Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to submit your manuscript to SPPS

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Social and Personal Relationships
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Planalp, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Friends' and Acquaintances' Conversations II: Coded Differences

Sally Planalp

University of Colorado

This is the second of a pair of studies investigating differences between friends' and acquaintances' conversations. In Study I (Planalp & Benson, 1992), naive judges were asked to indicate whether they thought conversations were between friends or acquaintances and why. In Study Il (reported here), the same conversations were analyzed to determine if the reasons given by judges in Study I did, in fact, discriminate between friends and acquaintances when coded from the conversations and analyzed statistically. Results indicated that the pattern of differences was consistent with Study I, although only a few differences were significant statistically due to low power. Discriminant analyses indicated that two variables alone, mutual knowledge and continuity, predicted friends/acquaintances' differences as well as the entire set of variables and with the same level of accuracy (about 80 percent) as the judges in Study 1.

Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, Vol. 10, No. 3, 339-354 (1993)
DOI: 10.1177/0265407593103003
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Management Communication QuarterlyHome page
M. E. Gordon and L. P. Stewart
Conversing About Performance: Discursive Resources for the Appraisal Interview
Management Communication Quarterly, February 1, 2009; 22(3): 473 - 501.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Communication ResearchHome page
L. K. Knobloch
Extending the Emotion-in-Relationships Model to Conversation
Communication Research, December 1, 2008; 35(6): 822 - 848.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Language and SpeechHome page
T. Murfitt and J. McAllister
The Effect of Production Variables in Monolog and Dialog on Comprehension by Novel Listeners
Language and Speech, September 1, 2001; 44(3): 325 - 350.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Journal of Language and Social PsychologyHome page
J. P. Dillard, S. R. Wilson, K. J. Tusing, and T. A. Kinney
Politeness Judgments in Personal Relationships
Journal of Language and Social Psychology, September 1, 1997; 16(3): 297 - 325.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Journal of Social and Personal RelationshipsHome page
B. L. Fredrickson
Socioemotional Behavior at the End of College Life
Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, May 1, 1995; 12(2): 261 - 276.
[Abstract]