t e rcode r agreement, 2.4% of the

,*isodes contained compliance-gaining at tempts .

Overall , t e s t - r e t e s t s t a b i l i t y was very s t rong when the f i r s t and

second ques t ionnai res were compared ac ross i tems. Rank ordering of

techniques indica ted a g r e a t e r preference by f a c u l t y members f o r

socially acceptable techniques a s we l l a s f o r t h e a d d i t i o n a l techniques

included by the researcher . There were no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e rences

across techniques a s a func t ion of sex and s t a t u s of t he respondent.

The ana lys i s of t o t a l t u r n time based on average t u r n time f o r each

par t ic ipant revealed s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n the p a r t i c i p a t i o n of t he

in ter locutors based on t h e i r sex , on t h e i r s t a t u s , and e s p e c i a l l y on t h e

in terac t ion of both t h e sex and s t a t u s va r i ab le s .

F ina l ly , t h e examination of t he coded d a t a from the taped

conversations indica ted t h a t i n t e rcode r agreement was s a t i s f a c t o r y , but

hat few compliance-gaining a t tempts were found i n t h e t o t a l number of

The following chapter focuses on a d i scuss ion of these r s s u l t s and

t h e research impl ica t ions of t he f ind ings , p a r t i c u l a r l y

within the context of the research quest ions.

CHAPTER V: DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS

DISCUSSION

In t h i s s e c t i o n t h e d a t a a r e d iscussed i n terms of t h e research

questions posed i n Chapter I. The r e s u l t s of t h e ques t ionna i r e d a t a r

; analysis, t o t a l t u r n time a n a l y s i s and conve r sa t iona l d a t a a n a l y s i s a r e

' I L included. I n l i g h t of t h i s d i scuss ion , t h e imp l i ca t ions f o r a d d i t i o n a l I'

analysis of compliance-gaining a t tempts i n t h e d a t a a r e explored. L, i d F 0 The f i r s t ques t ion posed i n t h e s tatement of t he problem was: W i l l k

m l e s and females d i f f e r i n t h e i r use of and preference f o r

Compliance-gaining techniques? Regarding t h e i s s u e of

pliance-gaining technique preference , t h e ques t ionnai re d a t a revea led

t although males and females showed some d i f f e r e n c e s i n responses a s

emplified by d i f f e r i n g mean s c o r e s f o r most i tems, when examined

a t i s t i c a l l y t hese d i f f e r ences were no t s i g n i f i c a n t . Thus, i n s o f a r a s

e se l f - repor t measure i s concerned, males and females d id no t d i f f e r

ign i f icant ly i n t h e i r preference f o r compliance-gaining techniques when

Pared ac rc s s techniques.

7 4

s i m i l a r l y , t he second research i s s u e concerned whether o r not

tatus or occupat ional p o s i t i o n would be a f a c t o r i n d e t e m i n i n g

preference f o r and use of compliance-gaining techniques o r s t r a t e g i e s .

Regarding the i s s u e of compliance-gaining technique preference , t h e

,tatus va r i ab le d id no t c r e a t e s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n responses t o

the quest ionnaire when the t h r e e d i f f e r e n t s t a t u s populat ions were

s t a t i s t i c a l l y .

The high l e v e l of t e s t - r e t e s t r e l i a b i l i t y sugges ts t h a t t h e

espondents were r e l a t i v e l y c o n s i s t e n t i n t h e i r r e a c t i o n s t o the use of

compliance-gaining techniques a s described i n t h e ques t ionnai re .

For the 18 techniques, responses of t he f a c u l t y a s a group remained

stable with r e l a t i v e l y l i t t l e d r i f t from one t e s t adminis t ra t ion t o t h e

other. This suggests t h a t t e s t i n g e f f e c t s and s t a t i s t i c a l regress ion

effects were mininal. However, t h i s s e l f - r e p o r t instrument was no t

cessar i ly an accura te r e f l e c t i o n of t h e r e a l behaviors the respondents

uld use i n a n a t u r a l context . Consequently, t h e important

~ ~ s i d e r a t i o n f o r t he f i r s t two research ques t ions i s whether o r not t h e

compliance-gaining techniques r e f l e c t e d i n a c t u a l verba l behavior

d i f f e r by sex o r by s t a t u s s i n c e t h e s e l f - r e p o r t measures

gested t h a t no d i f f e rences would be evident .

7 5

Recall t h a t t h e coding of t h e f a c u l t y meeting conversat ions y ie lded

89 percent i n t e rcode r agreement, but t h a t t h e major i ty of episodes of

intercoder agreement contained no compliance-gaining at tempts . Although

conclusions drawn from so few coded techniques must n e c e s s a r i l y be

highly specula t ive , one such conclusion from conversa t ional d a t a i s t h a t

nei ther males and females, no r tenured, tenure- t r ack and

non-tenure-track f a c u l t y d i f f e r g r e a t l y i n t h e i r use of t he modified

Marwell and Schmitt ca t egor i e s of compliance-gaining techniques, s i n c e

all groups used v i r t u a l l y no compliance-gaining techniques a t a l l i n

4-1 /2 hours of conversat ion.

Despite t h i s apparent l ack of compliance-gaining i n f a c u l t y meeting

conversation, one very important r e s u l t of t h e d a t a ana lys i s r e q u i r e s

mention: Of t h e 13 episodes f o r which coders agreed t h a t

compliance-gaining techniques were i n use , i n every case the speaker

agreed upon by t h e coders was an ind iv idua l of high s t a t u s . The order

f s t a t u s des ignat ions from g r e a t e s t s t a t u s t o l e a s t s t a t u s wi th in the

university organiza t ions is: dean, c h a i r , tenured f a c u l t y , tenure-track

faculty, non-tenure-track f a c u l t y , and graduate s tudents . Thus, the top

three s t a t u s l e v e l s were de tec tsd i n t h e coding of the da ta ; t he bottom

three l e v e l s were not . Furthermore, t h e department c h a i r , who at tended

four meetings, accounted f o r n ine of the compliance-gaining

the dean, present a t only one meeting, a c c o u ~ t e d f o r two

attempts; and t h e tenured f a c u l t y members accounted f o r t h e remaining

W0 While these d a t a a r e f a r too few from which t o genera l ize

about status and compliance-gaining technique use, it is important to

note that the only instances of technique use were the province of the

higher status individuals. The questionnaire data are clearly at odds

with the conversational data, since the questionnaire results do not

suggest any differences in use depending on status. Other factors

appear to be influencing the use of compliance-gaining techniques, and

will be addressed later.

The sex variable produced no striking contrasts in the coded

conversational data. The technique use by the dean (female) was roughly

equivalent to that of the chair (male) when viewed in terms of technique

use per meetings attended. Similarly, the tenured male and tenured

female exhibited eauivalent techniaue use. with each individual - .ng for one compliance-gaining attempt. Although the data are

far too scant to be conclusive, this result augments the questionnaire

results, which indicated no significant difference in technique

preference between males and females.

The third research inquiry centered upon whether or not any

Particular compliance-gaining technique would be used more than other

echniques by the group. Again, the coded conversational data, although

limited, indicate that Camaraderie was used more than any other

technique (four instances of intercoder agreement, four instances in

which only one coder suggested ~ameraderie) . Expertise (~ositive) was

the second most frequently used technique (three instances of intercoder

77

t h r e e in s t ances i n which only one coder suggested Expertise

(positive). Nora1 A p ~ e a l was t h e t h i r d most popular technique (one

of i n t a r c o d e r agreement, two i n s t a n c e s i n which only one coder

suggested Moral Appeal). The f i n a l choice was Liking, a l though the re

was no i n t e r c o d e r agreement on t h i s technique* No o t h e r

compliance-gaining techniques were ev ident i n t he d a t a wi th p a r t i a l o r

total coder agreement. It i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o no te t h a t ~ x p e r t i s e , oral

Appeal and Liking a r e a l l members of Marwell and ~ c h m i t t ' s second-order

fac tor , "tendency t o use s o c i a l l y accep tab le techniques." It i s f u r t h e r

argued here t h a t Camaraderie, descr ibed i n t h e ques t ionna i r e and t h s

coding scheme " s ince we a r e a l l i n t h i s t oge the r , you w i l l want t o

comply," can be conaidered a s o c i a l l y accep tab le technique, e s p e c i a l l y

when cont ras ted wi th the techniques t h a t appear i n t h e " s o c i a l l y

unacceptable" category. The f a c t t h a t t he use of Camaraderie exceeds

a l l other techniques sugges ts t h a t , a t l e a s t w i th in t h i s f a c u l t y meeting

se t t i ng , t h i s technique i s s o c i a l l y acceptab le .

The a c t u a l u s e o f t hese techniques l e a d s t o t he concern expressed

in the fou r th r e sea rch quest ion: W i l l p a r t i c i p a n t s fend t o respond t o

the compliance-gaining ques t ionna i r e i n a manner c o n s i s t e n t wixh t h e i r

previously recordsd n a t u r a l v e r b a l behaviors? The rank o rde r ing of

cOmpliance-gaining technique preference by t h e group a s a whole sugges ts

that there i s some correspondence be tween ques t ionna i r e responses and

3ehavior. The technique most p re fe r r ed by the f a c u l t y was

Camaraderie wi th a mean score of 2.06. A s was j u s t d i scussad ,

camaraderie was the most frequent choice of t he coders i n eva lua t ing the

conversat ional da ta . To t h i s e x t e n t , then, t he re is some correspondence

between se l f - repor ted preference and a c t u a l technique use. One must

bear i n mind, however, t h a t t he rank-ordering of techniques was based on

f o r t he e n t i r e f a c u l t y ; t u a l hnique use involved only

four f acu l ty . The correspondence weakens a t t h i s poin t ; the second

the f a c u l t y was i s m 1' e r e a s i n a c t u a l behavior

Expertise ( p o s i t i v e ) was the most f requent . Perhaps the s t a r k e s t

contrast is the t h i r d choice. The f a c u l t y s e l e c t e d Exper t i se ( p o s i t i v e )

(second i n a c t u a l u s e ) , but t he t h i r d i n a c t u a l use was Moral Appeal,

which was ranked a s 14th--not even among t h e top h a l f of t he ranking

which included techniques the f a c u l t y might poss ib ly use. The

nked

) ; - :u l t y choice was

a c t u a l behavior

e i t h e

~ i k i n g

Lik ing o r A 1 t e r c a s t i n g

.as f o u r t h , although with no

coder agreement. There appears t o be some s l i g h t correspondence between

technique preference and a c t u a l technique use. Although the use of

Mot.al Appeal c l e a r l y c o n t r a d i c t s the ranking given by the f a c u l t y , i t i s C--

' important t o note t h a t t h i s technique i s used by the dean and the c h a i r ,

and not o the r f a c u l t y members. These comparisons once aga in r a i s e the t !% / question t h a t r ecu r s i n s o c i a l science: Y i l l people respond t o C

1 questionnaires about behavior i n ways t h a t a r e cons i s t en t with a c t u a l P

behavior? This i l l u s t r a t i o n sugges ts t h a t t h i s may be the case t o a

limited degree. The pauci ty of coded compliance-gaining techniques

'nclusions regarding consis tency between ques t ionnai re YeEponses

79

and verbal behavior highly specula t ive ;

The f i f t h research ques t ions was: W i l l comqliance-gaining

techniques i n conversat ion tend t o form c l u s t e r s , o r s t r a t e g i e s , as

defined by Marwell and Schmitt? It is impossible t o d i s c e r n t h i s

i n fomat ion from t h e coded d a t a , which were too few t o f a c t o r analyze.

~t t h i s po in t , t h i s ques t ion must remain unanswered u n t i l a l a r g e r o r

perhaps d i f f e r e n t body of d a t a can be analyzed, o r t h e cu r ren t d a t a can

be c d e d with a more comprehensive coding scheme. With regard t o t h e

current d a t a a n a l y s i s , t h i s ques t ion must be discarded.

The s i x t h research ques t ion touched on an i s s u e a l ready b r i e f l y

discussed: W i l l t h e techniques recorded i n a c t u a l conversat ion tend t o

be predominantly i n any one of Marwell and Schmit t ' s f i r s t - and

second-order f a c t o r s ? The d a t a do not suggest any p a r t i c u l a r

predominance wi th r e spec t t o the f i r s t - o r d e r f ac to r s . Exper t i se

(posi t ive) is a techpique i n the f a c t o r "Expert ise"; Moral Appeal

appears i n "Act iva t ion of Impersonal Commitments"; Liking appears i n

"Rewarding Act iv i ty" ; and Camaraderie does not appear i n any of t h e

f i r s t -order f a c t o r s s i n c e i t was added by t h e researcher t o the group of

However, a s noted be fo re , t h e f i r s t t h r e e of these

techniques a r e aembers of the second-order f a c t o r , "tendency t o use

accep tab l s techniques," and, f o r reasons c i t e d e a r l i e r ,

mag a l s o be considered p a r t of t h i s f a c t o r . E s s e n t i a l l y

his r e in fo rces what most people f a m i l i a r with a u n i v e r s i t y

set t ing would suspect : S o c i a l l y acceptable compliance-gaining

\ techniques a r e more normative than non-social ly acceptable techniques. ;

t i The f i n a l research ques t ion asked f o r two sepa ra t e analyses.

!. t F i r s t , would measures of t o t a l t u r n time r e f l e c t s t a t u s and sex 9

i differences of t h e speakers; and second, would t o t a l t u rn time i C I correspond t o speakers ' use of compliance-gaining techniques. For t h e i F f i r s t p a r t of t h e inqui rg , t h e r e s u l t s c l e a r l y i n d i c a t e t h a t , indeed, f-

t sex, s t a t u s and t h e i r i n t e r a c t i o n produce s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e rences i n F

t o t a l t u rn time. However, t h e r e i s evidence t o support t he no t ion t h a t #'

i a speaker 's s o c i a l power i s r e f l e c t e d i n t o t a l t u rn time, a s suggested

I by Eakins and Eakins ( 1 978). o r t h a t , as Thorne and Henley ( 1 975) $

pointed o u t , t o t a l t u rn time may be r e l a t e d t o g r e a t e r " inf luence." The

N O V A yielded s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t r e s u l t s i n d i c a t i n g , a s previous

research has found, t h a t males have g r e a t e r sverage t u r n time than

females. I n s h o r t , males i n t h i s mixed-sex context dominate t h e

opportunity t o t a l k ; i n terms of average t u r n time, females t a l k l e s s

than ha l f a s much a s the males do.

Some of t h e contemporary research i n t o sex d i f f e rences i n human

behavior claims t h a t males enjoy g r e a t e r s o c i a l s t a t u s by v i r t u e of

the i r sex and a r e thus s o c i a l l y e n t i t l e d t o more t a l k time. If s o c i a l

Statas is a determinant i n t a l k time, one would suspect t h a t o v e r t

+ ' b l y inf luence t h e .amount of a t a t ~ s within an organiza t ion might percep "1

talk a l l o t t e d to in t e r locu tg r s . The r e s u l t s of t h e ANCOVA, which showed

=~

81

s ign i f i can t sex d i f f e rences with s t a t u s con t ro l l ed , indica ted t h a t these

conclusions a r e supported. Within the f a c u l t y s e t t i n g , s t a t u s does

appear t o have an inf luence on t o t a l t u rn time s i n c e the ANOVA showed a

s ign i f i can t d i f f e rence i n average t u r n time as a funct ion of

pa r t i c ipan t s ' departmental s t a t u s . These d i f f e rences , compared i n the

mul t ip l e range t e s t , show t h a t tenured f a u l t y have both g r e a t e r s t a t u s

and g rea te r average tu rn time than tenure-track f a c u l t y (more than twice

as much tu rn time, i n f a c t ) ; and tenure-track f a c u l t y who have g r e a t e r

departmental s t a t u s than non-tenure-track f a c u l t y a l s o have

s ign i f i can t ly more tu rn time (nea r ly f i v e times more). The g r e a t e s t

d ispar i ty i n turn time is t h a t tenured f a c u l t y enjoy more than 10 times

as much tu rn time, on the average, a s non-tenure-track facul ty .

Thus f a r the t o t a l t u r n t i n e d a t a seem t o support both previous

research i n t h i s a rea and the reasonable i n t u i t i o n s comnlunicators have

about the p r iv i l eges of s t a t u s . Greater s t a t u s o f t e n provides the

Poss ib i l i ty of l a r g e r s a l a r i e s , bigger houses, and more automobiles; i t

appears t h a t g r e a t e r s t a t u s provides more t u r n time i n conversat ion, a s

It i s reasonable t o p r e d i c t t h a t t he i n t e r a c t i o n of sex and s t a t u s

produce s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t s , as well. Indeed, a s the M O V A

revealed, tu rn time does appear t o be influenced by the i n t e r a c t i o n of

sex and s t a t u s , but with some r a t h e r i n t e r s t i n g and a t y p i c a l r e s u l t s .

