Everyday Diplomacy:dealing with controversy online and face-to-face

Discussions about controversial topics, such as immigration, seem to get out of hand more easily when they take place online than when they are conducted face-to-face. It is often assumed that this is because people express themselves less clearly or more ambiguously online due to missing non-verbal signals, or because people become disinhibited online due to feeling anonymous. In this dissertation, we call these assumptions into question by studying what happens within online and face-to-face discussions. We closely examined behavior and social perceptions in conversations: How do interaction partners interact and how does this affect their relationship? We asked groups of unacquainted students to discuss about politically controversial topics via a text-based chat and face-to-face. We found that people express their opinions more clearly or less ambiguously in text-based chats than in face-to-face conversations. We also found that people respond less to each other online. This is due to the way the textual and asynchronous medium limits behavior, but people don't seem to acknowledge this. They do not feel heard because they get the idea that their interlocutors are mainly concerned with venting their own opinion. As a result, people think that they disagree more than they actually do and experience more conflict. This offers a new perspective on online polarization and disinhibition: people can feel polarized and get the idea that their interlocutor is disinhibited without that being the case, purely because of the way the online medium steers behavior

Dealing with disagreement:The depolarizing effects of everyday diplomatic skills face-to-face and online

In online text-based discussions, people behave less diplomatically because they are more outspoken and less responsive. This can feed impressions of polarization. This article uses a new methodology to isolate the influence of outspokenness and responsiveness in shaping perceptions of polarization in online chat and face-to-face discussions. Text-based online and face-to-face discussions were reproduced in a face-to-face format (Study 1) and in a text-based chat format (Study 2). Uninformed observers (N = 102 and N = 103, repeated measures) evaluated these. The results showed that responsiveness was generally considered indicative of agreement and good social relationships but the interpretation of outspokenness (or lack of ambiguity) depended on the medium format. This suggests that what counts as diplomacy is not the same for each medium. Moreover, the experiences of the actors reproducing the chats in a face-to-face format highlighted the differences between media. We conclude that online conversational dynamics may play an important role in societal polarization

The microdynamics of social regulation:Comparing the navigation of disagreements in text-based online and face-to-face discussions

This study explores how people navigate the field of tension between expressing disagreement and maintaining social relationships in text-based online as compared to face-to-face discussions. In face-to-face discussions, differences of opinion are socially regulated by introducing ambiguity in message content coupled with instant responding on a relational level. We hypothesized that online messages are less ambiguous and less responsive, both of which may hinder social regulation. Thirty-six groups of three unacquainted students discussed politically controversial statements via chat, video-chat (nonanonymous), and face-to-face, in a multilevel repeated measures Graeco-Latin square design. Content coding revealed that online discussions were relatively clear and unresponsive. This related to participants experiencing reduced conversational flow, less shared cognition, and less solidarity online. These results suggest that ambiguity and responsiveness enable people to maintain social relationships in the face of disagreement. This emphasizes the key role that subtle microdynamics in interpersonal interaction play in social regulation

Online Social Regulation:When Everyday Diplomatic Skills for Harmonious Disagreement Break Down

In group discussions, people rely on everyday diplomatic skills to socially regulate the interaction, maintain harmony, and avoid escalation. This article compares social regulation in online and face-to-face (FtF) groups. It studies the micro-dynamics of online social interactions in response to disagreements. Thirty-two triads discussed, in a repeated measures design, controversial topics via text-based online chat and FtF. The fourth group member was a confederate who voiced a deviant (right-wing) opinion. Results show that online interactions were less responsive and less ambiguous compared with FtF discussions. This affected participants’ social attributions: they felt their interaction partners ignored them and displayed disinhibited behavior. This also had relational consequences: participants experienced polarization and less solidarity. These results offer a new perspective on the process of online polarization: this might not be due to changes in individual psychology (e.g., disinhibition), but to misattributions of online behavior

Correlation of Pretreatment Polarographically Measured Oxygen Pressures with Quantified Contrast-Enhanced Power Doppler Ultrasonography in Spontaneous Canine Tumors and their Impact on Outcome After Radiation Therapy

Purpose: : To evaluate the use of noninvasive quantified contrast-enhanced power Doppler ultrasonography as a surrogate in the estimation of tumor hypoxia measured by invasive pO2 histography in canine tumors. Material and Methods: : Data of pretreatment tumor oxygenation status, tumor vascularity and blood volume, and tumor response after radiation therapy was collected in 48 spontaneous malignant oral tumors (Table 1). Tumor oxygenation status was correlated to vascularity and blood volume, and influences on outcome after treatment were analyzed. Results: : Although vascularity and blood volume correlated moderately with median pO2 (r = 0.51 and 0.61; p = 0.001 and < 0.0001) and percentage of pO2 readings ≤ 2.5, 5, and 10 mmHg (r = -0.37 to -0.42; p < 0.01-0.03) for all tumors, they did not correlate within the different histology groups (p = 0.06-0.9). For all tumors, pretreatment oxygenation status, vascularity and blood volume were not found to be of prognostic value (Tables 2 and 3). Conclusion: : These analyses show that quantified contrast-enhanced power Doppler ultrasonography does not represent a noninvasive indirect method to assess tumor hypoxia measured by invasive pO2 histography. Both technologies were nonprognostic indicators in spontaneous malignant canine oral tumor

Ageism, human rights and ethical aspects of end-of-life care for older people with serious mental illness

There are many complex concepts to consider during end-of-life discussions and advance care planning, especially when vulnerable populations such as older individuals with serious mental illness are involved. This article aims to summarize some of these important concepts, such as the effects of ageism, preservation of human rights and dignity, supported or shared decision making and palliative approaches. It emerged from a study that found two thirds of 100 participants 60 years of age and older with serious mental illness had end-of-life decision-making capacity. This finding highlighted the individual and contextual nature of decision-making capacity, the importance of consideration of individual values and protection of human dignity during end-of-life care. Healthcare providers have a duty to initiate end-of-life and advance care discussions, to optimize decision-making capacity, and to protect autonomous decision-making. Chronological age or diagnostic categories should never be used as reasons for discrimination and all patients should receive end-of-life care in keeping with their preferences and values