Search results

US soc sci has traditionally been somewhat remiss in examining soc conflict & soc violence because of its excessive commitment to models of soc harmony; this has resulted in a tame view of soc structures. This study proposes to redress the balance somewhat by discussing 3 soc functions of violence: violence as a form of achievement, violence as a danger signal, & violence as a catalyst. A plea is made that the study of soc violence be given greater emphasis in further res. HA.

Considering that humorous moments (BELL; ATTARDO, 2010; KIM; PARK, 2017; REDDINGTON, 2015) can arise when language learners interact, this study aimed at understanding the social functions of humor in telecollaborative activities. For the analysis, data from telecollaborative sessions and a mediation session were included. Among other social functions of humor, data analysis revealed "reinforcement of displeasure", "the lowering of the participants' affective filter" and "the maintenance of harmony among the participants". The outcomes indicated that the participants could engage themselves in meaning negotiation with language learners from other cultural horizons as they constructed humor.

American social science has traditionally been somewhat remiss in examining social conflict and social violence because of its excessive commitment to models of social har mony ; this has resulted in a tame view of social structures. This paper proposes to redress the balance somewhat by dis cussing three social functions of violence: violence as a form of achievement, violence as a danger signal, and violence as a catalyst. A plea is made that the study of social violence be given greater emphasis in further research.

Social dilemmas, or situations in which individual and collective interests collide, elicit strong emotions. But are these emotions socially functional in that they help establish cooperation? Generally, they are, as four empirical chapters showed. In dyadic relations, refusal to return a favour is best reciprocated while expressing disappointment instead of anger or no emotion. This does not even lead to a negative impression. When not recipients but observers can reciprocate cooperative acts, non-cooperation out of anger or disappointment is perceived by observers as a just action to retaliate against defectors and is therefore met cooperatively. In situations where group members have to coordinate their contributions to obtain a public good, anger signals bleaker prospects than guilt does, especially when communicated by an influential fellow group member. This makes that group members are more likely to exit the group or install a democratic leader. Guilt actually promotes successful coordination by signalling that both the person that experiences guilt and the person towards guilt is experienced will contribute, which encourages people to cooperate even when coordination is difficult. Thus, emotions are indispensable, socially informative cues that typically help to establish cooperation, facilitate coordination and implement structural solutions in social dilemmas.

Detached from American Sociological Society. Publications. v. 7 ; Mode of access: Internet.