82

One poss ib l e e f f e c t of t h e i n t e r a c t i o n of sex and s t a t u s would . b e

tha t malee wi th g r e a t e r s t a t u s wauld have g r e a t e s t average t u r n time and

females wi th l e a s t s t a t u s would have l e a s t average t u r n time. Fu r the r ,

it would seem l i k e l y t h a t i n comparisons between males and females of

q u a 1 s t a t u s , males would e x h i b i t g r e a t e r t u r n times s i n c e normal s o c i a l

s t a t u s v a r i a b l e s , i . e . , s t a t u s by v i r t u e of sex , would be opera t ive . A s

the da t a i n d i c a t e , n e i t h e r p r e d i c t i o n is subs t an t i a t ed . While t h e

tenured male d i d account f o r g r e a t e s t average t u r n t ime, t h e

non-tenure-track males (not t he females) accounted f o r t h e l e a s t . I n

f ac t , a l though t h e tenured female t a lked s i g n i f i c a n t l y l e s s than h e r

male counterpar t , t h e o t h e r two female populat ions ( tenure- t rack and

non-tenure-track) d id no t t a l k s i g n i f i c a n t l y l e s s than t h e i r male

counterparts ; i n f a c t , a l though t h e r e was no s t a t i s t i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e ,

these female populat ions averaged g r e a t e r t u r n time. I f sex was the

predominant f a c t o r involving t u r n t ime, then one could argue t h a t t h e

average t u r n time of any male popula t ion should exceed t h a t of any

female population. This was c l e a r l y no t t h e case. S i m i l a r l y , i f s t a t u s

was the predominant in f luence on t u r n time, i n d i v i d u a l s wi th g r e a t e r

s t a tu s should c o n s i s t e n t l y d i s p l a y g r e a t e r average t u r n t i x e s than

individuals of l e s s e r s t a t u s . Again, t h i s was not t h e case. The

tenure-track female was the second most dominant p a r t i c i p a n t i n t e r n s of

turn time. Apparently males i n s t a t u s l e v e l s below t h e top l e v e l

abdicate t he - r r l g h t s t o t he t u r n time t h a t one would expect them t o

have by v i r t u e of t h e i r g r e a t e r s o c i a l s t a t u s , sex; i t may be t h a t

, In r e a l

F Although b 6,

t h e o r i g i n a l statement ; of the problem

t h i

t h e aver ,age t u r n time a n a l y s i s r

s c l e a r l y r equ i re s

- A A

f u r t h e r s tudy,

83

social s t a t u s i s not a r e l evan t f a c t o r w i th in t h i s s e t t i n g . The female

in the h ighes t s t a t u s l e v e l apparent ly y i e l d s the r i g h t t o t u r n time

tha t would normally be accorded he r by v i r t u e of he r o rgan iza t iona l

I n t h e o r i g i n a l s tatement of t he problem, one of the i s s u e s r a i sed

was the concept t h a t i n many s o c i a l , non-occupational s e t t i n g s t h e r e i s

no easy method of de l imi t ing the inf luence of sex and s t a t u s on t a l k , no

way t o a r b i t r a r i l y g ive females g r e a t e r s t a t u s and males l e s s e r s t a t u s

and then observe the e f f e c t s on conversat ion. It was hoped t h a t t he

organizat ional s e t t i n g wi th i t s h i e r a r c h i c a l arrangement of occupat ional

posi t ions would allow f o r t h i s confounding of sex and s t a t u s va r i ab le s .

In r e a l i t y , t h e average t u r n time a n a l y s i s r e v e a l s t h a t t he i n t e r a c t i v e

e f f ec t s of sex and s t a t u s a r e convoluted and complex, s ince n e i t h e r one

nor the o ther inf luenced the d a t a i n any p red ic t ab le d i r e c t i o n , a l though

influences were ev ident .

Indiv idual pe r sona l i ty c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s undoubtedly inf luence t u r n

time t o some ex ten t , and the smal l c e l l s i z e s i n the AIJOVA allow f o r

considerable impact of i nd iv idua l pe r sona l i ty va r i ab le s . One concern,

consequently, is whether the f ind ings based on a small s eap le s i z e w i l l

generalize t o o the r and perhaps l a r g e r populat ions of i n t e r l o c u t o r s .

t h i s c l e a r l y r equ i re s f u r t h e r s tudy, i f t h e v a r i a b l e s of s t a t u s

and sex were i n f l u e n t i a l i n producing the t u r n time r e s u l t s , then i t

Seems l i k e l y t h a t l a r g e r populat ions would produce t h e same o r s t ronge r

, one o f the i s s u e s r a i sed

evea ls t h a t t he i n t e r a c t i v e

- -

i f t h e

- - - - - - - - . -

v a r i a b l e s of s t a t u s

.I . - - . . .

84

E s s e n t i a l l y , t h e average t u r n time f indings suggest t h a t t h e

organieat ional s e t t i n g may be a f r u i t f u l one f o r examining in f luence i n

te rns of dominance i n volume of t a l k . Unlike non-occupational s e t t i n g s ,

where s t u d i e s have revealed t h a t sex d i f f e rences and t h e i r implied

s t a t u s d i f f e r e n c e s a r e reasonable p r e d i c t o r s of conversa t ional

pa r t i c ipa t ion , t h e organiza t ional s e t t i n g makes p red ic t ion l e s s nea t .

In f a c t , these r e s u l t s suggest t h a t n e i t h e r males nor females need be

hampered by t h e i r sex s t e r e o t y p i c r o l e s when p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n

conversations i n organiza t ional contexts . It may be t h a t t he

in t e rac t ion of sex and s t a t u s w i l l a l low f o r g r e a t e r l a t i t u d e of

individual v a r i a t i o n i n t u r n time, s i n c e s t a t u s and sex do not

necessari ly work i n concert i n determining t h e q u a n t i t y of an

ind iv idua l ' s p a r t i c i p a t i o n .

The second p a r t of t he f i n a l research ques t ion was: Would t o t a l

turn time correspond to speakers ' use of compliance-gaining techniques?

One area of correspondence worth examining involves the opportuni ty f o r

compliance-gaining technique use. E s s e n t i a l l y , the more tu rn time

avai lab le t o a speaker , t he g r e a t e r t he opportuni ty, i n terms of "having

the f loor" f o r t h a t speaker to use ve rba l compliance-gaining techniques.

the l imi t ed number of compliance-gaining techniques found i n

the coded d a t a make conclusions hazardous a t b e s t , t he re appears t o be a

$ l ight a s s o c i a t i o n between tu rn time and technique use. The c h a i r and

85

the dean, ovemhelmingly dominant in term3 of average turn time, are the

pre-eminent users of compliance-gaining techniques - on a

p,,meeting-attended basis. The tenured faculty, who in combination

the second highest average turn time after the chair and the

dean, were responsible for the only other coded instances of

compliance-gaining technique use. More turn time may increase the

number of possible opportunities for the use of compliance-gaining

techniques in conversation. The issue of "opportunity" needs to be

evaluated. Discussions of the influence of situational variables need

to include this consideration in order to adequately describe contextual

information and participants.

IMPLICATIONS

The research findings have raised more questions than they have

answered, and the implications for further research into conversational

compliance-gaining attempts are profound.

The average turn tune data indicate that organizational situations

may not parallel non-occupational situations insofar as the effects of

sex and status are concerned. In order to establish that a sex/status

interaction creates some unusual and relatively unpredictable turn time

results, however, a variety of organizational settings ss well as the

setting need to be investigated. The findings that obtain in a

L 3 ~ ~ l t ~ mketing ccntext may not be evident in, for eranple, a meeting of

heads in a local business. The faculty meeting situation may

8 6

involve a hos t of v a r i a b l e s ( a s , f o r example, t h e s t a t u s t h a t may come

with an i n d i v i d u a l ' s length of s e rv ice ) which a r e not r e a d i l y apparent

but which may inf luence turn time. If t h e sex X s t a t u s i n t e r a c t i v e

effects on tu rn time were examined ac ross a number of d i f f e r e n t types of

meetings, and i f the same kinds of t u r n time d i s t r i b u t i o n s occurred, one

could more s a f e l y argue t h a t t he o rgan iza t iona l context provides f o r

grea ter t u rn time v a r i e t y , s ince n e i t h e r t h e sex nor s t a t u s of t he

speaker would p red ic t ab ly inf luence t u r n time.

The consis tency of ques t ionnai re responses, both i n terms of t h e

t e s t - r e t e s t r e l i a b i l i t y and i n terms of t h e sex and s t a t u s sub-group

comparisons, may be due t o t h e f a c t t h a t t h e respondents were r e l a t i v e l y

homogeneous, e s p e c i a l l y with regard t o p l ace and gene ra l type of

vocation, l e v e l of education ( a l l having a minimum of a bacca laurea te

degree, and a l l having o r planning on obta in ing advanced degrees) ,

socio-economic and s o c i a l c l a s s l eve l . I n add i t ion , t he re was a c e r t a i n

amount of homogeneity i n age, with no respondent being e i t h e r very old

o r very young. Another important f a c t o r i n ques t ionnai re response

consistency i s t h a t the s i t u a t i o n s given i n t h e items were designed t o

be facul ty s i t u a t i o n s , thus al lowing respondents to r e l a t e the items t o

their own experiences. Given t h a t some of those experiences would be

Similar , s ince the p a r t i c i p a n t s were a l l members of the same department,

of response across t h e sex end s t a t u s sub-groups i s not

""tirely su rp r i s ing .

8 7

~h~ two variables that would seem likely to influence responses

and status. Sex of respondent was a likely influence because

of the implications that sex differences are socialization differences;

and status was a likely influence because this otherwise homogeneous

group could be differentiated by status within the university system-

Since no differences in responses to the questionnaire were significant,

it seems that group homogeneity transcended sex or status variables

insofar as the questionnaire responses were concerned.

Finally, the major issue raised by the findings is the

applicability of the compliance-gaining technique coding scheme. It is

impossible to ignore the fact that out of a fairly large number of

conversational episodes, relatively few compliance-gaining attempts were

found. This disparity could have been the result of three possible

factors: inadequate coding, lack of compliance-gaining in the chosen

setting, or inadequacizs in the coding scheme itself.

The first possibility is that the individual coders were unreliable

in their coding of the data, or that they failed to comprehend the

compliance-gaining techniques as described in the coding scheme.

the high degree of intercoder agreement makes this an unlikely

possibility, and the fact that coders did agree on some epis,~des

'Ontaining compliance-gaining attempts makes it still more unlikely.

One expect that if the actual codinq of the conversations was the

problem, intercoder reliability would be erratic or absent.

88

The second p o s s i b i l i t y is t h a t t h e context f o r d a t a c o l l e c t i o n is

,t f a u l t . The f a c u l t y meeting s e t t i n g may not have been an i d e a l forum

f o r i n v e s t i g a t i n g compliance-gaining at tempts . This f a c t o r is

especial ly l i k e l y i f t h e f a c u l t y perce ives i t s e l f and the funct ion of

its meetings a s being more socio-emotional than task-oriented. A s a

par t ic ipant i n and observer of t h i s f a c u l t y ' s departmental meet ings, t he

researcher concluded t h a t the f a c u l t y group seems t o emphasize t h e t a s k

and information-sharing o r i e n t a t i o n wi th in i t s meetings, a s we l l a8 t he

socio-emo t i o n a l o r i en ta t ion . Furthermore, through i n f crmal

conversations wi th the p a r t i c i p a n t s , t he r e sea rche r determined t h a t both

or ien ta t ions a r e ope ra t ive wi th in t h i s f a c u l t y group. Despi te t h e f a c t

tha t some f a c u l t y members tend t o i n t e r a c t more from one o r i e n t a t i o n

than the o t h e r , most f a c u l t y members func t ion wi th in both o r i e n t a t i o n s .

However, i f i n f a c t the f a c u l t y f e l t t h a t compliance-gaining and r e l a t e d

a c t i v i t i e s were of l i f t l e importance i n t h e f a c u l t y meeting s i t u a t i o n ,

then the d a t a base f o r exploring compliance-gaining a t tempts could be

questioned.

To explore t h i s p o s s i b i l i t y , when t h e apparent lack of

compliance-gaining was found i n the coded d a t a , s t h i r d ques t ionnai re

"as administered t o the f acu l ty . This f i n a l instrument was designed t o

determine the f a c u l t y nee t ing funct ions t h a t f a c u l t y members f e l t were

important, and t o a s c e r t a i n the frequency of t h e i r occurrence. ( s e e

Appendix F f o r complete ques t ionnai re . ) Thir teen f a c u l t y meeting

funct ions d e ~ i v e d from in terv iews x i t h f a c u l t y members were l i s t e d in

.d C,

El

CL

UO

m

'"p, .d

0

.d

.d

k 0

mo

m

El u

a!

lh

G

k O

0 d .d

Q

) d

cm

o

-@

P.4 40

40d CD

c ..(

c

.d 4:

.d

hQ

X

ka,(d

+m

E

Y

9 1

fairly important and slightly important, contrasted with the rating of

7.07 on the "importance to me" scale, where it fell between slightly

inportant and neither important or unimportant. These results indicate

that the faculty as individuals are likely to see compliance gaining as

less important to themselves than to the other faculty members as a

group. A similar contrast occurred in terms of the assessment of the

frequency of compliance gaining. Frequency for self was rated 4.27,

between occasionally and infrequently, whereas frequency of occurrence

for the faculty as a whole was rated 3.0 - often. This finding ia

consistent with the responses to the importance scale, wherein the

faculty as individuals perceive their compliance gaining as occurring

less frequently than the compliance gaining of the faculty as a whole.

In general, for the faculty as a whole and to a lesser axtent for the

faculty as individuals, compliance gaining has some importance and

occurs fairly often. Given these, one would anticipate that the coded

data would yield far more than 13 compliance-gaining attempts in 4-i/2

hours of meeting time containing 370 conversational episodes.

A third possible explanation for the conversational coding results

is that the ccmpliance-gaining techniques devised by Marwell and Schmitt

are inadequate for the task of evaluating naturally-occurring

Conversation. Several factors lend credence to this explanation, and

Primary among them is the general nature of compliance-gaining research

92

Compliance-gaining behavior has he re to fo re been accessed almost

through t h e use of paper-and-pencil measures, a s Malwell and

Schmitt (1967) used i n t h e i r o r i g i n a l development of t he f i r s t - and

second-order f ao to r s . S imi l a r ly , M i l l e r - e t - a l . (1977) developed a

quest ionnaire instrument t o i n v e s t i g a t e compliance-gaining techniques i n

te rns of t h e i r use depending on long- o r short-term consequences i n

in terpersonal and non-interpersonal s i t u a t i o n s . More r ecen t ly Cody

McLaughlin, and Jordan (1980) have attempted t o go beyond the

pre-formulated techniques suggested by Marwell and Schmitt and have

inves t iga ted compliance-gaining s t r a t e g i e s through multi-dimensional

scal ing of p a r t i c i p a n t repor ts . Although Cody, et &.. have taken a

more exhaust ive approach by having s t u d e n t s w r i t e about what s t r a t e g i e s

they would use t o ga in compliance i n th ree d i f f e r e n t s i t u a t i o n s , r a t h e r

than having them respond t o pre-formulated techniques, the f a c t remains

tha t the s i t u a t i o n s themselves a r e e s s e n t i a l l y "pre-formulated" and t h e

techniques described a r e those t h a t a r e repor ted by s u b j e c t s r a t h e r than

those t h a t might a c t u a l l y be observed i n t h e i r behavior.

The p r i n c i p a l aim of t h i s research was t o observe

compliance-gaining at tempts - a s they n a t u r a l l y occur , n o t as they a r e

Suspected t o occur, nor a s they a r e repor ted t o occur. To t h i s end, the

techniques constructed by Marnell and Schmitt appear t o have l i t t l e

gengra l i zab i l i t y from ques t ionnai re rneascres t o behaviora l measures.

The one ins t ance of correspondence between ques t ionnai re and performance

(the Camaraderie technique) involved a technique sllgges ted 5y the

!a researcher a f t e r i n i t i a l acces s t o t he f a c u l t y meeting s i t u a t i o n and was

not pa r t of t h e o r i g i n a l l i s t of compliance-gaining techniques suggested

by Marwell and Schmit t . The b e s t i n t e r e s t s of compliance-gaining r e sea rch o r of

conversational research , however, a r e no t served i f t h e i s s u e i s

abandoned a t t h i s point . S ince pre-formulated ca t egor i e s of

compliance-gaining behavior do not apply t o t hese d a t a t o any g r e a t

extent, and s i n c e se l f - r epo r t ed compliance-gaining techniqus a r e a s y e t

untried a s t o t h e i r a p p l i c a b i l i t y t o a c t u a l conversa t iona l behavior , an

a l t e rna t ive s o l u t i o n i s t o develop a data-based model o f

compliance-gaining techniques i n conversat ion.

