{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01533494753833737, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0016142050040355124, 'mean_word_length': 5.019417475728155, '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}}
The Form and Function of Remedial Moves: Reported Use, Psychological Reality and Perceived Effectiveness

Three studies were conducted to examine the form and function of remedial moves. In the first study, the remedial moves that subjects reported using and receiving were analysed for frequency of occurrence. A surprisingly large percentage (55%) of these moves involved a combination of concessions and accounts. Subjects in the second study sorted into categories a sample of these remedial moves. A hierarchical cluster analysis of these sorts provided evidence for the psychological reality of some of the primary conceptual categories of remedial moves. A multidimensional scaling analysis suggests that the major remedial move types can be ordered on a single dimension. The results of the third study provided further support for this dimension, and suggest that remedial moves can be ordered in terms of the extent to which they encode concern for the face of the speaker and hearer. As expected, perception of hearer satisfaction was greater for moves that encoded concern for the hearer's face, and the more satisfying a move was perceived to be for the hearer, the more difficult it was judged for a speaker to use that move.