The polite abuser: Using politeness theory to examine emotional abuse

Abstract

This study examined how instigators of abuse used emotionally abusive messages to manipulate politeness to attack their partners' face. Additionally, we studied how the people experiencing abuse responded to such messages. Using thematic co‐occurrence analysis (TCA), we analyzed 20 semi‐structured interviews with those who have experienced abuse. Participants reported that instigators of abuse used all three of Austin's (1990) face attack act strategies of (a) bald‐on‐record, (b) on record with inappropriate redress, and (c) off‐record, as well as the emergent strategy of (d) non‐response. Similarly, those who experienced abuse indicated that they used three politeness strategies: (a) bald‐on‐record, (b) positive politeness, and (c) off‐record, and the emergent strategy of (d) not doing the face‐threatening act (FTA). TCA revealed five relationships between instigators' messages and the responses of those who experienced abuse. Finally, we discussed theoretical implications and practical applications.

An examination of visually impaired individuals’ communicative negotiation of face threats

“…Additionally, individuals use off-record strategies when they communicate indirectly or hint (“If only I had a ride to the store, I could get groceries.”). Last, people most concerned about face threats opt to not engage in the FTA, saying nothing as they deem the face threat risks too high (Alvarez & Miller-Ott, 2021) choosing, for example, to pass as a drinker versus reveal their non-drinking status (Romo et al, 2015). Individuals can also use humor to prevent face threats (e.g., Miller-Ott & Linder, 2013).…”

Examining the face threatening acts individuals with autism spectrum disorder experience and how they respond

“…", (c) developing initial themes, (d) reviewing themes, and (e) refining, defining, and naming themes. For RQ 2 and RQ 3 , we conducted an additional layer of analysis where we compared the developed themes to facework (Cupach & Metts, 1994), and politeness strategies (Alvarez & Miller-Ott, 2022;Brown & Levinson, 1987). For example, during the first level of analysis we developed a theme called preemptive explanation.…”

“…First, we conducted a thematic analysis using Braun and Clarke’s (2021) reflexive thematic analysis by (a) familiarizing ourselves with the data, (b) systematically coding the data in response to our analytical questions, “what FTAs are individuals with ASD describing?” “how, if at all, are people with ASD responding to the FTAs?” and “how, if at all, are commenters responding to the FTAs?”, (c) developing initial themes, (d) reviewing themes, and (e) refining, defining, and naming themes. For RQ 2 and RQ 3 , we conducted an additional layer of analysis where we compared the developed themes to facework (Cupach & Metts, 1994), and politeness strategies (Alvarez & Miller-Ott, 2022; Brown & Levinson, 1987). For example, during the first level of analysis we developed a theme called preemptive explanation .…”

“…For example, when overstimulated, an individual with ASD might remain silent (i.e., not do the FTA). Individuals experiencing emotional abuse from their romantic partner did not engage in FTAs toward their partner as a way to get through the abuse and save their partner's face (Alvarez & Miller-Ott, 2022). Although scholars conceptualize politeness strategies in terms of the addressee's face, they also save the speaker's face.…”

“…When an individual hints at the face-threatening message, they go off-record (Brown & Levinson, 1987). For example, an individual with ASD who is overstimulated might say, “It’s loud in here.” Finally, the most face-saving strategy is when a speaker does not do the FTA at all (Alvarez & Miller-Ott, 2022). For example, when overstimulated, an individual with ASD might remain silent (i.e., not do the FTA).…”