Such a model can be developed through an ethnographic approach

which c a p i t a l i z e s on t h e n a t u r a l i n f l a e n c e s wi th in t h e s e t t i n g and

minimizes inf luences due t o t h e research p r o j e c t i t s e l f . Wilson

spec i f i ca l ly addresses

behavior:

, se of cod scl f o r

Theore t ica l ly a coding scheme . . . f o r i n t e r p r e t i n g observed behaviors can be developed and communicated so t h a t anyone who has learned t h e scheme, wi th t r a i n i n g and p r a c t i c e , w i l l i n t e r p r e t t h e behav P* 249)

. approximat way.

He fu r the r po in t s out t h a t such schemes a r e a r b i t r a r y , and t h a t t h e most

important frame i n wh unders tan ,e those

par t ic ipants , no t t h e researchers . The data-based model proposed i n t he IIIII

94

following chapter is a n a t tempt t o reduce t h e a r b i t r a r i n e s s of .

compliance-gaining coding schemes and in t roduce p a r t i c i p a n t / o b s e m e r

knowledge i n t o t h e d e s c r i p t i o n s of ve rba l behavior. This approach w i l l

unify both q u a l i t a t i v e and q u a n t i t a t i v e methods of i nqu i ry by sugges t ing

measurable ca t egor i e s of compliance-gaining techniques which a r e der ived

from behaviors the p a r t i c i p a n t s themselves acknowledge. The

ethnographic approach al lows d e s c r i p t i o n s which w i l l account f o r t h e

in t e r locu to r s ' meanings a s we l l a s o b j e c t i v i s t i c d e s c r i p t i o n s of t h e i r

behavior ( ~ e a r c e , 1 977) .

The at tempt t o empi r i ca l ly explore compliance ga in ing i n

conversation has f a l l e n s h o r t of providing the substance f o r conclusive

ana lys is but has suggested t h a t t h e behaviors a r e neve r the le s s v i a b l e i n

the context . The next l o g i c a l s t e p i s t o develop an understanding of

those compliance-gaining behaviors a s they e x i s t i n t h e da ta . I n o rde r

fo r the d e s c r i p t i o n of t hese behaviors t o proceed, some sort of

h e u r i s t i c framework i s required ( ~ y m e s , 1972).

The ethnographic method suggested here i s designed t o develop a

coding scheme which i s not 5 ~ r i o r i , bu t r a t h e r data-based. An

important assumption of t h i s aim i s t h a t t h e r e s u l t a n t scheme w i i l

account f o r behavior not only i n the context from which i t was der ived ,

but i n o t h e r conversa t ional contexts of t h e same type, a s well .

95

The following chapter w i l l focus on the development of a

data-driven coding scheme garnered from three of the four recorded

facul ty meetings. Techniques w i l l be evaluated and labeled, using the

relevant contextual fea tu res and part icipant/observer knowledge of the

researcher; and the conversation i n the four th facu l ty meeting w i l l be

coded and analyzed using the proposed scheme. The r e s u l t s of the coding

w i l l then be evaluated i n terms of genera l izab i l i ty beyond the facu l ty

context, and the issue of external va l i d i t y w i l l be discussed.

k I CHAPTER V I : DEVELOPMENT AND APPLICATION OF A MODEL

I FOR CONVERSATIONAL COMPLIANCE-GAINING TECHNIQUES

F' A b a s i c premise of t h i s r e sea rch i s t h a t human beings seek !: 1 s e l f - d e f i n i t i o n through conve r sa t iona l c o n t r o l . A s Marwell and Schmi t t i b b and o the r s have sugges ted , an a n a l y s i s of compliance-gaining i s a means b

9 i F to examine s o c i a l c o n t r o l . The coding scheme der ived from t h e Marwell t

and Schmitt c a t e g o r i e s y i e lded l i m i t e d r e s u l t s when appl ied t o t h e d a t a , k e t yet t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s who genera ted t h e d a t a i nd ica t ed t h a t

compliance-gaining was a func t ion w i t h i n t h e f a c u l t y meeting con tex t .

This apparent c o n t r a d i c t i o n l e d t o t h e conclus ion t h a t t he codi~::

scheme, not t h e s i t u a t i o n o r p a r t i c i p a n t s , was suspec t .

The concluding s e c t i o n of Chapter V d i scussed t h e a d v i s a b i l i t y o f

' construct ing a data-based model of compliance-gaining behavior , and an

ethnographic approach t o t h e codi fy ing of compliance-gaining behavior

was suggested. This c a l l s f o r q u a l i t a t i v e con tex tua l in format ion and

descr ip t ion of t h e a c t u a l behaviors of t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s i n t h e i r

compliance-gaining a t t empt s . S ince t h e i s s u e here is v e r b a l

compliance-gaining a t t e m p t s , they w i l l be viewed i n t h e i r conve r sa t iona l

9 7

context i n o r d e r t o c l a r i f y t he ways i n which compliance-gaining

occur i n conversat ion.

A new coding scheme, one which inco rpora t e s t h e s a l i e n t c a t e g o r i e s

of compliance-gaining behavior from both the c u r r e n t d a t a base and t h e

typologies of o t h e r r e sea rche r s , is hereby proposed.

DEVELOPMENT OF THE CODING SCHEME

General resources. The proposed compliance-gaining coding scheme

was developed from t h r e e resource a reas . F i r s t , t h e compliance-gaining

typologies suggested by o t h e r r e sea rche r s were examined i n l i g h t of t h e

conversat ional d a t a of t h r e e f a c u l t y meetings. Techniques t h a t were

appl icable t o t h e d a t a were s e l e c t e d f o r i n c l u s i o n i n t h e new coding

Second, compliance-gaining techniques suggested by t h e

pa r t i c ipan t s themselves t o t he researcher were considered f o r i n c l u s i o n

i n the coding schema. A s with t h e techniques c u l l e d from previous

research, t hese par t ic ipant -based techniques were examined f o r

a p p l i c a b i l i t y t o t h e t h r e e f a c u l t y meetings. F i n a l l y , t he r e sea rche r

included ca t egor i e s t h a t , i n h e r judgment, were r e l evan t t o t h e da t a .

These judgments were made from t h e r e s e a r c h e r ' s informal contex tua l

knowledge and knowledge of t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s . These t h r e e resources w i l l

"Ow be examined i n depth.

98

Prior research in compliance-gaining behavior. The typology

suggested by Marwell and Schmitt (1967) has already been shown to have

onl* limited applicability to the conversational data collected in this

study. However, these categories were not discarded without further

rather, these categories were preserved as a whole and

applied to the data from one faculty meeting as a further check on the

instances of intercoder agreement produced by the original Marwell and

Schmitt coding. This was done simultaneously with the application of

the proposed coding scheme to the same faculty meeting data.

In addition, two other compliance-gaining typologies were evaluated

for salient techniques. The first of these was the recent research of

Cody, McLaughlin and Jordan ( 1 980) . Their investigation into

compliance-gaining behavior included consideration of the strategies

mapped by Falbo (1977), and their approach to the construction of

strategies was similar to Falbo's inductive method. Cody et al. -- derived strategies from essays written by respondents who were asked to

report the message strategy they would use in each of three situations

(a situation with high intimacy, low resistance to persuasion, and

long-term consequencss; a situation with low level of situation

apprehension and long- tam consequences ; and a nsgo t la tion situation) . The three stim~lus situations produced differing clusters of strategies,

with som3 duplication in strategies across situations. Elimineting

dlQ~lica te categories, 1 5 compliance-gaining techniques wers derived from

the data (see Chapter I1 for review of strategies obtained in each

s i t u a t i o n ) . The research had taken i n t o account the typologies

of Marwell and Schmit t , Mi l l e r - e t - a l . and Falbo, and had explored

.comnliance-gaining ac ross t h r e e d i f f e r i n g s i t u a t i o n s . These 15 - - - -

techniques were then

-

examined. Therefore, t h e l is t of 15 techniques

from the Cody -- e t a l . research was considered t h e most comprehensive t o

date derived from a se l f - r epor t da t a base. i n t h e context of the

current da t a base , and t h e r e l evan t techniques s e l e c t e d f o r i nc lus ion i n

the coding scheme were: Simple Statement , Disclaimer, Hint ing ,

Negotiating Al t e rna t ives , and Simple Expert2,se. ( s ee Descr ip t ion - of

: compliance-gaining techniques, which fo l lows, f o r f u l l e r e x p l i c a t i o n of

techniques. )

i The research of Grimshaw (1980) i n t o what he c a l l e d the

" ins t rumen ta l i t i e s of ve rba l manipulation" was considgred f o r i nc lus ion s : i n the coding scheme. The research seemed a l i k e l y resource s i n c e

Grimshaw was s p e c i f i c a l l y i n v e s t i g a t i n g v e r b a l compliance gaining; I 1. z however, t h e ca t egor i e s he proposed ( ~ s k , Beg, Cajole , Con, Order, :

Persuade, sugges t ) seemed to be accounted f o r more s p e c i f i c a l l y i n the I 1 Cody e t a l . l i s t o r were too i n d e t e m i n a t e t o be usefu l . For example, --

Grimshaw' s technique Suggest seemed to be accoun .ted f o r i n Hin - t i n g ; and

% the technique fersuade could a c t u a l l y represent most ve rba l

compliance-gaining at tempts . Consequently, a 1 though t h i s l ist of

techniques was considered, none xe re included i n t h e f i n a l scheme.

100

Techniques based on pa r t i c ipan t repor ts . I n the weeks t h a t

followed the co l l ec t ion of the conversat ional da ta , the researcher had

opportunity t o d iscuss compliance-gaining with severa l departmental

facul ty . During these d iscuss ions , the f a c u l t y pa r t i c ipan t s

occasionally suggested techniques which they f e l t t h a t e i t h e r they o r

other f a c u l t y members used t o ga in compliance i n f a c u l t y meetings.

These remarks, when summed and d i s t i l l e d , suggested the following

message techniques: Information, Humor, Hinting, Sarcasm and Put-Downs.

Despite the f a c t t h a t these techniques were derived d i r e c t l y from the

repor ts of the pa r t i c ipan t s , not a l l of the techniques were applicable

a s they were described to the researcher. The f i r s t of these,

Information, was considered a v iab le compliance-gaining technique by

several f acu l ty ; however, the d i f f i c u l t i e s i n t ry ing t o code

informational statements used a s compliance-gaining at tempts were too

considerable t o overcome i f informative value alone was the c r i t e r i o n

fo r judgment. Simply, based on the da ta , uses of information were not

iden t i f i ab ly d i f f e r e n t except a s had already been accounted f o r within

other techniques. One of the bas ic premises of t h i s research i s t h a t

every conversat ional of fer ing i s an attempt a t s o c i a l control . In l i g h t

of t h i s premise and the coding d i f y i c u l t i e s , Information, a s a category

i n i t s own r i g h t , was discarded a s too broad to be useful .

10 1

Similarly, H~~~ was described by severa l facul ty members as a

viable compliance-gaining technique. However, once again* the

mar too broad t o be useful and subsumed o the r ca tegor ies which - made f i n e r d iscr iminat ions possible. Several of the ca tegor ies a r e

discussed i n t h e next sec t ion . The two suggest ions, Sarcasm and

Put-Downs, f o r example, were subsets of the category Humor. These two

were included i n the coding scheme, but were combined i n t o a s i n g l e

category s ince d iscr iminat ions between a s a r c a s t i c remark and a put-down

seemed e n t i r e l y a r b i t r a r y and not p a r t i c u l a r l y meeningful i n l i g h t of

the data.

The category Hinting had already appeared i n the Cody e t a l . - - typology f o r two of t h e three st imulus s i t u a t i o n s . This f u r t h e r

supported the inc lus ion of Hinting in the new coding scheme.

Participant/obaerver-based techniques. The l a s t resource

considered i n developing the coding scheme was the informal contextual

and par t i c ipan t f a m i l i a r i t y of the researcher , rho had not only attended

faculty meetings but knew a l l of the p a r t i c i p a n t s , excluding the dean,

through informal contac ts v i t h i n the Communication Department.

Addi t ional ly , t h e researcher had cont inual access t o the conversations

that cons t i tu te the da ta of t h i s research , allowing her t o develop

considorable fa!ILiliarity with these conversations. Three of the four

meetings were examined i n depth f o r compliance-gaining attempts.

The fourth was preserved f o r t e s t i n g the a p p l i c a b i l i t y of the new coding

recorded, t h e researcher was a b l e t o l i s t e n t o t h e i n t e r a c t i o n s a s they

were occurr ing , and was a b l e t o a u d i t t h e conversa t ions t h a t preceded

and followed t h e recorded conversat ions.

From t h i s background, then , t h e r e sea rche r made eva lua t ions about

the types of compliance-gaining techniques she saw evidenced i n t h ree o f

the f a c u l t y meetings. The d e c i s i o n s regarding these techniques were t o

some exten .t based on knowledge o f i n d i v i d u a l p a r t i c i p a n t s t y l e s * s i n c e

some i n d i v i d u a l s showed r e l a t i v e cons is tency i n the use of some

techniques and eschewed o the r s , The aim i n s e l e c t i n g c a t e g o r i e s was t o

i s o l a t e techniques t h a t were g e n e r a l l y app l i cab le t o t he d a t a as a

whole. The techniques i s o l a t e d were: H i s t o r i c a l Claim. Reminder,

Challenge, Summarizing, Assumed

- Compliance, and Camaraderie. The

Camaraderie category had been included i n t h e coding scheme used f o r t he

i n i t i a l coding of t h e data . Its i n c l u s i o n st t h a t time was based on the

pa r t i c ipan t /obsemer knowledge of t h e r e sea rche r , and consequently i t is

re-s tated h e r e f o r i nc lus ion i n t h e new coding scheme, The technique

Sycophantic F l a t t e q , a l s o added t o t h e o r i g i n a l coding scheme, was not

included i n t h e new scheme a s i t was found t o be inappropr i a t e t o t he

data , even though t h i s technique was a l s o suggested by Cody Gt. and

Falbo i n t h e i r compliance-gaining paradigms. F l a t t e r y i n any f o m did

not su r f ace i n the da t a base from t h e th ree f a c u l t y meetings.

103

Descr ip t ion of the compliance-gaining techniques. Twelve

compliance-gaining message techniques were derived from previous

p a r t i c i p a n t ve rba l r e p o r t s and the r e s e a r c h e r ' s

par t ic ipant /observer knowledge. These 12 techniques c o n s t i t u t e t he

compliance-gaining paradigm by which one f a c u l t y meeting was explored i n

depth. Each of t he s e l e c t e d techniques had ample support from t h e d a t a

of t h ree f a c u l t y meetings t o be included i n t he scheme. Descr ip t ions of

techniques inc lude examples, and i n cases where t h e r e may be ambiguity

o r the examples r equ i r e c l a r i f i c a t i o n , r e l evan t contex tua l in format ion

i s added.

The 12 compliance-gaining techniques a r e :

1 DISCLAIMER - 8 . ) Includes qua l i fy ing s ta tements i n advance of what follows. ( ~ . g . , " I f you don' t have i t , you n igh t want t o g e t yours." One f a c u l t y member i s suggest ing t h a t t he o t h e r f a c u l t y have the course d e s c r i p t i o n i n f r o n t of them before t h e d i scuss ion begins.)

3 . ) Inc ludes hedging which r e v e a l s unce r t a in ty about surrounding s ta tements . ( ~ . g . , "I d o n ' t know, but I d o n ' t th ink t h i s . . . I th ink , y e s , we have t o s t r i k e a balance . . . . I t ' s not t he course. What e l s e do we do, o r where's t he r e s t ? " The p a r t i c i p a n t i s t r y i n g t o persuade o t h e r f a c u l t y members t h a t two courses a r e needed where one i s p re sen t ly o f f e red . )

C.) Includes r eques t s f o r permission o r l a t i t u d e u n t i l t he a c t can be placed i n c o r r e c t contex t . ( ~ . g . , "May I , while e-ferybody i s s igning and s 3 c i a l i z i n g and cha in ing ou-G, uh ask t h a t . . ." The p a r t i c i p a n t apparent ly wanted t o i n t rude i n t o ongoing conversa t ion and d i scuss an item x h i l e the o the r f a c u l t y c ~ m p l e t a d t h e i r lmmediste t a sks . I n t h i s case , t h e i tem went undiscussed s ince the f a c u l t y chosa t o d i scuss what "chaining out" meant.)

2. SARCASM/PUT-DOWNS - Inc ludes s ta tements t h a t a r e o v e r t l y s a r c a s t i c i n e i t h e r conten t o r p re sen ta t ion o r t h a t imply s o c i a l d i sapproval o r os t rac ism to q u e l l o p p o s i t i o n . These a r e o f t e n humorous i n ' c o n t e x t and must be eva lua t ed on t h e b a s i s of prosodic f e a t u r e s as we l l a s c o n t e n t . (E-g., "Is t h i s what we c a l l t he product of consensus i n decision-making?" This ques t ion was asked immediately a f t e r a ve rba l exchange i n which the c h a i r announces a change i n meeting s t y l e based on f a c u l t y consensus, and t h e remarks of t he f a c u l t y inc lude : "What p l ane t were you on?" "Was t h i s a d i f f e r e n t meeting than the one we a l l attended?" "Seig h e i l ! Se ig h e i l ! " ) -- -- (E.~. , "You t e l l them a s soon a s t h e f a c u l t y comes t o g r i p s wi th i t , w e ' l l l e t you know," This s t a t emen t i s o f f e red i n response t o informat ion given by a f a c u l t y member regarding the f a c t t h a t new graduate s t u d e n t s want t o "come t o g r ip s" wi th what communication i s a l l about before beginning t h e i r g raduate program.)

