How we are versus how we are feeling: The role of emotional intelligence and mood in reactions to impoliteness in L1 and L2

IF 1.8 1区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Nicola Claire McNab , Irini Mavrou
{"title":"How we are versus how we are feeling: The role of emotional intelligence and mood in reactions to impoliteness in L1 and L2","authors":"Nicola Claire McNab ,&nbsp;Irini Mavrou","doi":"10.1016/j.pragma.2025.07.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Previous (im)politeness research has tended to focus on socio-cultural influences, thus largely neglecting the role of individual differences. This study takes a socio-cognitive approach to investigate how personality––measured through emotional intelligence (EI)––, mood, and language (first versus second language) influence responses to impoliteness. The study was pre-registered prior to data collection and analysis. One hundred and four Spanish-English bilinguals completed an EI questionnaire and underwent mood induction, before responding to a Discourse Completion Task (DCT) involving ten impolite workplace scenarios. A mixed-methods approach was used, and data were analysed by means of mixed-effects regression models, Chi-squared tests, and content analysis. Sociability, a facet of EI, appeared to influence responses to impoliteness, possibly indicating individual levels of assertiveness played a role. Mood had an impact on response types, with participants in a negative mood responding with more offensive counter-attacks and those in a positive mood responding with more acceptance. However, offensive responses within the positive mood group were also found to utilise more bald on record impoliteness, thus suggesting cognitive processes do vary depending on mood. Language did not have an effect, perhaps signalling similarities between Spanish and English or lending support to the role of pragmatic transfer.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16899,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pragmatics","volume":"246 ","pages":"Pages 121-133"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pragmatics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378216625001584","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Previous (im)politeness research has tended to focus on socio-cultural influences, thus largely neglecting the role of individual differences. This study takes a socio-cognitive approach to investigate how personality––measured through emotional intelligence (EI)––, mood, and language (first versus second language) influence responses to impoliteness. The study was pre-registered prior to data collection and analysis. One hundred and four Spanish-English bilinguals completed an EI questionnaire and underwent mood induction, before responding to a Discourse Completion Task (DCT) involving ten impolite workplace scenarios. A mixed-methods approach was used, and data were analysed by means of mixed-effects regression models, Chi-squared tests, and content analysis. Sociability, a facet of EI, appeared to influence responses to impoliteness, possibly indicating individual levels of assertiveness played a role. Mood had an impact on response types, with participants in a negative mood responding with more offensive counter-attacks and those in a positive mood responding with more acceptance. However, offensive responses within the positive mood group were also found to utilise more bald on record impoliteness, thus suggesting cognitive processes do vary depending on mood. Language did not have an effect, perhaps signalling similarities between Spanish and English or lending support to the role of pragmatic transfer.
我们是如何与我们是如何感受的:情商和情绪在第一语言和第二语言中对不礼貌的反应中的作用
以往的礼貌研究倾向于关注社会文化的影响,从而在很大程度上忽视了个体差异的作用。本研究采用社会认知方法来调查个性(通过情商(EI)衡量)、情绪和语言(第一语言与第二语言)如何影响对不礼貌的反应。该研究在数据收集和分析之前进行了预登记。104名西班牙语-英语双语者完成了一份情商问卷,并进行了情绪诱导,然后对涉及10个不礼貌工作场景的话语完成任务(DCT)做出了回应。采用混合方法,通过混合效应回归模型、卡方检验和内容分析对数据进行分析。社交能力(情商的一个方面)似乎会影响对不礼貌行为的反应,这可能表明个人的自信程度起了作用。情绪对反应类型有影响,消极情绪的参与者会做出更具攻击性的反击,而积极情绪的参与者则会做出更多的接受。然而,在积极情绪组中,攻击性反应也被发现使用了更多的不礼貌行为,这表明认知过程确实因情绪而异。语言没有影响,也许表明了西班牙语和英语之间的相似性,或者为语用迁移的作用提供了支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
18.80%
发文量
219
期刊介绍: Since 1977, the Journal of Pragmatics has provided a forum for bringing together a wide range of research in pragmatics, including cognitive pragmatics, corpus pragmatics, experimental pragmatics, historical pragmatics, interpersonal pragmatics, multimodal pragmatics, sociopragmatics, theoretical pragmatics and related fields. Our aim is to publish innovative pragmatic scholarship from all perspectives, which contributes to theories of how speakers produce and interpret language in different contexts drawing on attested data from a wide range of languages/cultures in different parts of the world. The Journal of Pragmatics also encourages work that uses attested language data to explore the relationship between pragmatics and neighbouring research areas such as semantics, discourse analysis, conversation analysis and ethnomethodology, interactional linguistics, sociolinguistics, linguistic anthropology, media studies, psychology, sociology, and the philosophy of language. Alongside full-length articles, discussion notes and book reviews, the journal welcomes proposals for high quality special issues in all areas of pragmatics which make a significant contribution to a topical or developing area at the cutting-edge of research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信