Cover not available

Article published In: Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict: Online-First Articles

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB
authorization required

The quick termination of verbal conflicts expressed through disagreement

Three patterns of conflict minimization during computer science project meetings

ORCiD logo with link | Bielefeld University, Germany
ORCiD logo with link | Bielefeld University, Germany
Published online: 24 June 2024
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/jlac.00112.put
Abstract
This paper considers verbal conflicts at the workplace and asks how team members negotiate conflict termination. Our corpus consists of meetings where computer scientists discuss the progress of projects they are working on, a context where conflict resolution is crucial for the continuation of work. Following the literature, we define conflicts as continued disagreement. The analysis focuses on conflict termination formats that show whether a conflict can be resolved as well as episode length and disagreement mitigation that indicate the severity of the conflict. Power relations among participants are also discussed. Our results show that most conflicts end after two or three disagreements. Among the termination formats, submission is the most frequent, followed by stand-off and compromise. We further show that participants minimize conflicts by concluding them as soon as someone indicates their unwillingness to concede, whereas the pattern of conflict minimization varies with the termination format that participants negotiate.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Background: The dynamics of continued disagreement
    • 2.1Conflict termination formats
    • 2.2Mitigated disagreements during conflict
    • 2.3Conflict length and severity
  • 3.Methodology
  • 4.Results
    • 4.1Conflict termination and the unwillingness to concede
    • 4.2A short verbal conflict ending in submission
    • 4.3Discussing the goals of the educational game: A stand-off
    • 4.4A longer verbal conflict where a compromise is negotiated
  • 5.Discussion
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
References (64)
References
Angouri, Jo. 2012. “Managing Disagreement in Problem Solving Meeting Talk.” Journal of Pragmatics 44(12): 1565–1579. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Antaki, Charles. 1994. Explaining and Arguing: The Social Organization of Accounts. London: Sage.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Asmuß, Birte, and Sae Oshima. 2012. “Negotiation of Entitlement in Proposal Sequences.” Discourse Studies 14(1): 67–86. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baxter, Leslie. A. 1982. “Conflict Management: An Episodic Approach.” Small Group Research 13(1): 23–42.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bilmes, Jack. 1988. “The Concept of Preference in Conversation Analysis.” Language in Society 17(2): 161–181. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1995. “Negotiation and Compromise.” In The Discourse of Negotiation: Studies of Language in the Workplace, ed. by Alan Firth, 61–81. Oxford: Elsevier. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2014. “Preference and the Conversation Analytic Endeavor.” Journal of Pragmatics 641: 52–71. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boden, Deirdre. 1994. The Business of Talk: Organizations in Action. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bou-Franch, Patricia, and Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich. 2014. “Conflict Management in Massive Polylogues: A Case Study from YouTube.” Journal of Pragmatics 731: 19–36. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boyle, Ronald. 2000. “Whatever Happened to Preference Organisation?” Journal of Pragmatics 32(5): 583–604. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Button, Graham, and Wes Sharrock. 1996. “Project Work: The Organisation of Collaborative Design and Development in Software Engineering.” Computer Supported Cooperative Work 51: 369–386. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2000. “Design by Problem Solving.” In Workplace Studies: Recovering Work Practice and Informing Systems Design, ed. by Paul Luff, Jon Hindmarsh, and Christian Heath, 46–67. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Coulter, Jeff. 1990. “Elementary Properties of Argument Sequences.” In Interaction Competence, ed. by George Psathas, 181–203. Washington, DC: University of America Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Davidson, Judy. 1984. “Subsequent Versions of Invitations, Offers, Requests, and Proposals Dealing with Potential or Actual Rejection.” In Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. by J. Maxwell Atkinson, and John Heritage, 102–128. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dersley, Ian, and Anthony Wootton. 