HINTING - Inc ludes s ta tements o r ques t ions which merely a l l u d e t o o r i n s i n u a t e des i r ed behaviors without o v e r t l y s t a t i n g what t h e t a r g e t should do. ( ~ . g . , " I f t h i s would work and i f L doesn ' t mind tak ing on the task . . ." This s ta tement occurs i n a d i scuss ion i n which the p a r t i c i p a n t (L) has r a i s e d ob jec t ions t o a proposal r ega rd ing the t r a i n i n g of teaching a s s i s t a n t s ; t he o b j e c t i o n s a r e reso lved , but t h e i r r e s o l u t i o n means t h a t L w i l l need t o assume more r e s p o n s i b i l i t y , )

( ~ . g . , "Everyone should have t h e i r name, rank, s e r i a l -number and what they do i n a paragraph under t h e f a c u l t y thing." This occurs ic a d i scuss ion about updat ing t h e graduate handbook. The p a r t i c i p a n t i s implying t h a t i f f a c u l t y members have not provided t h a t in format ion , they should do so . )

4. HISTORICAL C L A I M - Makes re ference t o agreement o r consensus t h a t took p lace some time i n t he p a s t ; t h i s i nc ludes e i t h e r r e a l o r f i c t i t i o u s agreement. ( E .g. , "During the graduate meeting t h e r e was unanimous agreement t h a t we should change t h e s t y l e of t he meetings." This i s an example of a f i c t i t i o u s agreement h i s t o r i c a l c laim; subsequent remarks--see ~arcasm/?ut- own descr ip t ion- - indica te t h a t t h e r e was no agreement.)

(E.~. , "We've decided . . . t h e pol icy i s t h i s , t h a t t hese d a t a a r e not released." The p a r t i c i p a n t i s r e f e r r i n g t o a

105

past dec i s ion regarding course eva lua t ions which had h i t h e r t o been t h e departmental pol icy . )

P

b 5. RENINDER - Admonishes t a r g e t s t o remember o r r e c a l l ! previous d i scuss ions a s a b a s i s f o r compliance now. Often

conta ins t h e words remember o r r e c a l l . (E.g., "Remember t h a t i f you' r e g iv ing graduate s tudent i n t e rnsh ips . . . they have t o be given a grade on t h e graduate leve l . " The p a r t i c i p a n t i s urging the f a c u l t y t o

i g ive t h e appropr i a t e grades f o r i n t e rnsh ips . ) - - -

( ~ . g . , "This year , i f you r e c a l l , we have . . . because i t ' s not i n t h e handbook and I want t o keep reminding you of t h i s . . . we have required t h a t a l l graduate s tuden t s g ive t h e i r t h e s i s adv i so r a copy of t h e i r t hes i s . " The p a r t i c i p a n t is admonishing the f a c u l t y t o t e l l t h e i r graduate s tuden t s about t h e a d d i t i o n a l required t h e s i s COPY

6. SIMPLE STATEMENT - Includes simple demands, reques ts and quest ions which c l e a r l y r equ i re some behavior from t h e t a r g e t . Coding dec i s ions need t o be based on the i l l o c u t i o n a r y f o r c e of t h e u t t e rance ; i n o the r words, "p lease r e t u r n it" can have t h e same i l l o c u t i o n a r y f o r c e a s , "Will whoever took i t r e t u r n i t . " Ques t ions and reques ts which have t h e same i l l o c u t i o n a r y f o r c e a s simple commands o r demands do no t gene ra l ly r equ i re a ve rba l response from t h e t a r g e t because they a r e merely t e l l i n g t h e t a r g e t , "Do X." This technique excludes simple s tatements of f a c t o r information, simple reques ts f o r

k information, o r ques t ions of a pure ly information-seeking

f 7 . CHALLENGE - Involves v e r 7 ~ a l i z a t i o n s of an inflammatory o r r t "cheerleading" na tu re t o arouse agreement o r compliance.

Coding dec i s ions need t o be based on prosody a s well a s c ~ n t e n t s ince these remarks a r e o f t e n humorous o r exaggerated. (E.g., "Are we going to t ake t h i s s i t t i n g

na ture which do not r equ i re t h a t t h e t a r g e t "Do X . "

(E.g., "Put down an item about the p o s s i b i l i t y of a departmental r e t r e a t i n Newark. ")

( E . ~ . , "You a l l decids.")

( E . ~ . , "That 's no longer acceptable." This s tatement , s a i d f l a t l y , was i n response t o the c h a i r ' s use of the gener ic "he" in s t ead of "she o r he." The ~ a r t i c i ~ a n t is t r v i n ~ t o " - g e t t h e c h a i r t o modify h i s form of gene r i c address . )

.down?" The p a r t i c i p a n t i s humorously asking f o r support t o over r ide the c h a i r ' s attempt to change the s t y l e of t h e nee t i n g s . ) (E.g., "What i s t h i s s h i t , A?" The p a r t i c i p a n t i s a t tempting t o overr ide the c h a i r i n the s i t u a t i o n described i n the previous example. )

8. CAMARADERIE - Includes v e r b a l i z a t i o n s t h a t sugget "we a r e a l l i n t h i s toge ther" and imply c o l l e c t i v e behavior. These nea r ly alxays con ta in the word we i n the technique. (E.g., "We're going t o have t o make a dec i s ion f a i r l y soon on what we have c a l l e d G ' s job." The p a r t i c i p a n t wants t o d i scuss t h i s job and i s urging the f a s u l t y t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n the dec is ion . )

( E . ~ . , " I f we look a t our own experiences a t the --quote--good schools we went t o , they seem t o be opera t ing q u i t e wel l under the double- l i s t ing ." The p a r t i c i p a n t says t h i s i n a d iscuss ion about double- l i s ted courses where i t had been suggested by one f a c u l t y member t h a t graduate courses be l i s t e d sepa ra t e ly . The p a r t i c i p a n t i s c a l l i n g upon commonality of experience t o ga in compliance.)

9. SUMMARIZING - Includes s ta tements o r ques t ions t h a t s u m up a l l t h a t has been s a i d on a given s u b j e c t , with the expecta t ion of compliance o r agreement. ( ~ . g . , "The consensus seems t o be , then , t h a t we d o n ' t l i k e t h a t idea." The p a r t i c i p a n t has summarized the d iscuss ion of giving s tuden t s course eva lua t ions and expects agreement from the o t h e r f a c u l t y members. )

( E . ~ . , "Then t h a t ' s the poin t . No. We w i l l no t have s replacement." The p a r t i c i p a n t is summing up a d i scuss ion regarding a f a c u l t y member who w i l l be on s a b b a t i c a l leave. This s tatement i s a demand f o r c l a r i f i c a t i o n regarding the s t a t u s of f a c u l t y during t h a t s a b b a t i c a l . )

10. NEGOTIATING ALTERNATIVES - Involves an explanat ion and p resen ta t ion of opt ions i n o rde r t o reach agreement o r ga in compliance. (E.~., "We could g ive them copies of our course s y l l a b i . " This is of fered a s an a l t e r n a t i v e t o giving s tuden t s course eva lua t ions , s ince t h a t choice was gene ra l ly unacceptable t o the f a c u l t y . )

( ~ . g . , ". . . could you a l t e r i f t o i n t e r c u l t u r a l perspec t ives on method o r something l i k e tha t ?" The

p a r t i c i p a n t is present ing an a l t e r n a t i v e l a b e l f o r a s e c t i o n of t he research methods course s i n c e he f e e l s t h a t t h e proposed l a b e l i s no t r e a l l y d e s c r i p t i v e of t he ma te r i a l he w i l l teach.)

11. SINPLE EXPERTISE - Involves an i n t e r l o c u t o r ' s claim t o supe r io r knowledge o r s k i l l a8 t h e b a s i s f o r seeking compliance o r agreement. ( ~ . g . , "I th ink I may be a b l e t o shed a l i t t l e ins igh t . I ' v e ta lked wi th 3 about h e r motivation." This occurs i n t h e d i scuss ion of g iv ing course eva lua t ions t o s tuden t s ; t h e p a r t i c i p a n t is claiming knowledge which w i l l r evea l t h e motivat ion of t h e s tuden t s f o r wanting the course eva lua t ions , with the i n t e n t of ove r r id ing t h i s suggestion.)

(E.g., "But when they f i r s t s t a r t e d I know t h a t t he department r e a l l y encouraged them." The p a r t i c i p a n t claims knowledge based on h i s s e n i o r i t y wi th in the department; t he d iscuss ion c e n t e r s on t r y i n g t o g e t t h e present f a c u l t y t o encourage t h e var ious undergraduate s tuden t organizat ions. )

12. ASSUMED COWLIAHCE - Involves t h e o v e r t asswaption t h a t t he group ag rees o r c>omplies; o f t e n con ta ins phrases " l ike! " I ' m sure" o r " I ' m cer tain." (E.g., I ' m s u r e you don ' t , e i ther . " The p a r t i c i p a n t has been d iscuss ing having t h e f a c u l t y involved i n s tuden t recru i tment and has s a i d t h a t she does not want t o t e s t t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between an involved f a c u l t y and s tuden t enrollment. )

( ~ . g . , " I ' m s u r e you sha re the load." This was sa id i n re ference t o having f a c u l t y members g iv ing up time t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n recruitment. )

CODING THE CONVERSATIONAL DATA

Method and data.ana1ysi.s. The dec i s ions made

- data r e l i e d on: prosodic information, knowledge

knowledge of t he s i t u a t i o n , t he Yardel l and Schmitt

Coding scheme. The d a t a of one f a c u l t y meet f

researcher nn a n rani a n ? ~ hw eni qnde bani n - Cndina

i n eva lua t ing the

of t he p a r t i c i p a n t s ,

scheme and t h e new

i n g was coded by t h e

judgnents were made

Y

108

primarily with reference to information within a given episode but with

proceding episodes in mind. There was no attempt by the researcher to

"over-~aly~e" ; if a compliance-gaining at tempt was not readily

apparent within an episode, the episode was designated, No Strategy. In

short, coding decisions were based on the same sort of information and

interpretation communicators naturally rely upon in every-day

conversation. Remarks in the faculty meeting were interpreted through

content, prosody and presumed intent of the interlocutor.

The data available for coding included both the written transcript

of the conversation and the recording of the conversation itself. This

data sample was one meeting out of a series of five faculty meetings.

The first recording was not used in the data sample nor in the

development of the coding scheme since it was thought that the

participants needed one meeting in which to become accustomed to being

recorded. Three of the remaining meetings were analyzed for the

development of the coding scheme.

A11 of the participants listed in Table 4, excluding X (dean) , were

Present at the meeting currently under analysis.

Because the aim of this part of the research is qualitative as

opposed to quantitative, the data analysis involves exc<?rpts o r

COCversational data which illustrate the use of techniques, and raw

counts of techniques by the faculty subgroups originally described for

the ANOVA. The data fron one fac,~lty meeting were too few for

s t a t i s t i c a l analyses .

coding i l l u e t r a t i o n . I n o r d e r t o more fu l3y desc r ibe the

conter t u a l and p a r t i c i p a n t information used i n making c o d i l s judgments,

a sample from t h e d a t a is provided below, wi th commentary aa t o what is

believed t o b e t r a n s p i r i n g among t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s . Remarks include

~ e f e r e n c e s t o t h e occurrences of compliance gaining wi th in the ve rba l

and s o c i a l context .

The t o p i c t h a t A is d i c u s s i n g is t h e Academic A c t i v i t i e s Report, which a l l of t h e ?acuity a r e required t o f i l l out. When t h i e episode begine, - A has been d e s c r i b i n g t h e func t ion of t h e repor t and urging ' t h e facul ty t o a t t e n d workshops which w i l l h e l p them i n f i l l i n g ou t t h e report.

Conversation

A: I want t o stress t h a t , while - I'm n o t . i n t o t h i s k ind of th ing , because i t is p r o d u c t i v i t y and. r e s u l t s which a r e impor tant , we do need to-- -- C: Sorry, George, no one s a i d - anything f o r t h e first hour.

A: --y'knou, t o use t h i s , because - a l o t of t h i s i n f o g a t i o n is - - - - - enormous1 ?- t o - our departmen:. ~ a m a r a d e r i 7 It has to do with t h e number o f s t u d e n t s

Commentary

A ' s s ta tement , "we do need t o , d

y'knou, use t h i s because a l o t of t h i s i n f o m a t i o n is enormously h e l p f u l t o our department," was . coded as camaraderie, s i n c e A i n c l u d e s himself and a l l of t h e department. A f requent ly uses t h i s technique, s o f t e n i n g t h e a t tempt t o gain compliance by inc lud ing himself among a l l who need t o comply. G ' s cornsent, which i n t e r r u p t s '47 i s addressed t o a f a c u l t y member j u s t jo in ing t h e meeting.

i n c lass , t h e numbers of hours we teach, and t h i s k ind o f th ing. Basically, ( u n i n t e l l i g i b l e )

110

C: Can we work on t h i s uh as a The s ta tement by evokes l a u g h t e r from t h e group and was apparen t ly an a t tempt a t humor, whi le a l s o i n d i c a t i n g resistance t o f i l l i n g ou t such a n e l a b o r a t e form. Two

A : A group p r o j e c t ? t u r n s l a t e r , C i n d i c a t e s t h a t h e . d e s i r e s c l a r T f i c a t i o n . H i s

ch follow8 A's c r y p t i c seriously, y ' knov. comment about a group ptb j e c t , is

r a t h e r ambiguous and does no t A: A l o t of it is very - a lot of r e a l l y s t a t e what t h e i n t e n t i o n of i t doesn ' t apply. h i e previous t u r n was. A's

response t h a t "a l o t o f i t doesn ' t apply" seems t o be A ' s a t tempt t o soothe t h e misgiving; which C has revealed i n t h e preceding turns . '

n by H asking f o r r codex a s a Simple

compliance-gaining technique. H appears t o be r e f e r r i n g t o a-need f o r examples o f what does and does no t apply,

l iance-gaining at tempt a demand f o r more

informat ion. However, t h e example g iven by A goes unnoticed, s i n c e H con t inues by i n d i c a t i n g wh7 examplee a r e needed. A's response occur8 af ter a b r i e f pause, which is apparen t ly i n t e r p r e t e d by a s a need f o r f u r t h e r c l a r i f i c a t i o n . H provides c l a r i f i c a t i o n by. - a say ing , I mean, one item?"

I

11 1

Simple S ta tement technique, ng f o r examples, followed by o r a t i o n , f i n a l l y r e s u l t s in

compliance. He g i v e s severa l lea of what $0- i n t o t h e t. Despi te t h i s , . g is still

into the r e p o r t i n g a c t i v i t y f o r unc lea r aa t o what is included, g ran t s . If you have a and says so. T h i s is a t i l l *ore

f o r - v i t h t h e u n i v e r s i t y , e l a b o r a t i o n proceeding from 11'8 uDRF gran t , that kind of th ing , i t o r i g i n a l Simple Statement comes i n h e r e , too. That shows compliance-gaining attempt. your uh ( u n i n t e l l i g i b l e ) .

n e f f o r t t o c l a r i f y mat ters f o r H, 5 s u g g e s t s i n t e r r o g a t i v e l y t h a t what f i n a l l y goes i n t o the r e p o r t is percentage of time spent on t h e a c t i v i t i e s which has given a s examples.

umes t h a t K is c o r r e c t i n h e r suggest ion and- f u r t h e r c l a r i f i e s by saying t h a t "you're no t e s t i m a t i n g hours." A t t h i s point , A , r e p e a t i n g himself f o r emphasis, -

borate's t h e f a c t t h a t the r e p o r t does n o t involve es t imat ion of hours. M r e - s t a t e s t h i s - conclus ion j u s t t o be sure and remarks t h a t percentages are not too bad.

I

112

however, is s t i l l unc lea r as .to ~ h a t ' e t he t i m e base? t h i s measure of t h e i e based;

in f a c t , he i n t e r r u p t a M j u s t be fo r e 5 says , "That'e x o t too bad," t o ask what t h e base is.

