{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.043833580980683504, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011144130757800892, 'mean_word_length': 5.0675675675675675, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A typology of facework behaviors in conflicts with best friends and relative strangers

The purpose of the current study was to create a typology of facework behaviors in interpersonal conflicts between best friends and relative strangers for Japanese and U.S. participants. In phase I, 286 participants responded to open‐ended questions about the manner in which they negotiated face during a conflict with either a best friend or a relative stranger. The responses of a sample of these respondents ‐16 Japanese, 16 members of ethnic minority groups in the U.S., and 20 European Americans — were categorized using a Q‐sort technique. Fourteen categories of facework behaviors were derived. Validation procedures for the typology were carried out via a cluster analysis resulting in 13 unique clusters: (a) aggression, (b) apologize, (c) avoid, (d) compromise, (e) consider the other, (f) defend self (g) express feelings, (h) give in, (i) involve a third party, (j) pretend, (k) private discussion, (l) remain calm, and (m) talk about the problem. In phase II, 95 Japanese and 61 U.S. Americans rated the appropriateness and effectiveness of behaviors from each of the categories. The findings illustrate that the typology captures a wide range of appropriateness and effectiveness rating which further demonstrates the validity of the typology.