2000. “Complaint Sequences within Antagonistic Argument.” Research on Language & Social Interaction 33(4): 375–406. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fernández-Amaya, Lucía. 2021. “Online disagreement in WhatsApp groups: A comparative study of Spanish family members and work colleagues.” Discourse & Communication, 15(5): 542–558. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fisher, B. Aubrey. 1974. Small Group Decision Making: Communication and the Group Process. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Garcia, Angela. 1991. “Dispute Resolution without Disputing: How the Interactional Organization of Mediation Hearings Minimizes Argument.” American Sociological Review 56(6): 818–835. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gibson, David R. 2012. Talk at the Brink: Deliberation and Decision during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Princeton, NJ : Princeton University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goodwin, Marjorie Harness. 1983. “Aggravated Correction and Disagreement in Children’s Conversations.” Journal of Pragmatics 7(6): 657–677. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1990. He-said-she-said: Talk as Social Organization among Black Children. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gouran, Dennis, and John Baird. 1972. “An Analysis of Distributional and Sequential Structure in Problem Solving and Informal Group Discussions.” Speech Monographs 39(4): 16–22. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Greatbatch, David, and Robert Dingwall. 1997. “Argumentative Talk in Divorce Mediation Sessions.” American Sociological Review 621: 151–170. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gruber, Helmut. 1998. “Disagreeing: Sequential Placement and Internal Structure of Disagreements in Verbal Conflicts.” Text and Talk 18(4): 467–504.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heritage, John, and Geoffrey Raymond. 2005. “The Terms of Agreement: Indexing Epistemic Authority and Subordination in Talk-in-Interaction.” Social Psychology Quarterly 68(1): 15–38. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Holmes, Janet, and Maria Stubbe. 2015. Power and Politeness in the Workplace: A Sociolinguistic Analysis of Talk at Work. London: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hutchby, Ian. 2001. “‘Oh,’ Irony and Sequential Ambiguity in Arguments.” Discourse & Society 12(2): 123–141. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2006. Media Talk: Conversation Analysis and the Study of Broadcasting. Maidenhead, United Kingdom: Open University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jarzabkowski, Paula, and David Seidl. 2008. “The Role of Meetings in the Social Practice of Strategy.” Organization Studies 29(11): 1391–1426. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kakavá, Christina. 2002. “Opposition in Modern Greek Discourse: Cultural and Contextual Constraints.” Journal of Pragmatics 34(10–11): 1537–1568. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kangasharju, Helena. 2002. “Alignment in Disagreement: Forming Oppositional Alliances in Committee Meetings.” Journal of Pragmatics 34(10–11): 1447–1471. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2009). “Preference for Disagreement? A Comparison of Three Disputes.” In Talk in Interaction: Comparative Dimensions, ed. by Markku Haakana, Minna Laakso, and Jan Lindström, 231–253. Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koczogh, Helga Vanda. 2012. “The Role of Gender in Verbal Disagreement: A Study of Disagreement Strategies Employed by Hungarian Undergraduate Students.” Gender Studies 11(1): 318–332. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koester, Almut. 2006. Investigating Workplace Discourse. London: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kotthoff, Helga. 1993. “Disagreement and Concession in Disputes: On the Context Sensitivity of Preference Structures.” Language in Society 22(2): 193–216. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Locher, Miriam A. 2004. Power and Politeness in Action: Disagreements in Oral Communication. Berlin: de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Luhmann, Niklas. 1983. Soziale Systeme: Grundriß einer allgemeinen Theorie. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mackenzie, Adrian. 2006. Cutting Code: Software and Sociality. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mahoney, Michael S. 2011. “What Makes Computer Science a Science?” In Science in the Context of Application, ed. by Martin Carrier, and Alfred Nordmann, 389–408. Dordrecht: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Maynard, Douglas W. 1985. “How Children Start Arguments.” Language in Society 14(1): 1–29. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Messmer, Heintz. 2003. Der soziale Konflikt. Stuttgart: Lucius & Lucius. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mikkelsen, Elisabeth N., and Stewart Clegg. 2018. “Unpacking the Meaning of Conflict in Organizational Conflict Research.” Negotiation and Conflict Management Research 11(3): 185–203. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Muntigl, Peter, and William Turnbull. 1998. “Conversational Structure and Facework in Arguing.” Journal of Pragmatics 29(3): 225–256. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nelson, Christian K. 2001. “If it sounds too good to be true, it is: A Wittengensteinian Approach to the Conflict Literature.” Language & Communication 211: 1–22. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nielsen, Mie F. 2009. “Interpretative Management in Business Meetings: Understanding Managers’ Interactional Strategies through Conversation Analysis.” The Journal of Business Communication 46(1): 23–56. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Norrick, Neal R., and Alice Spitz. 2008. “Humor as a Resource for Mitigating Conflict in Interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics 40(10): 1661–1686. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita. 1984. “Agreeing and Disagreeing with Assessments: Some Features of Preferred/Dispreferred Turn Shapes.” In Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. by J. Maxwell Atkinson, and John Heritage, 57–101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pütz, Ole. 2019. Talking Collective Action: A Sequential Analysis of Strategic Planning in Anti-Nuclear Groups. Abingdon, UK: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2021. “Managing Exactness and Vagueness in Computer Science Work: Programming and Self-repair in Meetings.” Social Studies of Science 51(6): 938–961. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rees-Miller, Janie. 2000. “Power, Severity, and Context in Disagreement.” Journal of Pragmatics 32(8): 1087–1111. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey. 1987. “On the Preferences for Agreement and Contiguity in Sequences in Conversation.” In Talk and Social Organisation, ed. by Graham Button, and John R. E. Lee, 54–69. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Saft, Scott. 2004. “Conflict as Interactional Accomplishment in Japanese.” Language in Society 331: 549–584. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1992. “Repair after Next Turn: The Last Structurally Provided Defense of Intersubjectivity in Conversation.” American Journal of Sociology 97(5): 1295–1345. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schiffrin, Deborah. 1984. “Jewish Argument as Sociability.” Language in Society 13(3): 311–335. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sifianou, Maria. 2019. “Conflict, Disagreement and (Im)politeness.” In The Routledge Handbook of Language in Conflict, ed. by Matthew Evans, Lesley Jeffries, and Jim O’Driscoll, 176–195. London and New York: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stalpers, Judith. 1995. “The Expression of Disagreement.” The Discourse of Business Negotiation, ed. by Konrad Ehlich, and Johannes Wagner, 275–290. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stromer-Galley, Jennifer, Lauren Bryant, and Bruce Bimber. 2015. “Context and Medium Matter: Expressing Disagreements Online and Face-to-Face in Political Deliberations.” Journal of Deliberative Democracy 11(1). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tannen, Deborah, and Christina Kakavá. 1992. “Power and Solidarity in Modern Greek Conversation: Disagreeing to Agree.” Journal of Modern Greek Studies 10(1): 11–34. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ten Have, Paul. 2007. Doing Conversation Analysis: A Practical Guide. London: Sage. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thomas, Kenneth W. 1992. “Conflict and Conflict Management: Reflections and Update.” Journal of Organizational Behavior 13(3): 265–274. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Valentine, Kristin B., and B. Aubrey Fisher. 1974. “An Interaction Analysis of Verbal Innovative Deviance in Small Groups.” Speech Monographs 41(4): 413–420. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vine, Bernadette. 2004. Getting Things Done at Work. Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vuchinich, Samuel. 1987. “Starting and Stopping Spontaneous Family Conflicts.” Journal of Marriage and Family 49(3): 591–601. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1990. “The Sequential Organization of Closing in Verbal Family Conflict.” In Conflict Talk, ed. by Allen D. Grimshaw, 118–138. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Meral, Erdem O., Marc W. Heerdink & Gerben A. van Kleef
2025. The Dark(er) Side of Ostracizing wrongdoers: An Organizing Framework and Review. Small Group Research DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 13 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue