SAVING FACE Saving Face: A Literature Review of Face Negotiation Face, as defined by the expert Stella Ting Toomey,

is the projected image of ones self in a relational situation. (Griffin, p. 409). Stella Ting Toomey created the face negotiation theory to develop understanding of individualistic behaviors when approaching variable conflicting situations. Toomey work is based within interpersonal conflicts and the manner in which conflict management manifests itself through four basic steps of culture, self-construal, and face maintenance, which all lead into the final concept conflict management.

The study done regarding interpersonal conflicts provided a framework to place the other findings into. The study was done in order to examine the ways that people communicate during interpersonal conflicts, whether it was between best friends or strangers. This was also done cross culturally, to determine whether the facial cues were able to cross cultural boundaries. When studying the researchers put the facework observed into 13 different categories, because of this, three factors emerged. There were dominating facework behaviors, including aggression and self-defense. This observation helped emphasize Ting-Toomeys theory that facework is the act of defending ones face in society, and is an act inherently of self-interest, rather than having effective communication in these conflict settings. The second factor was the avoidance of facework, i.e. giving in, involving a third party, pretending. This is so the first party saves face of the other party so they dont feel conflicted or embarrassed. The third, and final factor that was observed was integrating facework. Apologizing, compromising, considering the other party, private discussion, and talking about the problem represented this factorial group. What is most fascinating, is the fact that when members of different cultural groups, the Japanese rated their factors differently than the U.S. respondents. This furthers the idea that cross-culture communication studies are essential as the world transforms into a global economy.

SAVING FACE In the authors, McBride and Toller, study of bereaved parents, the facework that was exhibited was similar to that of the interpersonal conflict study. These parents, whom were experiencing considerable loss, had the subconscious need to express their feelings of their loss to their peers in order to work out their emotions. Though they have this urge to discuss these issues, societal pressure keep them from talking about the problem, they way their facework

comes across is similar to the avoidance factor in the findings of Oetzel, Ting-Toomey, Yokochi, Masumoto and Takai. Also similar to the interpersonal conflict findings, Kirschbaum found, when studying physicians, there was a sense of cross-cultural communication. These physicians, and their facework, did not come across as easily to their anesthesiologist counterparts. These two sets of doctors received different training, and because of this training, the doctors communicate within different cultures, much like the U.S. citizens and Japanese residents of the previous example. Heisler and Ellis critically examined the face of motherhood, and with that found that they wanted to portray a certain type of mother. These mothers were, as Ting-Toomey explains, defending ones face in the eyes of society. Their faces mimicked their idea of what a good mother should look like, in order to create great memories. The findings of these acclaimed scholars have a significant amount of cross over. They stem from the initial findings of Ting-Toomey of facework and the act of presenting ones face to society and its situations. The factors and categories initially found by Oetzel, Ting-Toomey, Yokochi, Masumoto and Takai, were building blocks and provided areas to categorize the findings of other scholars such as McBride and Taylor, Heisler and Ellis, and Kirschbaum with their analyses of facework in bereaved parents, physicians and mothers.

SAVING FACE References Goddard, S. B. A., & Torres, M. B. (2009). Conflict, face, and disability: An exploratory study of the experiences of college students with disabilities. Conference Papers -- International Communication Association, , 1-25. Golato, A., & Taleghani-Nikazm, C. (2006). Negotiation of face in web chats. Multilingua, 25(3), 293-321. doi:10.1515/MULTI.2006.017 Griffin, Emory A.. A first look at communication theory. 8th ed. Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education, 2012. Print. Heisler, J. M., & Ellis, J. B. (2008). Motherhood and the construction of Mommy identity:

Messages about motherhood and face negotiation. Communication Quarterly, 56(4), 445-467. doi:10.1080/01463370802448246 Kirschbaum, K. (2012). Physician communication in the operating room: Expanding application of face-negotiation theory to the health communication context. Health Communication, 27(3), 292-301. doi:10.1080/10410236.2011.585449 McBride, M. C., & Toller, P. (2011). Negotiation of face between bereaved parents and their social networks. Southern Communication Journal, 76(3), 210-229. doi:10.1080/10417940903477647 Oetzel, J. G., Ting-Toomey, S., Yokochi, Y., Masumoto, T., & Takai, J. (2000). A typology of facework behaviors in conflicts with best friends and relative strangers. Communication Quarterly, 48(4), 397-419.

SAVING FACE