4 provide . hese answera

can generate f u r t h e r d i scuss ion , rous remark regarding

place f o r s l eep ingW on t he for s leeping, too. fonn. This remark evokes l augh te r

from t h e group s i nce i t r e f e r s t o an i n a i d e joke regarding t h e s l e ep

then pursued t h e t op i c of centage of time i n an e f f o r t t o t h e r c l a r i f y uhat is required,

don' t-they don' t-- and K responds with a c l a r i f i c ~ t i o n . -9 M who moments

conunented t h a t percentage o f time was "not too bad," now also needs c l a r i f i c a t i o n

Do they-do t hey mean working a s a r e s u l t of t h e preceeding discuss ion. He i n q u i r e s i f what i s meant by time is working time.

in f a c t , he i n t e r r u p t 8 M j u s t be fo r e W says , "That'e ;;bt too

Simultaneously, J and 4 provide . answers, but be%ra these answers

- makes a hmorous remark r e g a r d i n . "a p lace f o r s l eep ingW on t he

f u r t h e r c l a r i f y uhat is required, and K responds with a

a s a r e s u l t of t h e preceeding discuss ion. He i n q u i r e s i f what

113

B responds t o M's question, B: What time you devote t o your - . . . t r a i l i n g o f f a f t e r wacademic ," but apparent ly i t is c l e a r t o 3 what 2 meant, s i n c e he immediately says, "okay," and B f i n i ahes h i s

&

8: Enterprises. i n c m p l e t e statement . with rn en te rpr i ses . " B has successful ly

ind ica ted that- the t i m e frame is indeed work time.

A t t h i s po in t , K who of ten -9

a r i z e a d i scuss ions a f t e r a l l r speakers who intend to

con t r i bu t e have contr ibuted, use8 the compliance-gaining technique, Sumnarieing, t o br ing the d i scuss ion t o a close. Thie is probably necessary because of f a c t o r s which t he tape recorder h s s no t revealed. H , who has been s i l e n t s i n c e asking-about vhat the time base was, is very l i k e l y shoving nonverbally t h a t he i a s t i l l unsa t i s f i ed ,

i n a l remark by - C about "back to t he Old Country" supports t h i s suppos i t ion and ind i ca t e s t h a t C probably is t ry ing to support K'; - e f f o r t t o b r ing t h e d i scuss ion t o a close. Ft is apparent t h a t C i s - r e f e r r i n g s p e c i f i c a l l y t o H - because t h e -Old Country" r e f e r s

H' s e thn i c background ( f requynt ly the sub j ec t of humor i n f a c u l t y meetings) and a l so

n . because t h e throw a number around t h i s guy" r e f e r s t o X ' s renowned d i sda in f o r nwazers-orien ted research, which has a l s o been the s u b j e c t of much humor v i t h i n f a c u l t y meetings. K' a sbmmary appears t o be f o r H ' s - benef i t .

114

The foregoing conversational excerpt with comentary is included here to

illustrate the kinds of general convereational, contextual and

participant infomation which were considered in coding decisions. As

can be seen in this example, the relation of one turn to another needs

to be considered so that compliance-gaining attempts can be charted from

the points in conversation where they begin. Additionally, this type of

contextual information allous for distinctions betueen turns which

include compliance-gaining attempts and those which do not.

-

Results and discussions. Application of the new coding scheme

yielded 61 compliance-gaining attempts in a total of 82 episodes.

However, only 42 episodes contained compliance-gaining techniques; this

discrepancy is accounted for by the fact that some episodes contined

more than one technique: 28 episodes had one technique; 10 episodes

had two; and one episode had four techniques. These findings contrast

with the first coding of this data, which yielded only five

compliance-gaining techniques. The results of the second coding suggest

two important possibilities: First, that in s faculty meeting setting,

compliance gaining is being attempted roughly 50 percent of the time;

and second, that when compliance-gaining attempts occur, approximately

one-third of the attempts are either series of techniques (more thsn one

technique used by the sane interlocutor) and might then be considered

3trategiss, or they are reactions to techniques which precede them in

the episode (more than one technique by more thsn one interlocutor).

-

115

Combinations o f compliance-gaining techniques. The examination o f

the d a t a base f o r developing the new coding scheme revealed t h a t

compliance-gaining techniques nay r e s u l t as r e s i s t a n c e t o o r r eac t ion t o

techniques employed by o t h e r i n t e r l o c u t o r s . Argument o r a e g o t i a t i o n

amow i n t e r l o c u t o r s is l i k e l y t o produce t h i s l i o k i n g of

compliance-gaining techniques. Consider t h e fol lowing exce rp t s from a

discussion episode:

(Deletions from episodes inc lude a s i d e s by f a c u l t y members, offhand remarks, e t c . Delet ions were made t o preserve l i n e a r r e l a t i o n s h i p s among u t t e rances i n lengthy episodes.)

D: Ye want t o put down p r e r e q u i s i t e courses i n t h a t desc r ip t ion , too. I d o n ' t know i f they were included o r not. Were they, M---?

A: Yeh.

D: . . . I j u s t wanted t o nake sure .

X: Not s p e c i f i c course numbers.

D: Yeh, we l l , t h a t ' s what we want t o p a t , i n the urn f i r s t 45 words. (CAMARADERIE) . . .

L: Can' t you say, "prereq o f i n s t r u c t o r " ? (SIMPLE STAT!XWT) 0 . .

D: I don ' t have any qualms a t a l l about any of t h a t . I would l i k e t o have " p e m i s s i o n of i n s t r u c t o r " on all o a r courses. ( SIMPLE STATE~I IT)

This episode involves th ree compliance-gaining a t tempts by two d i f f e r a n t

inter locutors , i nd ica t ing t h a t a t tempts may be r eac t ive . During the

discussion of t he inc lus ion of p r e r e q u i s i t e courses i n the

descr ip t ion i n t h e handbook, D i n d i c a t e s , using t h s Camaraderie -

116

technique, that he wants specific prerequisite course numbers at the

beginning of the description. The reaction to this Camaraderie

technique is k's blunt statement, "Can't you say, 'prereq of

instructor'?" which is L's desired addition to the description. - D, in response to k's Simple Statement, employs a Simple Statement technique

of his own which expands upon &'a attempt by bringing in the new

infomation that 2 would like "prereq of instructor" on all of the

courses. The second technique is an elaboration of the third.

Similarly, the following exchange indicates that the second

technique is a reaction to the first technique:

fi he subject under discussion is an academic activities report, which the faculty is unenthusiastic about filling out .)

A: I want to stress that, while I'm not into this kind of thing, because it is productivity and results which are important, we do need to, y'knou, use this. (CAMARADERIE) . . .

H: Well, uould you give us some "for examples" here? (SIMPLE STATMF~T )

In response to A's urging for compliance in filling out the form, H - -- demands more information.

117

A t h i r d example of r e a c t i v e compliance-gaining occurs i n t h i s

J: May I ask you a s o r t of semi-pert inent quest ion? (DISCLAI~~IER) How can we know ahead of time whether something is approved by you and the re fo re comes o u t o f t he department budget on t h e telephone o r whether i t ' s personal?

A: Go back and read the famous s tatement i n t h e orange book. ( SIMPLE STATEXENT)

It wae noted t h a t more than one technique may be used by the same

in t e r locu to r i n a s i n g l e episode. Consider the fol lowing example:

. . . The problem is some of t h e c a l l s a r e , y'know, unnecessary. (HINTI~~C) I f you ' re . . . i f you' r e d e a l i n g with a publ i sher , c a l l the pub l i she r c o l l e c t . (SIMPLE STATEMENT) They w i l l t ske the c a l l . I t ' s mazing . And i f you're . . . i f you're . . . i f you need some informat ion , un le s s i t ' s an unusual s i t u a t i o n and you need i t quickly , w r i t e 3 l e t t e r , because the mail is f r ee . (SIMPLZ STATE=! T )

In t h i s sxample, the s t r a t e g y seems t o be t o h i n t st which behaviors a r e

undesirable, an5 simply demand d e s i r a b l e behaviors. Likewise, t h i s next

example shows a s t r a t e g y involving two compliance-gaining techniques:

H: Before we leave the phones, uh, and I don ' t mean t h i s ,

The speaker begins the ccmpliance-gaining a t tempt x i t h a d i s c l s imar ,

pfobably because the s u b j e c t of t he telephones had been dropped several -

episodes p r i o r t o the example; t he re in t roduct ion of the topic after

c losure was reached could have been construed a s belligerent by other

without t h e d isc la imer . It should be noted t h s t had

given a number of armaments s g a i n s t reduced telephone usage. The

h in t ing technique i n the s t r a t e g y is t h e suggestion th s t MCI could be

introduced i n t o t h e department t o allow f o r g rea t e r telephone latitude.

A s was noted e a r l i e r , t hese l inkages o

techniques occurred 14 times ( 1 0 episodes with

1 f

two

compliance-gaining

techniques; three

episodes with three ; and one episode with four) i n 42

compliance-gaining epieodes, which sugges ts t h a t techniques w i l l appgar

as combinations i n the form of s t r a t e g i e s f o r a s ingle interlocutor, or

a s reac t ive l i n k s t o orevious techniaues bv o the r interlooutors.

Frequency of compliance-gaining techniques.

- - - - - - - - - -

'he overwhelming

f avor i t e compliance-gaining technique i n the new coding scheme ras

i Siaple Statement, which occurred 20 times. ( s ee Table 8 for the number L s of occurrences of each technique.) The data-based category Simple t

Expertise, which was supported from t h r e e of the facul ty meetings, d i d 1

! not occur a t sl l i n the fou r th meeting. Three compliance-~aininn

attempts were coded a s Hinting, i n combination with one

- -

other technique.

These three ins tances had elements of both hint ing and an additional P i , technique, so both werd i i s t e d on the coding sheet. The follouing

example i l l a s t r a t e s how two techniques appear inseparably within a

119

TABLE 8

Number of Occurrences of Each Compliance-Gaining Tichnique (2nd ~ata-coding)

Compliance-Gaining Technique Number of Occurrences

Simple Statement 20

Camaraderie 8

~arcasm/Put-Downs

Disclaimer

Assumed Compliance 2

Historical Claim 1

Expertise (positive) 1

Self-feeling ( ~ o s i tive) 1

Negotiating Alternatives 1

[a]~ombinstions are: iIinting/limple Statement; Historical Claim/ Hinting; ~inting/Altrgism.

120

s i n g l e b r i e f u t te rance :

J: ~t would he lp me t o know, l i k e , who has taped what- (HI~TING/ALTRUI~)

The p a r t i ~ i g a n t is t r y i n g t o g e t o t h e r f a c u l t y members t o i n f o m him of

t h e v ideotapes they have. This seems t o have elements of Hint ing, s i n c e

he does not r e a l l y s t a t e what exac t ly ha wants, and o f Altruism, which

i n t h e Marwell and Schmitt scheme was descr ibed a s , "I need your

compliance badly, s o i t would be a l t r u i s t i c of you t o do i t f o r se . "

Although Simple Statement was t h e technique most f r equen t ly used,

H i n t i n g , Cqmaraderie and ~ a r c a s m / ~ u t - ~ o u n were a l s o used r e l a t i v e l y

f requent ly ( e i g h t , e i g h t and seven uses r e spec t ive ly ) .

D i s t r i b u t i o n of compliance-gaining techniques a c r o s s f a c u l t y sub-

$roups. A f i n a l a r e a of a n a l y s i s was t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n of technique use

across t he subgroupings t h a t o r i g i n a l l y appeared i n t he ANOVA. ( s e e

Table 9 f o r average technique use by each subgroup.)

The department c h a i r accounted f o r t he g r e a t e s t number of

compliance-gaining techniques, and non-tenure-track males ascounted f o r

the l e a s t . Thus f a r , t h i s second coding o f the d a t a suppor ts the d a t a

ana lys i s i n previous chapters where t h e i s s u e of "opportunity" was

discussed. The f a c u l t y member with t h e h ighes t l e v e l of p a r t i c i p a t i o n

used t h e g r e a t e s t number techniques; those members with the lowest

P a r t i c i p a t i o n used t h e l e a s t n m b e r of techniques.

TABLE 9

Average Number of Compliance-Gaining Techniques Used by Each Faculty Subgroup (2nd Data-Coding)

Number of Average Number ~ e c h n i q u e s ( ~ a w ) o f Techniques

I

Males (excluding Chair)

Tenured (excluding c h a i r )

Tenure-Track

Non-Tenure-Track

Tenured Male

Tenured Female

Tgnure-Track Males

Tenure-Track Females

Non-Tznure-Track Males

xon-Tenure-Track Females

122

Whereas the Marctell and Schmitt coding suggested that tenured

faculty ranked second in technique use, the second coding indicates that

tenure-track faculty are the second ranked group. They averaged 4.3

techniques to the tenured faculty ' s one technique.

The first coding also indicated that there wera no real differances

between males and females in numbers of compliance-gaining attempts, but

the second coding revealed that nales made far more attempts than

females (24 versus 7 respectively). One disparity in the male-female

comparisons was between the tenure-track males and the tenure-track

female. The tenure-track males made 23 compliance-gaining attempts to

the tenure-track female's three attempts. However, on the average,

these males had only 4.6 attempts to her three attempts. The tenured

male and the tenured female each used one technique. Again, little

disparity was displayed between the non-tenure-track groups, in which

the females used three techniques overall (or, on the average, ona

technique) and the males used none.

These findings suggest that over the faculty as s whole, the

distribution of compliance-gaining techniques was relatively even on the

average, excluding the chair. Average use of techniques only ranged

from 4.6 techniques as a maximum to zero techniques as s mininun. (see

Table 9 for average number of techniques per subgroup.)

123

While the comparisons of t hese subgroups a r e extremely specu la t ive ,

they neve r the le s s i n d i c a t e t h a t g r e a t e r numbers of i d e n t i f i a b l e

ins tances of ve rba l compliance-gaining at tempts may . r e v e a l g r e a t e r

d i s p a r i t i e s between status-based groups i n o rgan iza t iona l s e t t i n g .

Those of r i s i n g s t a t u s , a s exemplified by the tenure-track f a c u l t y , seem

to use more compliance-gaining techniques than do those of h ighes t

s t a t u s , t he tenured f a c u l t y . One poss ib l e explanat ion f o r t h i s i s t h a t

tenure-track f a c u l t y may need t o t r y harder o r more o f t e n t o ob ta in

compliance which may a l ready be accorded tenured f a c u l t y by v i r t u e of

t h e i r h igher s t a t u s . Whether o r not t h i s f ind ing would p r e v a i l i n o t h e r

organiza t ional s e t t i n g s needs t o be explored.

The d a t a a n a l y s i s does show, however, t h a t a data-based system f o r

coding behavior , when coupled with contextual knowledge, makes

behavioral d i sc r imina t ions e a s i e r and more v a l i d i n terms of t he

meanings t o the p a r t i c i p a n t s , s i n c e t h i s p a r t i c u l a r system revealed

compliance-gaining at tempts t h a t t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s themselves had

indica ted were occurr ing i n the s i t u a t i o n . Fur ther , a data-based coding

scheme produces r e s u l t s more t r u l y r ep resen ta t ive of the s i t u a t i o n which

is being measured, because i t accounts f o r behaviors wi th in the

s i t u a t i o n t h a t a r e meaningful t o the p a r t i c i p a n t s .

Marwell and Schmitt coding v e r i f i c a t i o n . I t was noted e a r l i e r t h a t

during t h e second coding the Marwell and Schmitt ca t egor i e s would be

applied simultaneously a s a reliability check of the f i r s t coding of t he

b

124

f a c u l t y meeting c u r r e n t l y under ana lys i s . The second coding produced

agreement on fou r of t he f i v e ep isodes i n which Marwell and Schmitt

compliance-gaining techniques were i d e n t i f i e d and agreed upon by the two

coders i n t h e first coding. The one in s t ance of disagreement occurred

i n an episode t h e f i r s t coding labe led Expe r t i s e ( p o s i t i v e ) : The second

coding showed t h e compliance-gaining at tempt t o be a combination of

H in t ing and Simple Statement:

h his d iscuss ion is about t h e academic a c t i v i t i e s form. )

A: You a r e going t o be given an oppor tuni ty t o go t o a s e r i e s of workshops which reviews t h i s , and I urge you t o go. ( HINTINC/SIMPLE STATPIWT) ( EXPERTISE-posi t i v e ) I spent two hours i n a meeting t h i s week a l r eady , dea l ing wi th the p re sen ta t ion t h a t has t o do wi th t h e philosophy, t h e background, t h e use and t h e des ign of t h i s . And I came away from t h e meeting with a d i f f e r e n t f e e l i n g than I went i n . . . .

One reason f o r t h e lack of agreement may be t h a t Expe r t i s e ( p o s i t i v e )

may account f o r t he genera l tone of t h e e n t i r e episode, whereas H in t ing

and Simple Statement may account more d i r e c t l y f o r t h e technique

a c t u a l l y used, even though Expe r t i s e ( p o s i t i v e ) is implied.

Another coding discrepancy worth mentioning was an epiaode

o r i g i n a l l y coded, with no i n t e r c o d e r agreement, a s Se l f - f ee l ing

( p o s i t i v e ) o r a s No St ra tegy . The second coding of t h e episode

concurrad with the Se l f - f ee l ing ( p o s i t i v e ) s e l e c t i o n :

(once aga in , t h e d i scuss ion is about t h e academic a c t i v i t i e s form. A is - t e l l i n g the f a c u l t y how the workshops w i l l h e lp them.)

A: I f e l t good, not only about t h i s form, but about myself. (SELF-FEELING, POSITIVE)

C: This is a v a r i a t i o n o f , " I ' m okay, t h e form's okay."

