ArticlePDF Available

An Introduction to the Social Psychology of Insults in Organizations

November 1998
Human Relations 51(11):1329-1354

Authors:

University of Bath

The author argues that insults are an important social and organizational phenomenon, which causes powerful emotions and enters peoplés personal histories. It is suggested that insults involve a perpetrator, a target and, often, an audience. The intention to insult is not necessary, as some insults are the result of misunderstanding or accident. However, the experience of being gratuitously offended and the corresponding feelings of shame, guilt, and anger are fundamental to insults. Several types of insults are observed, such as exclusion, stereotyping, obliteration of significant identity details, ingratitude, scapegoating, rudeness, broken promises, being ignored or kept waiting. Even more potent insults result from the defamation or despoiling of idealized objects, persons, or ideas. Different insult dynamics are noted; these include an apology, a commensurate retaliation, a disproportionate retaliation and possible escalation, a retaliation against a surrogate and weaker target than the perpetrator of the initial insult, an affected indifference with a possible delayed retaliation, or more commonly a resigned tolerance which may fuel subsequent insults. Insults as well as retaliation and resistance to them are part of an organization's political process which establishes, first, lines of domination/subordination, second, finer gradations of status and power, i.e., a pecking order, and third, opportunities for building coalitions and alliances. It is argued that insults allow for a certain mobility within a pecking order, by offering 'matches' for contestants to pitch their wit, venom, and courage against each other. They also enable audiences to take sides, thus influencing and testing the operation of coalitions and alliances.

Content uploaded by Yiannis Gabriel

Content may be subject to copyright.

An Introduction to the Social Psych ology of

Insults in Organization s

Yian n is Gabriel

2,3

The author argue s that insults are an important social and organizational

phe nomenon, which causes powerful emotions and enters people

’

s pe rsonal

histories. It is suggested that insults involve a perpetrator, a target and, often,

an audie nce. The intention to insult is not necessary, as some insults are the

result of misunde rstanding or accident. Howeve r, the e xperie nce of being

gratuitously offe nde d and the corresponding feelings of shame, guilt, and anger

are fundame ntal to insults. Se ve ral type s of insults are observe d, such as

exclusion, stereotyping, obliteration of significant identity details, ingratitude,

scapegoating, rudeness, broken promise s, being ignore d or kept waiting. Even

more potent insults result from the defamation or despoiling of idealized objects,

persons, or ideas. Different insult dynamics are noted; these include an apology,

a co mm e nsu rate re taliation , a disproportionate re taliation and possible

e scalation, a re taliation again st a surrogate and we ake r targe t than the

perpetrator of the initial insult, an affecte d indifference with a possible delayed

retaliation, or more commonly a resigned tolerance which may fuel subsequent

insults. Insults as well as re taliation and resistance to them are part of an

o rg a n i z at i o n

’

s p o l i ti c al p ro c e ss w h i c h e st a b li sh e s, f i r s t , l ine s o f

domination/subordination, second, finer gradations of status and power, i.e., a

pecking order, and third, opportunities for building coalitions and alliances. It

is argued that insults allow for a certain mobility within a pecking order, by

offe ring

‘

matches

’

for contestants to pitch their wit, venom, and courage against

each other. They also enable audiences to take sides, thus influencing and te sting

the operation of coalitions and alliances.

KEY WORDS: insults; organizational politics; exclusion; stere otypes; conflict;

psychic injuries; survival; emotion; harassment; psychoanalysis.

Hum an Relations, Vol. 51, No. 11, 1998

1329

0018-7267/98/1100-1329 $15.00/1

1998 The Tavistock Institute

An earlier ve rsion of this paper was presented at the 1997 Symposium of ISPSO.

School of Management, University of Bath, Bath, U.K.

