•  
  •  
 

Jurnal Komunikasi Indonesia

Abstract

The most crucial aspect of a collaborative process, face to face or online, is the face of participants, which is the focus of this research. The face is a direct indicator of the importance for individuals to maintain face (self-esteem) for themselves and for their culture group. This research uses a qualitative interpretive approach of ethnomethodology. The subjects observed in this study are a virtual team of three universities: (one from Indonesia and two from the USA), which meets regularly via Skype videoconferencing. Conversation analysis is used to analyze how participants construct their conversation in collaborating to make decisions. The result of this study is the construction or mapping of the individual facework strategies from individualistic and collectivistic cultures. The implication of this research is a model constructing face strategy mapping of individuals, which explains how individuals negotiate their face in virtual collaboration inter-culturally and are very relevant in the advancement of Face-Negotiation Theory.

References

Agger, B. (2004). The Virtual Self: A Contemporary Sociology. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Baranova, E. (2010). Facework in Organizational Conflict: A Cross-Cultural Study Comparing Russians and Americans. University of Kansas Communication Studies Dissertations & Theses. Retrieved August 8, 2010 from URI http://hdl.handle.net/1808/6434

Bond, M. (ed). (1997). Face-Negotiation Theory Stella Ting-Toomey, An Intercultural Journey: The Four Seasons. In Working at the Interface of Cultures: Eighteen Lives in Social Science. (pp. 202-215). New York: Routledge.

Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Canelon, J.S. (2011). Do Facework Behaviors Matter During Conflicts Among Online Discussion Team Members?. CGU Theses & Dissertations, 15. Retrieved October 10, 2013, from https://scholarship.claremont.edu/cgu_etd/15 doi: 10.5642/cguetd/15

Denzin, N.K. & Lincoln, Y.S. (2005). The Handbook of Qualitative Research. Third Edition. London: Sage Publications.

Forrester, M. A. (1999). Conversation Analysis: A Reflexive Methodology for Critical Psychology. Annual Review of Critical Psychology. 1, 34–49.

Forrester, M.A. (2002). Appropriating Cultural Conceptions of Childhood: Participation in Conversation. Childhood, 9, 255-278.

Friedman, R, Oekains, M. , David, S. (2011). Cross‐Cultural Difference in Reactions to Facework During Service Failures. Retrieved on November 27, 2013, from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1750-4716.2011.00086.x

Goffman, Erving. (1955). On Facework: An Analysis of Ritual Elements in Social Interaction. Journal of Psychiatry: Interpersonal and Biological Processes. 18(3), 1955, 213-231.

Goffman, Erving. (1959). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Company, Anchor Books.

Goffman, Erving. (1967). Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Interaction. Oxford, England: Aldine.

Green, E., Deschamps, J.C., Paez, D. (2005). Variation of Individualism and Collectivism within and between 20 Countries: A Typological Analysis. Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology. 36(3), 321-339.

Griffin, Em, Ledbetter, A. & Sparks, G. (2015). A First Look at Communication Theory (9th ed). New York: McGraw-Hill Education.

Guba, E. G. & Lincoln, Y.S. (2005). Paradigmatic Controversies, Contradictions, and Emerging Confluences. In Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln Y.S (eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research. California: Sage Publications.

Gudykunst, W.B. (2002). Intercultural Communication Theories. In Handbook of International and Intercultural Communication. Second Edition. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Gudykunst, W.B., & Ting-Toomey, S. (1988). Culture and Interpersonal Communication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Guzzo, R.A., Salas, E., & Associates. (1995). Team Effectiveness and Decision Making in Organization. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Hall, E.T. (1976). Beyond Culture. Garden City, NY: Anchor Press.

Have, P. T. (1991). Talk and Institution: a Reconsideration of the 'Asymmetry' of Doctor-Patient Interaction. In: Boden, D. & Zimmerman, D.H. (eds). Talk and Social Structure. (pp. 38-63). Cambridge: Polity Press.

Heritage, J. & Atkinson, J. M. (1984) Introduction. In Atkinson, J. M. & Heritage, J. (Eds.), Structures of Social Action (pp. 1-15). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. Maidenhead, UK: McGraw-Hill.

Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organizations Across Nations. Second Edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Hofstede, G. & Hofstede, G.J. (2005). Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. Second Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Hui, V. & Bond, M. (2009). Target's Face Loss, Motivations, and Forgiveness Following Relational Transgression: Comparing Chinese and US Cultures. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 26(2-3), 123-140.

Jia, W. 2001. The Remaking of the Chinese Character and Identity in the 21st Century. London: Ablex Publishing.

