Language and Social Influence in Small Conversational Groups

Abstract

University students, in groups of 3 or 4, discussed legal aspects of commercial surrogacy and afterwards ranked the relative influence of each group member. As predicted, high-influence members spoke more words and had more successful turns during the conversation than low-influence members. The latter used a greater rate of intonation and intensifiers than the former. A closer examination of the results showed that turns were particularly important for high influence. Unexpectedly, tag questions and hedges did not result in low influence, probably due to the different usage of tag questions and to the nature of the conversation setting which, unlike one facing court witnesses, required tactful hedging in the exertion of influence.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Blakar, R. (1979) Language as a means of social power. In R. Rommetveit & R. Blakar (eds), Studies of language, thought and verbal communication. London: Academic Press.

Bradac, J. J. (1982) A rose by another name: Attitudinal consequences of lexical variation. In E. B. Ryan & H. Giles (eds), Attitudes towards language variation. London: Edward Arnold.

Bradac, J. J. and Street, R. (1986) Powerful and powerless styles re-visited: A theoretical analysis. Paper presented at the meeting of the Speech Communication Association, Chicago, 1986.

Brown, R. and Ford, M. (1961) Address in American English. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 62, 375–85.

Brown, R. and Gilman, A. (1960) The pronouns of power and solidarity. In T. A. Sebeok (ed.), Style in Language. Cambridge: Technology Press.

Erickson, B. , Lind, A. E. , Johnson, B. C. and O'Barr, W. M. (1978) Speech style and impression formation in a court setting: The effects of ‘powerful' and’ powerless' speech. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 14, 266–79.

Fowler, R. , Hodge, R. , Kress, G. and Trew, A. (1979) Language and Control. London: Boston and Henley.

Gordon, E. and Deverson, T. (1985) New Zealand English. Auckland: Heinemann.

Jaspars, J. M. F. (1978) Determinants of attitudes and attitude change. In H. Tajfel and C. Fraser (eds), Introducing social psychology. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

10.

Lakoff, R. (1973) Language and woman's place. Language in Society, 2, 45–80.

11.

Levinson, S. C. (1983) Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

12.

Lind, E. A. and O'Barr, W. M. (1979) The social significance of speech in the courtroom. In H. Giles & R. St Clair (eds), Language and Social Psychology. Baltimore: University Park Press.

13.

Morris, C. G. and Hackman, J. R. (1969) Behavioural correlates of perceived leadership. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 13, 350–61.

14.

Mueller, C. (1973) The Politics of Communication: A Study in the Political Sociology of Language, Socialization, and Legitimation. New York: Oxford University Press.

15.

O'Barr, W. M. (1984) Asking the right questions about language and power. In C. Kramarae , M. Schulz & W. M. O'Barr (eds), Language and Power. Beverly Hills: Sage.

16.

Owsley, H. H. and Scotton, C. M. (1984) The conversational expression of power by television interviewers. Journal of Social Psychology, 123, 261–71.

17.

Sacks, H. , Schegloff, E. A. and Jefferson, G. (1974) A simplest sematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50, 696–735.

18.

Scherer, K. (1979) Voice and speech correlates of perceived social influence in simulated juries. In H. Giles & R. St Clair (eds), Language and Social Psychology. Baltimore: University Park Press.