That t h e second coding agreed with one of t h e choices of the f i r s t

coding sugges ts t h a t t he most d e s c r i p t i v e coding of t h i s episode wes

Sel f - fee l ing ( p o s i t i v e ) .

The coding scheme f o r conversa t iona l compliance-gaining behavior

proposed he re may be app l i cab le i n most s i t u a t i o n s where, a s Cody and

McLaughlin (1980) have claimed, i n t e r l o c u t o r s a r e l i k e l y t o be motivated

by both s e l f - i n t e r e s t and t h e d e s i r e t o maintain a l i k i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p .

Many s e t t i n g s beyond t h a t of t h e f a c u l t y meeting w i l l meet those two

c r i t e r i a . Although i t may be argued t h a t s data-driven nodel of

compliance-gainixq techniques i s h ighly s i t u a t i o n s p e c i f i c , t h e f a c t

remains t h a t businees meetings and f a c u l t y meetings, o rgan iza t iona l

s e t t i n g s and academic s e t t i n g s , have many elements i n common, such a s

h i e r a r c h i c a l s t r u c t u r e with chain-of-command c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . Facul ty

meetings similar t o business meetings can involve group decision-making,

information ga the r ing and shar ing , problem-solving, and so f o r t h . These

s i m i l a r i t i e s mean t h a t t he coding scheme may have a p p l i c a b i l i t y beyond

t h i s p a r t i c u l a r f a c u l t y s e t t i n g .

The p r i n c i p a l advantage of a data-based typology of

compliance-gaining techniques is i ts fundamental external v a l i d i t y .

Uhile admit tedly one l o e e s the r i g o r of s t r o n g i n t e r n a l c o n t r o l s , one

ga ins t h e enormous va lue of being a b l e t o i n v e s t i g a t e

na tura l ly-occuming behavior. To t h i s e x t e n t , conclusions based on a

data-based model, however specu la t ive they may be, a r e a t base grounded

i n na tura l ly-occurr ing behaviors , and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of behavior a r e

l i k e l y t o r e f l e c t t he a s p e c t s of behavior which a r e meaningful t o t he

p a r t i c i p a n t s themselves. A s Pearce ( 1 977) has suggested , ethnographic

approaches permit d e s c r i p t i o n s which account f o r i n t e r l o c u t o r s ' meanings

a s wel l a s o b j e c t i v e d e s c f i p t i o n s of t h e i r behavior. Furthermore, t h e

undeeirable i n f luences of experimenter i n t e r f e r e n c e a r e avoided ( ~ i l s o n ,

1977). Wilson po in t s ou t t h a t behavior i n n a t u r a l s e t t i n g s is s u b j e c t

t o the in f luences of t h e n a t u r a l s e t t i n g , and t h a t t h e goa l of s o c i a l

science--to g e n e r a l i z e research f ind ings t o t h e "everyday world" where

most behavior occurs--is b e s t reached through t h e use of a d a t a base and

data a n a l y s i s uhich accounts f o r t h e r e a l frameworks i n which people

i n t e r a c t .

CHAPTER V I I : CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

SUMMARY

Fundamental t o t h i s research was t h e pe r spec t ive t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s

seek t o de f ine themselves through t h e i r v e r b a l behavior and t o e x e r c i s e

conversat ional c o n t r o l t o accomplish t h a t end. A s Bochner and Kelly and

others sugges t , management of i n t e r p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s through

conversation is an e f f o r t a t s e l f - d e f i n i t i o n . Compliance-gaining

techniques r ep resen t one dimension of t h i s s o r t of s e l f l o t h e r

management, because compliance ga in ing occurs s p e c i f i c a l l y f o r t h e

purpose of obta in ing des i r ed behaviors from o the r s . The r e sea rch aim

t h a t provided t h e foundation of t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n involved t h e need t o

observe compliance-gaining behavior i n na tu ra l ly -occur r ing conversa t ion .

Within t h e explora t ion of compliance-gaining behavior , t h r e e major

f ac to r s were assessed: s ex , s t a t u s , and t h e i n t e r a c t i v e e f f e c t s of s ex

and s t a t u s on compliance-gaining behavior .

128

The statement of the problem focused on an organisations1 setting,

,,here the ordinary non-occupational social statuses accorded to males

and fenales were subject to the influences of titular status and

position within the organization. The research questions were designed

to explore three general areas: 1) the use of coapliance-gaining

technique as influenced by sex, status and the interaction of sex and

status of the participants; 2) the influence of sex, status and their

interaction on total turn time of participants in faculty meetings; and

3) the degree of similarity between participants' responses to

paper-and-pencil measures and their actual conversational behaviors.

To support the aims of the research, literature was rsviewed in

several different areas. A body of literature relating to power was

reviewed, since power and control in conversation were basic to the

research, because control is the behavioral extension of power, and

complaince-gaining attempts are inanifestations of control. The srgunent

for exploring conversational control was that conversation is the

primary instrumentality through which human beings asnage their

relationships and their self-definitions. The sending of messages, at

base, constitutes interactional management, and control in general is

cited as one of the primary interpersonal needs. Interlocutors' use of

conscious influence and their use of messages that are designea to alter

attitudes, beliefs or behavior of targets were revealed as fundamental

to the examination of compliance-gaiaing techniques. Studies relating

to the ststus variabLe in behsvior and comunication were discdssed to

129

provide background f o r t h e examination of s t a t u s d i f f e r e n c e s i n

technique use. S i m i l a r l y , r e sea rch t h a t explored sex d i f f e r e n c e s and

sex s t e reo typ ing was reviewed t o j u s t i f y the a n a l y s i s of t he sex

v a r i a b l e i n conversa t ion . A s a foundat ion f o r t he d a t a a n a l y t i c

technique, s t u d i e s focusing on r e l a t i o n a l communication and

compliance-gaining behavior were reviewed, and recent a r t i c l e s t h a t

support n a t u r a l i s t i c r e sea rch methods were summarized.

The ques t ionna i r e d a t a revealed the f a c u l t y ' s preference f o r

Camaraderie a s a compliance-gaining technique, but showed no d i f f e r e n c e s

i n responses ac ross popula t ions f o r a l l techniques. The i n v e s t i g a t i o n

of t o t a l t u r n time ind ica t ed sex, s t a t u s and the i n t e r a c t i o n of sex and

s t a t u s do produce s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n the amount of t a l k . Of

p r inc ipa l concern, however, was the discovery t h a t the

compliance-gaining technique coding scheme i s o l a t e d very few

compliance-gaining a t tempts and d id not appear t o have extens ive

a p p l i c a b i l i t y t o na tura l ly-occurr ing conversat ion in a s e t t i n g xhere

compliance ga in ing was occurr ing , according t o the p a r t i c i p a n t s . The

research ques t ions remained only p a r t i a l l y answered. A s a r e s u l t , a new

data-based coding scheme was propossd and a por t ion of t h e da ta was

re-coded us ing the new scheme.

130

CONCLUSIONS

The limited number and the homogeneity of the participants, the

general lack of compliance gaining detected in the first coding, and the

descriptive approach to the second coding limit conclusions. For these

reasons, the data examined in this study primarily suggest trends and

implications for conversational compliance-gaining attempts.

The most empirically valid of the speculations stated 3hroughout

this study were those in connection with total turn time. The strong

influence of sex, status, and the interaction of sex and status indicate

that, indeed, the organizational setting, with its obvious status

distinctions, may alter the usual outcomes of non-occupational status

insofar as quantity of talk is concerned, because it ap9ears that in the

organizational setting, the females in positions of rising status do

more talking than the males. It also appears likely that greater

amounts of talk may constitute opportunities for the use of

compliance-gaining techniques for the obvious reason that those

responsible for the most turn time were also responsible for the

greatest number of compliance-gaining attempts. A qualification of

these conclusions, however, is that the cell size for statistical

analysis was quite small.

13 1

This research a l s o supported t h e need f o r field-grounded research

as opposed t o the mere ga ther ing of ques t ionna i r e da ta . Field-grounded

research is fundamentally based on t h e argument t h a t ques t ionna i r e d a t a

do not always have a c o r o l l a r y i n a c t u a l behavior. For example, t he

da ta of t h e s tudy, though f a r too few t o gene ra l i ze from, suggest t h a t

coding based on t h e ques t ionnai re l i s t of behaviors r e s u l t e d i n few

ins tances of compliance ga in ing , even though p a r t i c i p a n t s were a b l e t o

i n d i c a t e t h e i r l i ke l ihood of us ing compliance-gaining techniques i n

t h e i r response t o t h e quest ionnaire . I n s h o r t , ques t ionnai res only

allow f o r formulated responses and may have no r e l a t i o n to what i s done

i n n a t u r a l s e t t i n g s .

A f i n a l conclusion of t he research i s t h a t f o r the purposes of

examining na tura l ly-occurr ing conversat ion, conversa t ional ly data-based

models f o r coding may be more v a l i d than ques t ionna i r e , s e l f - r e p o r t , o r

a p r i o r i models.

This s tudy has cont r ibuted t o our understanding of t h e importance

of accounting f o r contextual f e a t u r e s and meanings t h a t a r e s a l i e n t t o

the i n t e r a c t o r s , because with the i n t e g r a t i o n of contextual f e a t u r e s and

meanings, t h e behavior of i n t e r l o c u t o r s could be more thoroughly

examined. I n combining both q u a l i t a t i v e snd q u a n t i t a t i v e inethods i n a

s i n g l e research aim, a more comprehensivs assessment of compliance

gaining has been poss ib le . Although compliance-gaining models developed

from s e l f - r e p o r t da fa have i che ren t l i m i t a t i o n s i n t h e i r behavioral

132

a p p l i c a b i l i t y , a model developed from t h e behav ior i t s e l f may have much

g r e a t e r b e h a v i o r a l a p p l i c a b i l i t y . A model der ived from one con t ex t of

o r g a n i z a t i o n a l behav ior may a p p l y t o o t h e r o r g a n i z a t i o n a l c o n t e x t s as

wel l . The d i s t r i b u t i o n of t h e t y p e s o f compliance-gaining techn iques

used may va ry somewhat from s e t t i n g t o s e t t i n g a s a consequence of t h e

group norms p r e v a i l i n g i n each s i t u a t i o n . The f a c u l t y p a r t i c i p a n t s

w i th in t h i s p a r t i c u l a r con t ex t have e s t a b l i s h e d group norms which

t o l a r a t e sarcasm and pu t -downs , f o r example, t h u s a l l owing f o r t h e

p e r i o d i c u s e of ~ a r c a s m / ~ u t 4 0 1 i n a s a compliance-gaining technique. A

d i f f e r e n t o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s e t t i n g , o r even a d i f f a r e n t depar tment w i th in

t he same u n i v e r s i t y , might have a d i f f e r e n t s e t of group norms t h a t do

no t permit such s o c i a l and c o n v e r s a t i o n a l l a t i t u d e . I n t h a t c a se one

might f i n d t h a t , f o r example, Simple Expe r t i s e occurs more f r e q u e n t l y ,

and ~ a r c a s m / P u t -Down does no t occur a t a l l . With r e s p e c t t o t h e i s s u e - of t h e i n f l u e n c e s o f group n o m s on compliance-gaining a t t e m p t s a c r o s s

o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s e t t i n g s , t h e proposed coding scheme i s s t i l l l i k e l y t o

be a p p l i c a b l e , bu t w i th d i f f e r e n c e s i n f requency and d i s t r i b u t i o n of

t echn iques when d i f f e r e n t groups a r e c o n t r a s t e d .

A s w i t h coding schemes i n g e n e r a l , t h e proposed coding scheme i n

t h i s r e s e a r c h could be t aught t o coders so t h a t a h igh degree of

i n t e r c o d e r agreement could be ob ta ined . However, i t seems l i k e l y t h a t

i n t e r c o d e r r e l i a b i l i t y would be e a s i e r t o o b t a i n and no re v a l i d us ing s

data-based c ~ d i n g scheme s i n c e s c t u a l u t t e r a n c e s from t h e d a t a could be

used a s examples o f ca tegory types . Th i s approach wculd a l l ow coders t s

. 133

become familiar with individual participant styles, thus making their

determinations about compliance-gaining attempts more accurate. Coders

with approximately the same degree of participant/observer knowledge and

with a data-based coding scheme to guide them are likely to make highly

reliable judgments.

In general, this development of a data-based coding scheme for

verbal compliance-gaining techniques will augment future studies into

conversation in organizational settings by adding to the general

descriptive information which needs to be examined before

hypothesis-testing research on conversation is appropriate.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

This research has revealed the organizational setting to be a rich

context for examining conversation. Additional research into the

sex/ststus influences on quantity of talk in organizational setting are

needed. Total turn time, as one measure of conversational dominance,

can be coupled with other conversa5ional dimensions to provide insight^

into the question of how interpersonal control is managed in

organizational settings. For example, the turn time distribution in a

faculty msetlng might contrast starkly with that of a meeting of

military advisors and therefore could be an indication that differences

rsgardi~g zofiversational control exist as well.

k The compliance-gaining techniques developed from this study need to

-be tested in other situations to determine their overall applicability.

Other groups of interlocutors of differing age groups and in differing

social settings need to be studied in order for our understanding of

com~liance gaining to become more comprehensive.

A d -

social desirability for particular beh

The investigation of compliance-gaining behavior needs to be

pursued on many levels. Future research needs to account for not only il

context and participants, but content and relational variables as well.

Also, future research in compliance gaining might include extensive

post-conversational interviews with participants to determine interactor

intentionality. One method for determining the accuracy of

compliance-gaining coding decisions would be to give participants the

coding scheme and ask them to code their own utterances following the

data collection. The intent of this coding procedure would be to

determine if participants themselves agree with coders about when they

did or did not atteipt to gain compliance and about what techniques they

used. This approach would provide a comprehensive view of

compliance-gaining attempts within tha situation by including both

objective judgments by coders and relational judgments by participants.

One limitation of having participants code thsir own behavior is that

cause

[ judgmen:~ to be unduly biased in the participants' favor.

participant

In the data coded with the proposed coding scheme, however, such

agreement between the coder and the participants is likely to be

substantial since several of the category behaviors were discussed by

the participants with the coder prior to the development of the coding

scheme. Further, informal conversations with the participants after the

coding scheme was conceived revealed several instances of agreement

between a participant's judgment regarding the type of technique s/he

often used and the coder's judgment.

Another recommendation is that additional compliance-gaining

studies attempt to explore the issue of outcomes. This study has

centered primarily upon compliance-gaining attempts; however, a

systematic look at the outcomes of compliance-gaining attempts may

provide information about how strategies develop and why they are used.

One method for exploring the outcomes of compliance-gaining attempts

would be to have the data coded for instances where compliance or

agreement was clearly obtained. A second method for examining outcomes

would be to examine conversations within the same group over an

extensive period of time. This loagitudinal approach assqmes that not

all instances of compliance or agreement will be adjacent to the

compliance-gaining attempt. Weeks or months could intervene between the

use of a compliance-gaining attempt and a target's eventnal compliance.

136

Regardless of which approach to outcomes might be used, the

successes or failures of compliance-gaining attempts may be one

dimension for exploring the functions of conversation in different

Finally, analysis of conversational behaviors and contexts would be

greatly enriched by video data collection techniques, because not all

compliance-gaining techniques are exclusively verbal. Nonverbal

compliance-gaining may occur as uell and should be accounted for.

Indeed, in the present study the entire issue of non-verbal

compliance-gaining attempts has not been addressed; one recommendation

is that future research in this area try to replicate these findings and

enlarge upon them through the use of video recordings.

Additional studies into naturally-occurring conversation should

attempt to capitalize on ethnographic approaches which augment the data

with comprehensive contextual and partici3ant information. Such studies

would greatly increase our knowledge of situational variables,

participant variables, and conversation i~ general.

--

REFERENCE NOTES

1. Geis, F. L., Jennings (walstedt), J., Corrado-Taylor, D., & Brown, V. Sex role stereotypes in TV commercials: An experimental

2. Haslett, B.J. "I'll give you a knuckle sandwich: Preschoolers' resolution of conflict." In preparation, University of Delaware,

3. Porter, N., Geis, F. L. & Jennings (Walstedt), J. Are women invisible as leaders? In preparation, University of Delaware, 1979.

REFERENCES

Abelson, R .P. Script processing in attitude formation and decision-making. In J. S. Carroll & J. W. Payne (~ds.), Cognition

Baldwin, D. A. Economic power. In J. T. Tedeschi (~d.), Perspectives on social power. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company, 1974. -

Baldwin. D. A. Power and social exchange. American Political Science

Bem, S. L. & Bem, D. J. Teaching the woman to know her place: The power of a nonconscious ideology. In H. H. Garskoff (~d.) , Roles women play. Belmont, CA: ~rooks/~ole, 1971.

Bettinghaus, E. P. Persuasive communication. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1980.

Blom, J. P. & Gumperz, J. J. Social meaning in linguistic structure: Code-switching in Norway. In J. J. Gumperz & D. Hymes (~ds.),

New York: Holt, Rinehart and winston, 1972.