Johnson, D.W. & Johnson, F.P. (2009). Joining Together: Group Theory and Group Skills. Tenth Edition. New Jersey: Parson Education.

Kam, C. & Bond, M. (2008). Role of Emotions and Behavioral Responses in Mediating the Impact of Face Loss on Relationship Deterioration: Are Chinese More Face-Sensitive than Americans?. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 11, 175-184.

Kruger, T. & Roodt, G. (2003). Hofstede’s VSM-94 Revisited: is it Reliable and Valid?. Journal of Industrial Psychology, 29(1), 75-82.

Lindlof, T.R. & Taylor, B.C. (2002). Qualitative Communication Research Methods. Second Edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Littlejohn, S.W. & Foss, K.A. (2005). Theories of Human Communication. Eight Edition. Belmonth, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.

_________________________. (2008). Theories of Human Communication. Ninth Edition. Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.

Mai Nguyen, P.M., Terlouw, C. & Pilot, A. (2014). Revisiting Facework with a New analysis Instrument: Face Strategies and Face Negotiation in Intercultural Cmmunication. Journal of Intercultural Communication, 36, 2014. URL: http://immi.se/intercultural

Maitland, C. & Johannes, B. (2001). National Level Culture and Global Diffusion: The Case of the Internet. in Ess, C. & Sudweeks, F. (Eds). Culture, Technology, Communication: Towards an Intercultural Global Village (pp. 87-128). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Mao, L.M. (1994). Beyond Politeness Theory: ‘Face’ Tevisited and Renewed. Journal of Pragmatics, 21(5) 451-486.

Markus, H.R., Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and Self: Implications for Ccognition, Emotion and Motivation. Psychological Review, 98(2) 224-253.

Oetzel, J., Ting-Toomey, S., Masumoto, T., Yokochi, Y., Pan, X., Takai, J. & Wilcox, R. (2001). Face and Facework in Conflict: A Cross-cultural Comparison of China, Germany, Japan, and the United States. Communication Monograph, 68(3), 235-258.

Oetzel, J. & Ting-Toomey, S. (2003). Face Concerns in Interpersonal Conflict A Cross-Cultural Empirical Test of the Face Negotiation Theory. Communication Research, 30 (6), 599-624.

Park, Jung-ran. (2008). Linguistic Politeness and Face-Work in Computer-Mediated Communication, Part 1: A Theoretical Framework. JASIST. 59. 2051-2059. 10.1002/asi.20916.

Peng, C.A., & Tjosvold, D. (2011). Social Face Concerns and Conflict Avoidance of Chinese Employees with Their Western or Chinese Managers. Human Relations, 64(8), 1031–1050.

Peräkylä, A. (2008). Conversation Analysis. The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology Online. Retrieved September 15, 2013, from http://blogs.helsinki.fi/perakyla/files/2008/10/conversationanalysis_08l1.pdf

Petiti, M. (2010). Politeness in Professional E-Mails: A Content Analysis of Computer-Mediated Communication (CMC). Retreived September 10, 2013, from http://michaelpetitti.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/PetittiFinalPaper-1.pdf

Perdue, W. D. (1986). Sociological Theory: Explanation, Paradigm, and Ideology. Palo Alto, CA: Mayfield Publishing Company.

Schwamlein, E. & Wodzicki, K. (2012). What to Tell About Me? Self‐Presentation in Online Communities. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17 (4). 387–407.

Scollon, R. & Scollon S. W. (2004). Nexus Analysis: Discourse and the Emerging Internet. New York: Routledge.

Ting-Toomey, Stella (2005). The Matrix of Face: An updated face-negotiation theory. In William B. Gudykunst (ed.) Theorizing about Intercultural Communication, (pp. 71–92). London: SAGE Publications.

Ting-Toomey, S. (1988). A Face Negotiation Theory. In Kim, Y. & Gudykunst, W. (Eds.), Theories in Intercultural Communication (pp. 213-235). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Walsh, S.L., Gregory, E., & Lake, Y. (2003). Self-construal, Facework, and Conflict Styles among Cultures in Online Learning Environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51 (4).

Wilson, S. (1992). Face and Facework in Negotiation. In Putnam, L. & Roloff, M. (Eds.), Communication and Negotiation (pp. 176-205). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

West, L. & Trester, A.M. (2013). Facework on Facebook: Conversations on Social Media. Retrieved October 16, 2013 from https://www.academia.edu/4049815/West_and_Trester_2013_Facework_on_Facebook_Conversations_on_social_media

Young, B. (2013). Emmanuel Levinas and “the face of the Other”. Retrieved September 3, 2013 from http://english.byu.edu/faculty/youngb/levinas/face.pdf

Download

Share

COinS