Skip to main content
Log in

Identity and influence in social interaction

  • Dimensions of Critical Reasoning: Expanding the Horizons
  • Published:
Argumentation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Researchers studying argumentation often make the simplifying assumption that rational persuasion can be studied independently from the processes through which social identities are established and maintained. However, developments in the study of message design, particularly the groundbreaking work of Brown and Levinson (1978, 1987) on politeness, suggests that in practice the multiple functions of messages are intertwined in message structure and effects. In contrast to the view that identity issues distort rational processes in communication, both the communication of identity and the use of identity-based appeals in social influence are best seen as prototypical examples of rationality in message design.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bales, R. F.: 1950,Interaction Process Analysis: A Method for the Study of Small Groups, Addison-Wesley, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beles, R. F. and F. L. Strodtbeck: 1951, ‘Phases in Group Problem Solving’,Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 46, 485–495.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bingham, S.: 1988,Interpersonal Responses to Sexual Harassment, unpublished doctoral dissertation, Purdue University.

  • Brown, P. and S. Levinson: 1978, ‘Universals in Language Usage: Politeness Phenomena’, in E. Goody (ed.),Questions and Politeness, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 56–323.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, P. and S. Levinson: 1987,Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Eemeren, F. and R. Grootendorst: 1992, ‘Relevance Reviewed: The Case of Argumentation ad Hominem’,Argumentation 6, 141–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Eemeren, F., R. Grootendorst, S. Jackson and S. Jacobs: 1993,Reconstructing Argumentative Discourse, University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garfinkel, H.: 1967,Studies in Ethnomethodology, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goffman, E.: 1959,The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, Doubleday Anchor, Garden City, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goffman, E.: 1967,Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face to Face Behavior, Doubleday Anchor, Garden City, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goffman, E.: 1981,Forms of Talk, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, PA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grice, H. P.: 1975, ‘Logic and Conversation’, in P. Cole and J. L. Morgan (eds.),Syntax and Semantics, Volume 3: Speech Acts, Academic Press, New York, 41–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J.: 1979,Communication and the Evolution of Society, trans. Thomas McCarthy, Beacon Press, Boston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Logan, C.: 1991, ‘Message Design Logics and Moral Reasoning: Developmental Processes of Communication Function and Social Cognition’, paper presented at the annual meeting of the Speech Communication Association, Atlanta, GA.

  • O'Keefe, B. J.: 1988, ‘The Logic of Message Design: Individual Differences in Reasoning about Communication’,Communication Monographs 55, 80–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • O'Keefe, B. J. and J. G. Delia: 1988, ‘Communicative Tasks and Communicative Practices: The Development of Audience-Centered Message Production’, in B. Rafoth and D. Rubin (eds.),The Social Construction of Written Communication, Ablex, Norwood, NJ, 70–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • O'Keefe, B. J. and S. A. McCornack: 1987, ‘Message Design Logic and Message Goal Structure: Effects on Perceptions of Message Quality in Regulative Communication Situations’,Human Communication Research 14, 68–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • O'Keefe, B. J. and G. J. Shepherd: 1987, ‘The Pursuit of Multiple Objectives in Face-to-Face Persuasive Interactions: Effects of Construct Differentiation on Message Organization’,Communication Monographs 54, 396–419.

    Google Scholar 

  • O'Keefe, B. J. and G. J. Shepherd: 1989, ‘The Communication of Identity during Face-to-Face Persuasive Interactions: Effects of Receiver's Construct Differentiation and Target's Message Strategies’,Communication Research 16, 375–404.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, M. B. and S. M. Lyman: 1968, ‘Accounts’,American Sociological Review 48, 46–62.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

O'Keefe, B.J. Identity and influence in social interaction. Argumentation 9, 785–800 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00744758

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00744758

Key words

Navigation