Bochner, A. P. & Kelly, C. W. Interpersonal competence: Rationale, philosophy, and implementation of a conceptual framework. The

and social behavior. New York: L. Erlbaum Associates, 1976.

- Review, 1978, - 72, 1229-1 242.

Directions - in sociolinguistics: - The ethnography of communication.

Blau, P. M. Exchange and power in social life. New York: John Wiley & - Sons, Inc., 1 9 6 4 7

speech Teacher, 1974, 3, 279-301 . - -

Bradley, P. H. Sex, competence, and opinion deviation: An expectation states approach. Communication ~ o n o ~ r a ~ h s , 1980, 47, 101 -i 10.

Brandt, D. R. A systemic approach to the measurement of dominance in human face-to-face interaction. Communication Quarterly, 1980 Winter, 31 -43.

Broverman, I. K., Broverman, D. M., Clarkson, I?. E., Rosenkrantz, P. S., & Vogel, S. R. Sex role stereotypes and clinical judgments of mental health. Journal - of Consulting - and Clinical Psychology, 1970, 34, 1-7.

Campbell, D. T. Stereotypes and perception of group differences. American Psychologist , 1 967, - 22, 81,7 -829.

Clark, H. H. & Clark, E. V. Psychology - and language: An introduction to psycholinguistics. New kork: Harcourt Brace ~Ganovich, Inc. , - 1 977

Cody, M. J. & McLaughlin, M. L. Perceptions of compliance-gaining situations: A dimensional analysis. Communication Monographs, 1980, 47, 132-148.

Cody, N. J., McLaughlin, M. L., & Jordan, W. J. A multidimensional scaling of three sets of compliance-gaining strategies. Communication Quarterly, 1980, Summer, 34-46.

Costrich, N., Feinstein, J., Kidder, L., Marecek, J., & Pascale, L. When stereotypes hurt: Three studies of penalties for sex-role reversals. Journal - of Experimental Social Psychology, 1975, 11, 520-530.

Crosbie, P. V. Effects of status inconsistency: Negative evidence from small groups. Social Psychology Quarterly, 1979, 42, 110-125.

Cushnan, D. P. & Florence, B. T. The development of interpersonal communication theory. Today's Speech, 1974, Fall, 11-15. -

Day, D. R. & Stogdill, R. M . Leader behavior of male and female supervisors: A comparative study. Personnel Psychology, 1972, 2, 353-360

Dore, J. Conversational acts and the acquisition of language. In E. Ochs & B. B. Schieffelin (~ds.), Developmental pragmatics. New York: Academic Press, 1979.

Eakins, B. W. 3 Eakins, R. G. Sex differences in human communicatFon. - Boaton: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1978.

Elias, M. Sexes battle it out in convsrsation, too. Philadelphia Bulletin, April 20, 1580.

Erikson, B., Lind, E. f?,J~nnson, 9. C. d O'Barr, U. M . Speech style and iapression forma5ion in a court setting: The effscts of "powerfuln and "pcwerlsss" speech. Journal ol Experimental Social -- Psycho logy, 1975, 1 4, 266-273. -

140

Ervin-Tripp, S. Wait f o r me, Ro l l e r Skate! I n S. Ervin-Trip? & C. Mitchell-Kernan ( ~ d s .) , c h i l d d iscourse . New York: Acadeaic P ress , 1977.

Emin-Tripp, S. & Mitchell-Kernan, C. In t roduct ion . I n S. Ervin-Tripp & C . Xitchell-Kernan ( ~ d s . ) , Child d iscourse . New York : Academic P ress , Inc. , 1977.

Palbo, T. Multi-dimensional s c a l i n g of power s t r a t e g i e s . Journal - of Pe r sona l i ty - and Soc ia l Psychology, 1977, 15, 265-279.

Falbo, T . & Peplau, L. A . Power s t r a t e g i e s i n in t imate r e l a t ionsh ips . Journal - of Pe r sona l i ty - and Soc ia l Psychology, 1980, - 38, 618-628.

Fas t , J . The body language of sex , power and aggression. New York: ~ o v e m , 1977.

Fodor, E. M. & Farrow, D. L. The power motive a s an inf luence on use of power. Journal - of Pe r sona l i ty 9 Socia l Psychology, 1979, 2, 2091 -2097.

Fontaine G. & Beeman, J . Affec t ive consequences of s o c i a l power: Powerholder and t a r g e t expectancies associa ted with d i f f e r e n t types of power. Psychological Reports, 1977, 40, 771 -775.

Fox, J . & Moore, J. C . , J r . S t a t u s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and expecta t ion s t a t e s : F i t t i n g and t e s t i n g a recent model. Soc ia l Psychology Q u a r t e r l y , 1 979, 42, 1 26 -1 34.

French, J. R. F., J r . & Raven, B. H. The bases of s o c i a l power. In D. Cartwright ( ~ d . 1 , S tudies - i n s o c i a l power. Ann Arbor: Univers i ty of Michigan Press , 1959.

Fr ieze , I. H . , Parsons, J . E . , Johnson, P. 8 . , Ruble, D. N . , & Zellman, G. L. Women and sex r o l e s : A s o c i a l psychological perspect ive. - -- New York: W. W. Norton and company, 1975.

Fros t , J . H. & Wilmot, W. W . In terpersonal c o n f l i c t . Dubuque, Iowa: Wm. C. Brown Company, 1978.

Goidberg, P. Are women prejudiced aga ins t women? Transact ion, 1963, 5,

Greenbsrg, S. R . Conversaticn a s u n i t s of a n a l y s i s i n the s tudy of personal inf luence. Joarnalism Q u a r t e r l y , 1975, 52, 123-131.

Gr i f f in , K. & Heider, M. The r e l a t i o n s h i p between speech a r x i e t y and tn2 supgression of communi=ation i n childhood. Zn S. G r i f f i n 8 R. 9. Ps t ton ( ~ d s . ) , Easic readings - i n in t e rpe r sona l coamunication. New York: Harper 3 Row, Pub l i she r s , 1971.

Grimshaw, A. D. Se lec t ion and l a b e l i n g of i n s t r u m e n t a l i t i e s of ve rba l manipulation. Discourse Processes , 1980, - 3, 203-229.

Gumperz, J. J. Introduct ion. I n J. J. Gumperz & D. Hymes ( ~ d a . ) D i rec t ions i n s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c s : - The ethnography - of communication. New Y o ~ k : ~xt, Rinehart and Winston, 1972.

Haley, J. Symptoms a s t a c t i c s i n human re l a t ionsh ips . I n J. Haley, S t r s t e g i e s of psychotherapy. New York: Grune & S t r a t t o n , 1963.

Harragan, B. L. Games mother never taught you: Corporate gamesmanship _1_

f o r women- New York: Warner Books, Inc. , 1977. -- Heider, F. A t t i t u d e s and cogn i t ive organiza t ion . Journa l of

Psychology, 1945, 21, 107-1 2.

Henley, N. M. Body p o l i t i c s . Englewood C l i f f s : P ren t i ce Ha l l , Inc . , 1977.

Hennig, M. & Jardim, A . The managerial woman. New York: Pocket Books, - 1 977.

Hickson, M - , 111. Communication i n n a t u r a l s e t t i n g s : Research t o o l f o r undergraduates. Communication Buarterly_, 1977, 25, 23-28. -

Howell, S., Ledeman, C . , Owen, V., & Solomon. L. Z. Com~l iance a s a funct ion of s t a t u s . ~ o u r & l of s o c i a l ~ s y c h o l o i ~ , 1978, 106 - 29 1 -292.

-'

Hymes, D. Models of t h e i n t e r a c t i o n of language and s o c i a l l i f e . I n J . 3 . Gumperz & D. Hymes ( ~ d s . ) , Direc t ions i n soc io l ingu i s t s : The - - ethnography of communication. New York: Holt , Rinehart and Winston, 1 9 7 2 7

Joos, M. The i s o l a t i o n of s t y l e s . I n J. A. Fishman ( ~ d . ) , Readings i n - the sociology of language. The Hague: Mouton & Co., 1968. - -

Kanter, R . M. Men and women of t h e corporat ion. New York: Basic --- 7 - Books, Inc . , 1977.

Katz, J . P ropos i t iona l s t r u c t u r e and i l l o c a t i o n a r y force. New York: Thomas Y . Crowell, 1977.

Kelman, H. C . Fur ther thoughts on the processes o f compliacce, i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , and i n t e r n a l i z a t i o n . I n J. T. Tedeschi (Ed. ) , Perspec t ives 2 s o c i a l power. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company, 1974.

Kipnis, D. The powerholder. I n J. T . Tedeschi (Ed. j Perspec t ives on - s o c i a l Tower. Chicago: Aidine Publ i sh in3 C.xnpany, 1374.

communication: Behavioral perspec t ives . New York: Hol t , ~ i n e h a z and Wins ton , 1 976.

Kramer, C. Women's speech: Separa te but unequal? I n B. Thorne & N. Benley ( E ~ s . ) , Language and sex: Difference a& dominance. Rowley, HA: Newbury House Pub l i she r s , Inc. , 1975.

Lakoff, R. Language and woman's l a c e . New York: Barper & Row Publ i shers , 1975.

Litton-Hawes, E. M. A foundat ion f o r t h e s tudy of everyday t a l k . Communication Q u a r t e r l y , 1977, 25, 2-11.

7

Marwell, G. & Schmitt , D. R. Dimensions of compliance-gaining behavior: An empir ica l ana lys is . Sociometry, 1967, - 30, 350-364.

R. Power and innoc-ence. New YorkC- Dell Publ i sh ing Co., Inc . , -- 19729

Michener, H. A . & Burt , M. R. Legitimacy a s a base of s o c i a l inf luence. I n J . T. Tedeschi ( ~ d . ) , Perspec t ives on s o c i a l power. Chicago : Aldine Publishing Company, 1974.

N i l l a r , F. E. & Rogers, L. E. A r e l a t i o n a l approach t o in t e rpe r sona l communication. I n G. Mi l l e r ( ~ d . ) , Explorat ions i n in t e rpe r sona l communication. Beverly H i l l s : Sage Pub l i ca t ions , 1976.

Mi l l e r , C. & Swif t , K. Words and women. New York: Anchor Books, 1977. --I__

Mil le r , G . , Bos ter , F. , Rolof f , M . , & Seibold , D. Compliance-gaining message s t r a t e g i e s : A typology and some f ind ings concerning e f f e c t s of s i t u a t i o n a l d i f f e rences . Communication M o n o ~ r a ~ h s .

Newcombe, N . & Rrnkoff, D. B. E f f e c t s of speech s t y l e and sex of speaker on person percept ion . Journa l of P e r s o n a l i t y and %&a1 - - Psycho logy, 1979, 37, 1 293-1 303

Nisbet t , 3. E. 3 Wilson, T . D. T e l l i n g more than we can know: Verbal r e p o r t s on mental processes. P ~ y c h o l o g i c a l Review, 1977, 84, 23 1 -259.

??ofsinger, R. E. , J?. A peek a t conversa t ional ana lys i s . 3ommunication

Ochs, 3. Transc r ip t ion a s theory. I n E. Ochs & 3. 3. S c h i e f f e l i n ( ~ d s .) , Developmental pragmatics. New Y ~ r x : Academic P res s , Inc . , 1979.

Osmond, PI. W. Reciprocity: A dynamic model and a method t o s tudy family power. Journal - of Marriage and the Family, 1978, 40, 49-61.

Par lee , M. B. Conversational p o l i t i c s . Psychology Today, 1979, 12, 48-56.

Pearce, W. B. N a t u r a l i s t i c s tudy of communication: Its funct ion and form. Communication Q u a r t e r l y , 1977, 3, 51-56.

Powers, M. G. & Holmberg, J. J . Occupational s t a t u s scores: Changes introduced by the inc lus ion of women. Demography, 1978, 5, 1 83-204

Raven, B. H. The comparative a n a l y s i s of power and power preference. I n J . T. Tedeschi (Ed.), Perspect ives on s o c i a l power. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company, 1974.

Raven, B. H. & Kruglanski, A . W. Conf l i c t and power. I n P. Swingle ( ~ d . ) , - The s t , ruc ture of c o n f l i c t . New York: Academic P ress , 1970.

Rogers, L. E. & Farace, R. V. Analysis of r e l a t i o n a l communication i n dyads: New measurement procedures. Human Communication Research, 1975, - 1 , 222-239-

Roloff , M. E. Comunication s t r a t e g i e s , r e l a t ionsh ips , and r e l a t i o n a l change. I n G. Mi l le r ( ~ d . ) , Explorations - i n in t e rpe r sona l communication. Beverly H i l l s : Sage Publ ica t ions , 1976.

Rosen, B. & Jerdee , T . H. The inf luence of sex-role s t e reo types on evalua t ions of male and female supervisory behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1973, 57, 44-48.

Rosen, B. & Jerdee , T. H. Sex s tereotyping i n the executive s u i t e . Harvard Business Review, 1974, - 5 2 , 45-58.

Rubin, J . Z . , Provenzano, F. J . , & Luria , Z. The eye of t h e beholder: Parents ' views on sex of newborns. American Journal of Crthopaychiatry, 1974, - 44, 51 2-51 9.

Ruesch, J . Communication and human re l a t ions : An i n t e r d i s c i p l i n a r y approach. I n K . G r i f f i n 6 B. R. Pat ton (Eds.) , Basic readings in i n t e r ~ e r s o n a l communication. New York: Harper Row, Publ ishers , 197:.

S a t i r , V. Communication: A verka l and nonverbal process of naking requests of the rece iver . In C. J . Orr h L. K. : ( l i l i a s o a {31;.),

communication: Selected readings. Dub-~que, Iowa: Company, 1977.

Schople r , J. & Layton, B. D . A t t r i b u t i o n s o f i n t e r p e r s o n a l power. I n J. T . Tedeschi ( ~ d . ) , P e r s p e c t i v e s on s o c i a l o w e Chicago: -

Aldine Pub l i sh ing Company, 1 974.

Schutz , W. The p o s t u l a t e ."f i n t e r p e r s o n a l needs. I n S. Weinberg .- ( ~ d . ) .- . , Messages: A r e a d e r i n human communication (3 rd ed . ) . New York: Random House, 1980.

S h e r i f , M. , White, B. J . , & Harvey, 0 . J . S t a t u s i n expe r imen t a l l y produced groups. American Jou rna l of Sociologg_, 1955, 60, 370-379.

S t e i n b e r g , M. & M i l l e r , G. R . I n t e r p e r s o n a l communication: A s h a r i n g process . I n C . J . O r r 4 L. K. Williamson ( M s . ) , - I n t e r p e r s c

.- - - - - ,rial

communication: S e l e c t e d r ead ings . Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall /Hunt Pub l i sh ing Company, 1 977.

S t o l t e , J. F. Power s t r u c t u r e and pe r sona l competence. J o u r n a l of

Swenson, C . H . , J r . I n t r o d u c t i o n - t o i n t e r p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s . Glenview: S c o t t , Foresman and Company, 1973.

Thorne, B. & Henley, N. D i f f e r ence and dominance: An overview o f language, gender and s o c i e t y . I n B. Thorne & N . Henley ( ~ d s . ) , Language -- and sex : D i f f e r ence and dominance. Rowley, XA.: Newbury House P u b l i s h e r s , I nc . , 1975.

T josvo ld , D . & Okun, M. E f f e c t s o f unequal power on coope ra t i on i n c o n f l i c t . P sycho log i c s l Repor t s , 1979, 44, 239-242 -

Torczyner , J . Dynamics o f s t r a t e g i c r e l a t i o n s h i p s . S o c i a l Work, 1978, 23 , 467-474- -

Vatzlawick, P. , Beavin, J . H., & Jackson, D. D. P ragmat ics o f human - - - communication: A s t u d y o f i n t e r a c t i o n a l p a t t e r n s , pa tho log i e s and - - paradoxes . N e w ~ z r k : W. W. Norton & Company, I n c . , 1967.

Weber, M. The theory o f s o c i a l and economic o rgan i za t i on . - A. M. Henderson & T. ~ & o * x n s . ) New York: The Free P r e s s .

i i l s o n S. The use of e t h n o a r a ~ h i c t e chn i aues i n educational r e u ~ a r c h . - Review of Educa t iona l Research, 1977, 47, 245-265. - -

Zimmerman, D. K. & West, C. Sex r o l e s , i n t e r r u p t i o n s and s i l e n c e s i n conve r sa t i on . I n B. Thorne & ?I. Henlev ( ~ d s . ) . L ~ n e u a n e and sex: " . , . . " _._- _ ._

Di f f e r ence and dominance. Rowlsy, MA.: Uew3ury House P u b l i s h e r s , I n c . , :375.

APPENDIX B

COMPLIANCE-GAINING TECHNIQUES CODING SCHEME

(1f you comply, I will reward you.) "You offer to support your colleague's next proposal if s/he will serve on your committee."

