2001/03/01 by Mary Lee Hummert, Debra C. Mazloff · 2 citations
Arts and Humanities · Psychology · #Advice (programming) #Assertiveness #Computer science #Context (archaeology) #Discourse Analysis in Language Studies #Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies #Language, Metaphor, and Cognition #Linguistics #Perception #Politeness #Politeness theory #Psychology #Social psychology #Style (visual arts)
paper · doi:10.1177/0261927x01020001008
openalex publication_date 2001/03/01 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/30
Following Okamoto and Robinson, two studies extended the study of politeness in context to a consideration of how older individuals respond to advice delivered in a patronizing (impolite) or affirming (polite) manner. Study 1 involved older persons in focus groups that considered contexts for, perceptions of, and responses to patronizing advice. Study 2 collected oral responses from other older individuals in a 2 (advice style: patronizing/affirming) 2 (context: community/hospital) design. Together, the studies showed that participants perceived at least five ways of responding to patronizing advice (appreciative, assertive, passive, ignoring, condescending) that vary from highly polite (appreciative) to polite to impolite (condescending). Results from Study 2 supported the hypothesis that evaluations of advice and responses would show that the hospital context legitimates a patronizing advice style, consistent with the general framework of Politeness Theory. Other results reinforced the complexity and challenges of using the theory to interpret behaviors in context.