Extensive commentary cautions about the consequences of poor email etiquette, including emotional miscommunication and conflict escalation at work. This research considers the role of the receiver in negative email exchanges. Participants identified examples of negatively perceived emails received from coworkers, provided the text of these emails, and reported their perceptions and accounts of the messages. Results document a negative intensification bias in receiver perceptions of emails. Receivers perceived the emails more negatively than did observers, and receiver ratings had only weak relationships to characteristics of messages, including negative language and flaming. Negative intensification bias occurred more in poor communication climates and among individuals in subordinate positions. Qualitative results highlight the potential for ambiguous emails to be perceived in multiple ways leading to unanticipated consequences.
BaumeisterR. F.BratslavskyE.FinkenauerC.VohsK. D. (2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology, 5(4), 323–370. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.5.4.323
2.
BelkinL. Y.KurtzbergT. R. (2013). Affective displays in e-mail communication: Evidence from the lab and the field. In AshkanasyN. M.ZerbeW. J.HärtelC. E. J. (Eds.), Research on emotions in organizations (Vol. 9, pp. 279–308). Elsevier.
BraunS.Hernandez BarkA.KirchnerA.StegmannS.Van DickR. (2019). Emails from the boss—Curse or blessing? Relations between communication channels, leader evaluation, and employees’ attitudes. International Journal of Business Communication, 56(1), 50–81. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329488415597516
5.
BrownP.LevinsonS. C. (1987). Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena. Cambridge University Press.
6.
BrummansB.PutnamL.GrayL.HankeR.LewickiR.WiethoffC. (2008). Making sense of intractable multiparty conflict: A study of framing in four environmental disputes. Communication Monographs, 75(1), 25–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637750801952735
7.
ByronK. (2008). Carrying too heavy a load? Communication and miscommunication of emotion by email. Academy of Management Review, 33(2), 309–327. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2008.31193163
ClarkM. S.Von CulinK. R.Clark-PolnerE.LemayE. P.Jr. (2017). Accuracy and projection in perceptions of partners’ recent emotional experiences: Both minds matter. Emotion, 17(2), 196–207. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000173
10.
DuthlerK. W. (2006). The politeness of requests made via email and voic email: Support for the hyperpersonal model. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(2), 500–521. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00024.x
EdwardsR.BybeeB. T.FrostJ. K.HarveyA. J.NavarroM. (2017). That’s not what I meant: How misunderstanding is related to channel and perspective-taking. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 36(2), 188–210. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X16662968
13.
ElfenbeinH. A. (2007). Emotion in organizations: A review and theoretical integration. Academy of Management Annals, 1(1), 315–386. https://doi.org/10.1080/078559812
14.
ErhardtN.GibbsJ. L.Martin-RiosC.SherblomJ. C. (2016). Exploring dimensions of team learning processes through email over time. Small Group Research, 47(3), 243–278. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496416635823
15.
FiskeS. T.DépretE. (1996). Control, interdependence and power: Understanding social cognition in its social context. European Review of Social Psychology, 7(1), 311–361. https://doi.org/10.1080/14792779443000094
16.
FriedmanR. A.CurrallS. C. (2003). Conflict escalation: Dispute exacerbating elements of e-mail communication. Human Relations, 56(11), 1325–1347. https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267035611003
17.
GlaserS. R.ZamanouS.HackerK. (1987). Measuring and interpreting organizational culture. Management Communication Quarterly, 1(2), 173–198. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318987001002003
18.
GottmanJ. M.LevensonR. W. (1986). Assessing the role of emotion in marriage. Behavioral Assessment, 8(1), 31–48.
19.
HancockJ. T.DunhamP. J. (2001). Impression formation in computer-mediated communication revisited: An analysis of the breadth and intensity of impressions. Communication Research, 28(3), 325–347. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365001028003004
20.
HancockJ. T.GeeK.CiaciacoK.LinJ. M.-H. (2008). I’m sad you’re sad: Emotional contagion in CMC. In BegoleB.McDonaldD. W. (Eds.), Proceedings of the ACM conference on computer-supported cooperative work (pp. 295–298). ACM.
21.
HancockJ. T.LandriganC.SilverC. (2007). Expressing emotion in text-based communication. In RossonM. B.GilmoreD. (Eds.), Proceedings of the ACM conference on human factors in computing systems (CHI 2007) (pp. 929–932). ACM.
22.
HighA. C.SolomonD. H. (2014). Communication channel, sex, and the immediate and longitudinal outcomes of verbal person-centered support. Communication Monographs, 81(4), 439–468. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2014.933245
23.
JessmerS. L.AndersonD. (2001). The effect of politeness and grammar on user perceptions of electronic mail. North American Journal of Psychology, 3(2), 331–346.
24.
JiangL. C.BazarovaN. N.HancockJ. T. (2013). From perception to behavior: Disclosure reciprocity and the intensification of intimacy in computer-mediated communication. Communication Research, 40(1), 125–143. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650211405313
25.
