Download LEC09

LEC09
Title: The Effect of Politeness and Grammar on User Perceptions of Electronic
Mail
Author(s): Sherri JESSMER & David ANDERSON
Electronic mail is the most recent alternative to face-to-face communication. Even if we
don know that the medium is not the message, this medium is different in many ways
from other means of communication (Adkins & Brashers, 1995).
This research examined how the nature and format of an e-mail message might affect
how a recipient perceives the sender of that message.
Carnevale & Probst (1997) pointed out that text-based communication makes
interaction more difficult because it is less “rich” than other forms of communication.
There is a lack of social and status cues in e-mail, and dynamic cues are completely
missing from e-mail (Sproull & Kiesler, 1986).
What happens when we receive mails which don’t meet our expectations? For example,
how do we react when the language in an e-mail message is ungrammatical or impolite.
According to Eagly (1987), social norms are shared expectations about appropriate
behavior.
Since context cues often act as reminders of social norms, their absence can lead to
reduced attention to the behavioral norms that usually governs interpersonal behavior.
E-mail depersonalizes communication (Lea and Spears, 1991). Anonymity brings
security, hence less attach to social norms. Employees who communicate with their
supervisors via e-mail coud loose the sense of the social status of their supervisor. They
can be more prone to misconduct.
Sherwood (1998) suggested that one of the biggest cues people use to determine status
is the way the writer of the message uses language. As contextual cues are reduced, the
recipient must make assumptions on the basis of the information available within the
message itself.
Politeness & Grammar vs. Status
Competency was judged to be higher in both polite an grammatically correct messages.
Polite and grammatical messages are seen as clearer than impolite and ungrammatical
e-mails.
Grammatical messages are seen to be written by women. The opposite is true
(ungrammatical, men).
People who send polite e-mail messages are seen as more friendly nad likable;
recipients want to work with them; the sender is seen as having edited his or her
message and is interested in the reaction of the recipient. Same with grammar.
Particularity: less grammatical messages are perceived as being sent by people of higher
power.
References
ADKINS, Mark and BRASHERS, Dale E. (1995). The power of language in computermediated groups. Management Communication Quarterly 8, 289-232
CARNEVALE, Peter J. and PROBST, Tahira M. (1997). Conflict on the Internet. In S.
Kiesler (Ed.), Culture of the Internet pp.233-261 Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
EAGLY, Alice H. (1987). Social differences in behavior: A social-role interpretation.
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
LEA, Marin and SPEARS, Russell (1991). Computer-mediated communication,
deindividuation and group decision-making. International Journal of Man-Machine
Studies 34, 283-301
SHERWOOD, K. D. (1998). A beginner's guide to effective e-mail.
http://www.webfoot.com/advice/email.top.html
GARTON, Laura and WELLMAN, Barry (1995). Social impacts of electronic mail in
organizations: A review of research literature. Communication Yearbook 18, 434-453
SPROULL, Lee O. and KIESLER, Sara (1986). Reducing social context cues: Electronic
mail in organizational communication. Management Science 32, 1492-1512