(1f you do not comply, I will punish you.) "You threaten to withhold support from your colleague's next proposal if s/he does not volunteer for your co~~xnittee."

(1f you comply, you will be rewarded because of the nature of things.) "You point out to your colleague that if s/he serves on your committee, s/he will gain valuable experience and become more promotable."

(If you do not comply, you will be punished because of the nature of things.) "You point out to your colleague that if s/he does not serve on your committee, s/he will be inexperienced and unable to obtain promotion."

(~ctor is friendly and helpful to get target in "good frame of mind" so that s/he will comply with request .). "You are as friendly as possible to your colleague to get her/him in the right frame of mind to serve on your commitkee.

(~ctor rewards target before requesting compliance.) "YOU back your colleague's suggestions and tell her/hirn you now expect her/him to volunteer f9r your committee."

147

7 Aversive (~ctor continuously punishes target , making cessation Stimulation contingent on compliance. ) "You withhold the

availability of your ample, much desired library materials and tell your colleague s/he can' t use them until s/he volunteers for your committee."

(YOU owe me compliance because of past favors.) "You point out how cooperative you've been in the past, serving on other committees, and you point out to your colleague that s/he owes you serving on yours."

9 Moral Appeal (YOU are immoral if you do not comply.) "You tell your colleague it is morally wrong for anyone not to volunteer for a committee to fornulate new grading policies."

10 Self-feeling (YOU will feel better about yourself if you comply.) "You tell your colleague s/he811 feel better about herself/himself if s/he volunteers for the committee."

1 1 Self-feeling (YOU will feel worse about yourself if you do not comply.) "You tell your colleague s/he811 be ashamed of herself/himself if s/he fails to serve on your committee."

12 Altercasting ( 4 person with good qualities would comply.) "You tell your colleague that as a sophisticated researcher and educator, s/he will naturally want to serve on your commit tee.

13 Altercasting (only a person with bad qualities vould not comply.) "You tell your colleague that only someone who is uneducated and sophomoric would not volunteer for your committee."

14 Altruism (I need your compliance badly, so it would be altruis- tic of you to do it for me.) "You tell your colleague that this committee means a lot to you and that you wish s/he would support it as a favor to you."

(~sople you value will think better of you if you comply.) "You tell your colleague that the university community will regard her/him more highly if s/he serves on your comnittee."

148

16 Esteem (people you value will think worse of you if you do (negative) not comply.) "You tell your colleague that the

university community will look askance at her/hla if s/he does not support your commit tee. "

*17 Sycophantic (~ecause you are such a wonderful person, you will want to comply.) "You tell your colleague that $/he is the most intelligent, well-informed and fair-minded staff member, and then you ask her/him to volunteer for your committee."

*I8 Camaraderie (since we are all in this together, you will want to comply. ) "You tell your colleague that both of you desire to reach the sane goals; thus s/he will want to support your committee."

*I9 Combination (TWO or more techniques used in the same episode by the same speaker. List them. )

"20 No Strategy isode ode contains NO compliance-gaining at tempts. )

"Coding information added to original Marwell and Schmitt list of compliance-gaining techniques.

CODING INSTRUCTIONS

1 . Record each episode by the number i n red on l e f t of t r a n s c r i p t . Episodes a r e numbered consecutively from 1 t o 438.

2. Use t h e names on the t r a n s c r i p t i n the NAME column.

3. Be s u r e t o mark a STRATEGY # f o r each episode. Use the numbers of t h e Compliance-Gaining Coding Categories ( see add i t iona l s h e e t s ) i n the STRATEGY # column. I f t h e episode conta ins no compliance-gaining s t r a t e g y , then put down #20.

4. If you a r e unsure of how t o code a p a r t i c u l a r episode, leave some blank spaces on your coding s h e e t s and r e t u r n t o the episode l a t e r and t r y again.

5. A compliance-gairing attempt may o r may not be successfu l . I n the COIQLIANCE/AGREEMENT column, i n d i c a t e only when compliance, cooperation o r agreement i s evident . ( A "yes" o r a r/ w i l l be a f i n e ind ica t ion . ) Otherwise, leave t h i s column blank. You may f ind t h a t compliance/agreement t o one episode may no t appear u n t i l s eve ra l episodes l a t e r . If t h i s happens, go back t o the episode i n which the at tempt was made and mark t h e COMFLIANCE/AGREEMENT column.

Caution: Although i t i s h e l p f u l when people g ive obvious agreement, do not expect every at tempt t o be successfu l . The key th ing to d a t e m i n e i s the compliance-gaining s t r a t e g y i t s e l f ,

6. The EXPLANATION column i s t o be used t o provide c l a r i f i c a t i o n of your reason f o r s e l e c t i n g a c e r t a i n code. You do not have to f i l l t h i s i n i f a p a r t i c u l a r attempt seems se l f -evident to you. However, f o r Code #19, please put c l a r i f i c a t i o n . Also, i f wi th in the sams epiuode, the same speaker uses two o r more CC a t tempts , l i r t them sepa ra te ly and i n the EXPLANATION column wr i t e down a vord o r two from the t e x t so t h a t I can t e l l which sentences you a r e r e f e r r i n g to .

150

GENERAL GUIDELINES

Compliance-gaining strategies are different from requests for

information and general discussion.

Look for attempts at gaining compliance, cooperation and/or

agreement based on the coding scheme you received.

Remember, CG attempts are often subtle, so be alert for these

subtleties. They may be prefaced by such phrases as:

"Let's ..." "We will" (YOU will) "We should" (you should) "Don' t you think (agree). . . " "How about if we ..." "The consensus is..."

--and many more.

Although the coding scheme uses statements as exanples, CG attempts

may occur as questions, demands, orders, etc.

-The key in making your judgments is the statement in parentheses

opposite the category name. Check to see if a particular CG attempt

will generally fit into the parenthetical description. h he statements

in quotation marks are shply illustrations of the type of behavior that

might occur in that particular attempt. You will need to think beyond

this and consider generally what each category implies.)

APPENDIX C

SAMPLE QUESTIONNAIRE FOR USE OF COMPLIANCE-GAINING TECHNIQUES

( ~ d a p t e d from Marwel l ' s and Schmi t t ' s Q u e s t i o n n a i r e )

I n s t r u c t i o n s : Read t h e s i t u a t i o n d e s c r i b e d below and imagine

y o u r s e l f as t h e a c t o r t r y i n g t o g a i n compliance o f a n o t h e r person.

E igh teen p o s s i b l e b e h a v i o r s a r e l i s t e d below. P l e a s e i n d i c a t e by

c i r c l i n g t h e a p p r o p r i a t e number t h e l i k e l i h o o d t h a t you would employ

t h a t p a r t i c u l a r t echn ique i n g a i n i n g compliance o f a n o t h e r i n t h e

d e s c r i b e d s i t u a t i o n .

S i t u a t i o n : You a r e a ( n ) p r o f e s s o r / i n s t r u c t o r a t an e a s t e r n

u n i v e r s i t y . You a r e t r y i n g t o g e t a c o l l e a g u e t o v o l u n t e e r t o s e r v e f o r

t h e remainder o f t h e academic y e a r on your c o r n i t t e e t o f o r m u l a t e new

g r a d i n g p o l i c i e s .

Response Key:

1 D e f i n i t e l y would u s e 2 Probably would u s e 3 Might p o s s i b l y u s e

4 Might p o s s i b l y n o t u s e 5 Probably would n o t u s e 6 D e f i n i t e l y xould n o t use

1. (1f you comply, I w i l l reward you.) "You o f f e r t o support your co l l eague ' s next proposal if s /he w i l l se rve on your committee. "

2 . (1f you do no t comply, I w i l l punish you.) "You t h r e a t e n t o withhold support from your col league ' s next proposal if s/he does no t volunteer f o r your committee."

3. (1f you comply, you w i l l be rewarded because of the na tu re of th in@.) "You poin t out t o your col league t h a t i f s /he se rves on your committee, e/he w i l l ga in va luable experience and become more promotable."

4. (1f you do no t comply, you w i l l be punished because of the na tu re of things.) "You po in t out t o your col league t h a t if s /he does no t serve on your ~ ~ I D m i t t e e , s /he w i l l be inexperienced and unable t o o b t a i n promotion."

5. (Actor i s f r i e n d l y and he lp fu l t o g e t t a r g e t i n "good frame of mind" so t h a t s /he w i l l comply with reques t . ) "You a r e a s f r i e n d l y a s poss ib le t o your col league t o g e t her/him i n the r i g h t frame of mind to serve on your committee."

6 . ( AC t o r rewards t a r g e t before reques t ing compliance. ) "You back your co l l eague ' s suggest ions and t e l l her/him you now expect her/him to volunteer f o r your committee."

7. ( ~ c t o r continuously punishes t a r g e t , making cessa t ion contingent on compliance. ) "Y3u withhold the a v a i l a b i l i t y of your ample, much des i red l i b r a r y = a t e r i a l s and t e l l your col league s/he c a n ' t use them u n t i l s/he volunteers f o r 7our committee. "

(You owe me compliance because of p a s t favors . ) "You po in t ou t how cooperat ive you've been i n t h e p a s t , s e rv ing on o t h e r committees, and you po in t ou t t o your co l league t h a t s /he owes you se rv ing on yours."

(YOU a r e immoral i f you do not comply.) "You t e l l your col league i t is moral ly wrong f o r anyone not t o volunteer f o r a committee t o formulate new grading p o l i c i e s . "

(You w i l l f e e l b e t t e r about yourse l f i f you comply.) "You t e l l your col league s /he ' 11 f e e l b e t t e r about he r se l f lh imse l f i f s /he volunteers f o r the commit tee . "

(You w i l l f e e l worse about yourse l f i f you do not comply.) "You t e l l your col league s / h e l l l be ashamed of herse l f /h imsel f i f s /he f a i l s t o s e rve on your committee."

( A person with good q u a l i f i e s would comply.) "You t e l l your col league t h a t a s a s o p h i s t i c a t e d r e sea rche r and educa tor , s /he w i l l n a t u r a l l y want t o s e rve on your committee. "

(only a person wi th bad q u a l i t i e s would not comply.) "You t e l l your col league t h a t only someone who i s uneducated and sophomoric would not vo lun tee r f o r your committee."

( I need your compliance badly, so i t would be a l t r u i s t i c of you t o do i t f o r me.) "You t e l l your col league t h a t t h i s committee means a l o t t o you and t h a t you wish s /he would support i t a s a f avo r t o you."

15. (people you value w i l l t h i n k b e t t e r o f you i f you comply.) "You t e l l your co l league t h a t t h e u n i v e r s i t y community w i l l r egard her/him more h igh ly i f s / he s e r v e s on your conimittee."

16. (people you va lue w i l l t h i n k worse of you i f you do n o t comply.) "You t e l l your co l league t h a t t h e u n i v e r s i t y community w i l l look askance a t her/him i f s /he does n o t suppor t your committee."

*17. (aecause you a r e such a wonderful person, you w i l l want t o comply.) "You t e l l your co l l eague t h a t s h e is t h e most i n t e l l i g e n t , well-informed and fair-minded s t a f f member, and then you a sk her/him t o vo lun t ee r f o r your committee."

*18. ( s i n c e we a r e a l l i n t h i s t o g e t h e r , you w i l l want t o comply.) "You t e l l your co l league t h a t bo th of you d e s i r e t o reach t h e same goa l s ; thus s /he w i l l want t o suppor t your committee."

"Additional c a t e g o r i e s o f nompliance-gaining behavior n o t o r i g i n a l l y included among those of Marwell and Schmit t .

APPENDIX D

SUMMARY OF MARWELL AND SCHMITT FACTOR ANALYSIS OF 16 COMPLIANCE-GAINING BEHAVIORS

F i r s t o rde r Factors

Factor 1 : Rewarding a c t i v i t y ( ~ n c l u d e s Pre-Giving, Liking and Promise)

Factor 2: Punishing a c t i v i t y ( Includes Threat and Aversive s t imula t ion)

Factor 3: Exper t i se ( ~ n c l u d e s Exper t i se ( p o s i t i v e ) and Exper t i se (negat ive) )

Factor 4: Activat ion of impersonal commitments ( s e l f - f e e l i n g ( ~ o s i t i v e ) , Self - f e e l i n g (negat ive) , Altercas t ing ( p o s i t i v e ) , A l t e rcas t ing (nega t ive ) , Esteem ( p o s i t i v e ) , Esteem (nega t ive ) , Moral ~ p p e a l s )

Factor 5: Activat ion of personal commitments ( ~ l t r u i s m , Esteem (negat ive) , Debt, A l t e rcas t ing (negat ive) )

Second order f a c t o r s

Factor 1 : Tendency t o use s o c i a l l y acceptable techniques ( ~ n c l u d e s f i r s t - o r d e r f a c t o r s 1 , 3, 4)

Factor 2: Tendency t c use s o c i a l l y unacceptable techniques ( Inc ludes f i r s t order f a c t o r s 2 , 5 )

Nee t i n g

10/23/80

1 1 /6/80

11/11/80

1 1 /20/90

A P P E N D I X E

COMBINED TURN T I M E F O R E A C H F A C U L T Y l V 3 E T I N G

Total T u r n T i m e (seconds)

2320.6

2528.7

4383 -0

'3268.9

APPENDIX F

FACULTY MEETING QUESTIONNAIRE

During t h e F a l l 1990 semes t e r , depar tmenta l f a c u l t y meetings and committee meetings were he ld approximately every o t h e r week.

PART I

P l e a s e i n d i c a t e your pe r sona l se l f -assessment o f t h e importance t o you -- and t h e f requency of your p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e va r ious f a c u l t y meeting f u n c t i o n s l i s t e d below. Think i n terms o f a l l t he f a c u l t y meetings you a t t ended i n t h i s depar tment du r ing t h e f a l l , and judge your performance i n terms o f your behavior f o r t h e agg rega t e number of meetings.

I f you f e e l a p a r t i c u l a r f u n c t i o n is "very impor t an t , " c i r c l e #1 on t h e importance r a t i n g s c a l e ; i f you f e e l a f u n c t i o n is " f a i r l y important ," c i r c l e #2, and so f o r t h . Likewise, i f you f e e l you pe r sona l l y engaged i n t h a t f u n c t i o n a l l t h e t ime ( " a lnays" ) , c i r c l e #1 on t h e f requency r a t i n g s c a l e ; i f you f e e l you engaged i n t h e f u n c t i o n "very f r equen t ly , " c i r c l e #2, and s o f o r t h .

Rat ing Sca l e

Importance of Funct ion

1 = very important 2 = f a i r l y important 3 - s l i g h t l y important 4 = n e i t h e r important no r unimportant 5 = s l i g h t l y unimportant 6 = f a i r r y unimportant 7 = very unimportant

Frequency

I = always 2 = very f r e q u e n t l y 3 = o f t e n 4 = o c c a s i o n a l l y 5 = i n f r e q u e n t l y 6 = r a r e l y 7 = never

Please c i r c l e t h e appropr ia te number:

Importance to me Function Frequency

w/which I do t h i s

giving information ( f a c t s ) bui ld ing camaraderie seeking cooperation s o c i a l i z i n g promoting a c t i o n g e t t i n g agreement receiving information ( f a c t s ) giving opinions gaining compliance t ry ing t o change opinions seeking self-confirmation making pol icy dec i s ions en te r t a in ing

PART I1

A s i n P a r t I , you w i l l f i n d a list of f a c u l t y meeting funct ions a t t he bottom of the page. Again, th inking about the F a l l 1980 departmental meetings you a t tended, p lease r a t e these funct ions i n terms of t h e i r importance to f a c u l t y a s a whole and t h e i r frequency of occurrence during the aggregate number of meetings.

I f you f e e l a p a r t i c u l a r funct ion was "very important" to the f acu l ty , c i r c l e #1 on the r a t i n g s c a l e ; i f you f e e l a funct ion is " f a i r l y important, and so fo r th . Likewise, i f you f e e l a c e r t a i n funct ion occurred a l l t he time ("always"), c i r c l e #I on the Frequency- r a t i n g sca le ; i f you f e e l s funct ion occurred "very frequently," c i r c l e #2, and so f o r t h .

Rating Scale

Importance of Function Frequency

1 = - ~ e r y important 1 = always -8 - L - f a i r l y important 2 = very f requent ly 3 = s l i g h t l y important 3 = of ten 4 = n e i t h e r important nor unimportant 4 = occas ional ly 5 = s l i g h t l y unimportant 5 = inf requent ly 6 = f a i r l y unimportant 6 = rargljr 7 = very unimpgrtant 7 = never

Please c i r c l e the appropr i a t e number:

Importance t o me Function

g iv ing informat ion ( f a c t s ) bu i ld ing camaraderie seeking cooperat ion s o c i a l i z i n g promoting a c t i o n g e t t i n g agreement rece iv ing information ( f a c t s ) g iv ing opin ions ga in ing compliance t r y i n g t o change opinions seeking se l f -conf i rmat ion making po l i cy dec i s ions

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 e n t e r t a i n i n g

Frequency w/which I do t h i s