All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Analysis on Hostage Crisis Negotiations With Regard to Identity Concerns
Unformatted Document Text:  Hostage Negotiations 18 common(n=323 in total of 635 cumulative speech units, 50.87%) than that of negotiators. Remarkably, they engage in Attack Other’s Face frequently (32.44%). This behavior is followed by Positive Backchannels and Restore Self’s Face (2.35% for each behavior), Defend Self’s Face (2.20%), Attack Self’s Face (1.26%), and Restore Other’s Face (0.31%). There were no Defend Other’s Face. Attack Other’s Face is most frequent in Case 3 (90 of total of 185 speech units, 48.65), which exceeds Neutral Face (43.79%). Also, perpetrators engage in Defend Self’s Face rather than Defend Other’s Face, and more in Restore Self’s Face (0.80%, 2.77%, and 2.70% for Cases 1, 2, and 3 respectively) than in Restore Other’s Face (0.00%, 0.31%, and 0.54% for Cases 1, 2, and 3 respectively). Hypothesis 3 that perpetrators attempt to restore self’s face more than restore other’s face was supported in all three cases. Results of the test of Hypothesis 4 are visually displayed (see Appendices C-1, 2, and 3). Facework behaviors shown by each party in Case 1, 2, and 3 are plotted as dots during the sequence of the discourses. In order to examine the relationship between temporal flow and frequency of facework behaviors, the plots of the discourses for each case are divided into five segments. Included are response by third parties. The perpetrator of Case 1 attacks the other’s face four times and his own face three times in the first segment of the discourse units (each segment is approximately 63 units including both negotiator and perpetrator’s discourse units). In response to the perpetrator’s Face-Threat, the negotiator attempts to restore the perpetrator’s face six times. In the second segment, the negotiator attacks the perpetrator’s face four times and the perpetrator defends his face five times. In the third segment, the perpetrator attacks the negotiator’s face five times, and the negotiator defends his face three times. In the

Authors: Ie, Fumiko.
first   previous   Page 18 of 32   next   last



background image
Hostage Negotiations 18
common(n=323 in total of 635 cumulative speech units, 50.87%) than that of negotiators.
Remarkably, they engage in Attack Other’s Face frequently (32.44%). This behavior is
followed by Positive Backchannels and Restore Self’s Face (2.35% for each behavior),
Defend Self’s Face (2.20%), Attack Self’s Face (1.26%), and Restore Other’s Face
(0.31%). There were no Defend Other’s Face. Attack Other’s Face is most frequent in
Case 3 (90 of total of 185 speech units, 48.65), which exceeds Neutral Face (43.79%).
Also, perpetrators engage in Defend Self’s Face rather than Defend Other’s Face, and
more in Restore Self’s Face (0.80%, 2.77%, and 2.70% for Cases 1, 2, and 3 respectively)
than in Restore Other’s Face (0.00%, 0.31%, and 0.54% for Cases 1, 2, and 3
respectively). Hypothesis 3 that perpetrators attempt to restore self’s face more than
restore other’s face was supported in all three cases.
Results of the test of Hypothesis 4 are visually displayed (see Appendices C-1, 2,
and 3). Facework behaviors shown by each party in Case 1, 2, and 3 are plotted as dots
during the sequence of the discourses. In order to examine the relationship between
temporal flow and frequency of facework behaviors, the plots of the discourses for each
case are divided into five segments. Included are response by third parties.
The perpetrator of Case 1 attacks the other’s face four times and his own face three
times in the first segment of the discourse units (each segment is approximately 63 units
including both negotiator and perpetrator’s discourse units). In response to the
perpetrator’s Face-Threat, the negotiator attempts to restore the perpetrator’s face six
times. In the second segment, the negotiator attacks the perpetrator’s face four times and
the perpetrator defends his face five times. In the third segment, the perpetrator attacks
the negotiator’s face five times, and the negotiator defends his face three times. In the


Convention
Submission, Review, and Scheduling! All Academic Convention can help with all of your abstract management needs and many more. Contact us today for a quote!
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 18 of 32   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.