KnoblochL. K.SatterleeK. L.DiDomenicoS. M. (2010). Relational uncertainty predicting appraisals of face threat in courtship: Integrating uncertainty reduction theory and politeness theory. Communication Research, 37(3), 303–334. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650210362527
26.
KrugerJ.EpleyN.ParkerJ.NgZ. (2005). Egocentrism over e-mail: Can we communicate as well as we think?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(6), 925–936. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.925
27.
KurtzbergT. R.BelkinL. Y.NaquinC. E. (2006). The effect of e-mail on attitude towards performance feedback. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 14(1), 4–21. https://doi.org/10.1108/10553180610739722
28.
LimV. K. G.TeoT. S. H. (2009). Mind your E-manners: Impact of cyber incivility on employees’ work attitude and behavior. Information & Management, 46(8), 419–425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2009.06.006
29.
MarkusM. L. (1994). Finding a happy medium: Explaining the negative effects of electronic communication on social life at work. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 12(2), 119–149. https://doi.org/10.1145/196734.196738
30.
O’ConnerB. P. (2000). SPSS and SAS programs for determining the number of components using parallel analysis and Velicer’s MAP test. Behavioral Research Methods, Instrumentation and Computers, 32, 396–402. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03200807
31.
O’SullivanP. B.FlanaginA. J. (2003). Reconceptualizing “flaming” and other problematic messages. New Media & Society, 5(1), 69–94. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444803005001908
32.
ParkA. Y.HaunV. C. (2018). The long arm of email incivility: Transmitted stress to the partner and partner work withdrawal. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 39(10), 1268–1282. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2289
33.
PennebakerJ. W.BoydR. L.JordanK.BlackburnK. (2015). The development and psychometric properties of LIWC2015. University of Texas at Austin. https://doi.org/10.15781/T29G6Zl
34.
RainsS. A.AkersC.PavlichC. A.TsetsiE.AppelbaumM. (2019). Examining the quality of social support messages produced face-to-face and in computer-mediated communication: The effects of hyperpersonal communication. Communication Monographs, 86(3), 271–291. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2019.1595076
35.
RiordanM. A.TrichtingerL. A. (2017). Overconfidence at the keyboard: Confidence and accuracy in interpreting affect in e-mail exchanges. Human Communication Research, 43(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12093
36.
RobinsonJ. D. (2006). Managing trouble responsibility and relationships during conversational repair. Communication Monographs, 73(2), 137–161. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637750600581206
37.
SearleJ. R. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge University Press.
38.
ShackmanA. J.TrompD. P. M.StockbridgeM. D.KaplanC. M.TillmanR. M.FoxA. S. (2016). Dispositional negativity: An integrative psychological and neurobiological perspective. Psychological Bulletin, 142(12), 1275–1314. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000073
39.
ShortJ. A.WilliamsE.ChristieB. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. Wiley.
40.
SillarsA. (2011). Motivated misunderstanding in family conflict discussions. In SmithJ. L.IckesW.HallJ.HodgesS. (Eds.), Managing interpersonal sensitivity: Knowing when—And when not—To understand others (pp. 193–213). Nova Science Publishers.
41.
SillarsA.VangelistiA. L. (2018). Communication: Basic properties and their relevance to relationship research. In VangelistiA. L.PerlmanD. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of personal relationships (2nd ed., pp. 243–255). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316417867
42.
SproullL.KieslerS. (1986). Reducing social context cues: Electronic mail in organizational communication. Management Science, 32(11), 1492–1512. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.32.11.1492
43.
SussmanS. W.SproullL. (1999). Straight talk: delivering bad news through electronic communication. Information Systems Research, 10(2), 150–166. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.10.2.150
44.
TimmermanP. D.HarrisonW. (2005). The discretionary use of electronic media: Four considerations for bad news bearers. Journal of Business Communication, 42(4), 379–389. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021943605279059
VelicerW. F. (1976). Determining the number of components from the matrix of partial correlations. Psychometrika, 41(3), 321–327. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02293557
WaltherJ. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23(1), 3–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365096023001001
51.
WaltherJ. B.D’AddarioK. P. (2001). The impacts of emoticons on message interpretation in computer-mediated communication. Social Science Computer Review, 19(3), 324–347. https://doi.org/10.1177/089443930101900307
52.
WaltherJ. B.KashianN.JangJ.ShinS. Y. (2016). Overattribution of liking in computer-mediated communication: Partners infer the results of their own influence as their partners’ affection. Communication Research, 43(3), 372–390. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650214565898
53.
WaltherJ. B.LohT.GrankaL. (2005). Let me count the ways: The interchange of verbal and nonverbal cues in computer-mediated and FtF affinity. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 24(1), 36–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X04273036
54.
WaltherJ. B.Van Der HeideB.RamirezA.BurgoonJ. K.PeñaJ. (2015). Interpersonal and hyperpersonal dimensions of computer-mediated communication. In SundarS. S. (Ed.), The handbook of the psychology of communication technology (pp. 3–22). John Wiley & Sons.
