This study compared actors', partners', and observers' perceptions of the amount of sarcasm used by participants (n = 80) in videotaped conversations. Significant differences were found among perceptions of actors, partners, and observers. Of the three perspectives, actors perceived themselves as using the greatest amount of sarcasm, followed by partners' perceptions of actors. Observers perceived actors as using the least amount of sarcasm. Correlations conducted to assess whether partners and observers recognized actors' individual attempts at sarcasm during the conversations were generally low.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AuneK. S. (1997) Self and partner perceptions of the appropriateness of emotion. Communication Reports, 10, 133–142.
2.
BenoitP. J.BenoitW. L. (1994) Anticipated future interaction and conversational memory using participants and observers. Communication Quarterly, 42, 274–287.
3.
BullerD. B.StrzyzewskiK.HunsakerF. G. (1991) Interpersonal deception: The inferiority of conversational participants as deception detectors. Communication Monographs, 58, 25–40.
4.
BurgoonJ. K.BullerD. B.FloydK.GrandpreJ. (1996) Deceptive realities: Sender, receiver, and observer perspectives in deceptive conversations. Communication Research, 23, 724–748.
5.
BurgoonJ. K.LepoireB. A. (1999) Nonverbal cues and interpersonal judgments: Participant and observer perceptions of intimacy, dominance, composure, and formality. Communication Monographs, 66, 105–124.
6.
BurgoonJ. K.NewtonD. A. (1991) Applying a social meaning model to relational message interpretations of conversational involvement: Comparing observer and participant perspectives. Southern Communication Journal, 56, 96–113.
7.
JonesE. E.NisbettR. E. (1971) The actor and the observer: Divergent perceptions of the cause of behavior. In JonesE. E.KanouseD. E.KelleyH. H.NisbettR. E.ValinsS.WienerB. (Eds.), Attribution: Perceiving the causes of behavior. Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.78–94.
8.
MonahanJ. L. (1995) Information processing differences of conversational participants and observers: The effects of self-presentation and cognitive load. Communication Monographs, 62, 265–281.
9.
NisbettR. E.CaputoC.LegantP.MaracekJ. (1973) Behavior as seen by the actor and as seen by the observer. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 27, 154–164.
10.
StormsM. D. (1973) Videotape and the attribution process: Reversing actors’ and observers’ points of view. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 27, 165–175.
11.
StreetR. L.MulacA.WiemannJ. M. (1988) Speech evaluation differences as a function of perspective (participant versus observer) and presentational medium. Human Communication Research, 14, 333–363.