Re quests for reprints should be addresse d to Yiannis Gabrie l, School of Manage ment, Uni-

versity of Bath, Bath BA2 7AY, U.K.; e -mail: Y.Gabrie l@ bath.ac.uk

There are three forms of be littlement: contempt, spite and insult . . . . Insult is

belittlement. For an insult consists of doing or saying such things as involve shame

for the victim, not for some advantage to oneself other than the se have been done,

but for the fun of it.

—

Aristotle, Rhetoric

V ronsky

’

s life was particularly happy in that he had a code of principles, which

defined with unfailing certitude what should and what should not be done. This

code of principles covered only a small circle of contingencies, but in return the

principles were never obscure, and Vronsky, as he never we nt outside that circle,

had never had a moment

’

s he sitation about doing what he ought to do. This code

categorically ordained that . . . one must never pardon an insult but m ay insult

others oneself.

—

Tolstoy, Anna Karenina

INTRODUCTION

Emotion and language are two areas which are curre ntly attracting

conside rable attention among scholars of organizations. It is no longe r un-

usual to discuss the emotional life of organizations or the language which

organizational members use in their verbal and written transactions. In fact,

it has become commonplace to adopt an emotion and a language angle to

most manage me nt and organizational issues. Emotion is currently gener-

ating a burge oning academic literature in connection with customer service ,

manage ment learning, leader

followe r relations, busine ss ethics, and the

manage ment of change ( se e, e .g., Hochschild, 1983; Mangham , 1986;

George , 1990, 1997; Rafaeli & Sutton, 1987, 1989; Albrow, 1992; Fineman,

1993, 1997; Hall, 1993; Ashforth & Humphrey, 1993, 1995). Inspired by

the work of Goffman (1959) , social constructionists argue that emotions

can be le arned, just as theatrical role s may be learne d. And just as theat-

rical actors learn to experie nce ange r, sorrow, joy, or fear when the ir roles

call for them, so too social actors may learn to expe rience feelings appro-

priate to the social settings. Write rs like Heller (1979) , Mangham (1986) ,

Flam (1993) , Parkinson (1996) , and Fineman (1993, 1995, 1997) have stud-

ied the rules which gove rn emotional performances and have examine d how

emotion

“

flows,

”

by being symbolically constructe d, communicate d, and dis-

seminate d, from each individual to his or he r audie nce. Psychoanalytic writ-

ers, for their part, have been exploring the role of emotions in groups and

organizations, focusing on group dynamics, transference processes as we ll

as personal and institutional defenses against e motions like anxie ty and

envy (Jaques, 1955; Menzie s, 1960; Kets de Vries & Mille r, 1984; Diamond,

1985, 1993; Baum, 1987; Hirschhorn, 1988; Gabrie l, 1992, 1993; Schwartz,

1990, 1993; Neumann & Noumair, 1997).

The use of language in organizations is currently at the center of nu-

merous inve stigations, often but not always in tandem with studies of emo-

1330 Gabriel

tions (see, e.g., Gioia, 1986; Pool, Gray, & Gioia, 1990; Martin, 1990; Boje ,

1991; Drew & Heritage, 1992; Mangham, 1995; Case, 1995; Pye , 1995; El-

mes & Kassouf, 1995; Grant & Oswick, 1996; Tsivakou, 1996). Not only

are social constructionist and psychodynamic approache s displaying an in-

tense interest in the use of language and its effects on perceive d reality,

but postmode rn approache s of organizations privile ge language above every

other conside ration (see, e.g., Cooper & Burrell, 1988; Cle gg, 1990; Parke r,

1992, 1995; Clegg & Je ffcutt, 1993; Hassard & Parke r, 1993) . The analysis

of organizational narrative s, like the study of emotion, is currently attract-

ing conside rable research interest.

This paper explore s one particular phenomenon, which stands at the

crossroads of emotion and narrative , insults. It charts different forms of

insulting behavior including exclusion, stereotyping, obliteration of signifi-

cant identity details, ingratitude , scapegoating, rudeness, broke n promises,

being ignore d or kept waiting; even more pote nt insults may involve the

defamation or despoiling of ide alize d obje cts, persons, and ideas. The paper

the n examine s diffe rent interpersonal dynamics and different outcomes of

insults, including a resigne d tolerance, the reque st of an apology, and a

retaliation. While the pape r explores the social psychological dimensions

of insults it also place s the m within political discourse s of organizations,

sugge sting ways in which they reflect, sustain, and challenge underlying

powe r relations.

WHAT ARE INSULTS?

Insults include behavior or discourse , oral or writte n, which is per-

ce ived, experience d, constructe d, and at time s intended as slighting, hu-

miliating, or offe nsive . This pape r doe s not e xam ine the slurring or

scape goating of third partie s in abse ntia (see Baum, 1987; Hirschhorn,

1988; Fineman & Gabriel, 1996) concentrating instead on insults addre ssed

directly at an individual or at a group of which an individual is a member,

often in the presence of an audie nce. Nor does it examine insults which

are trade d in horseplay in what are known as joking relations (Collinson,

1988, 1994; Sims e t al., 1993) where no offense is me ant and none is taken.

Finally, the paper draws a distinction between bullying or harassment and

insult. Cumulative ly or individually, insults may, of course, amount to har-

assment (including sexual or racist). It will be argue d, howe ver, that not

all types of insulting behavior are equivale nt to harassment. For e xample ,

failure to invite someone to a function or a party can hardly be conce ive d

of as harassme nt, but it can certainly be an insult. Yet, like harassme nt,

Social Psych ology of Insu lts 1331

insulting be havior is part of the nexus of political relations in an organi-

zation and must be studied as such.

Within these narrowe r parame ters, insults are a topic which has be en

neglected by research in organizations and the social sciences in ge ne ral.

There are very fe w references to insults in the acade mic lite rature, and,

surprisingly, neither research on e motions nor research on narrative s and

discourse has addre ssed them. This neglect seems unjustifie d, as insults

would appe ar to be an important feature of human behavior and human

expe rie nce. Insults are very common in mythology and lite rature , featuring

in countle ss myths, fairy tales, novels, and plays. They are also a cardinal

feature of many pe ople

’

s personal historie s, remembere d long after they

happe ned or, alte rnative ly, represse d and denied through elaborate ration-

alizations and constructions.

Insults, this paper will argue , are also a fairly regular phenomenon of

organizational life , featuring in organizational narrative s whenever expres-

sions like

“

rubbing salt into the wounds

”

“

adding insult to injury

”

are

invoke d and leaving long-lasting marks in histories, personal and colle ctive .

They are a common theme of tragic narrative s, where they ge nerate strong

feelings of resentment and ange r (Gabrie l, 1991a,b,c, 1995) . Inde ed, as

Kapuscinski (1983, p. 97) has suggested, re bellion and resistance may more

commonly spring from insulte d dignity than from the routine disconte nts

of oppre ssion or exploitation. For the se reasons, insults are a promising

are a of social investigation in organizations.

Insults can be verbal, consisting of mocking inve ctive , cutting remarks,

negative stereotypes, rudeness, or straight swearing. They can also be per-

formed in deed, as when value d obje cts are defamed, symbols desecrated,

gifts returned, or invitations refused. They can be subtle , residing in verbal

innue ndo or the facial e xpre ssion of the aggre ssor, leaving room for a face-

saving retreat or an affected disregard by the aggrie ve d party. Alternatively,

the y can be brutal, unambiguous, and direct, as in cases of inde cent ges-

tures or racist and sexual harassme nt.

Insults involve two partie s, a perpetrator and a targe t, and possibly

an audie nce . There can be no insult without a pe rpe trator or an insulte d

party. A re mark or action intende d as an insult but not re giste re d or

experience d as one by its target, can hardly be said to constitute an

insult, eve n if an audie nce re cognize d the intention. It may inste ad be

1332 Gabriel

There is one group of researche rs who have discussed insults as a feature of the workplace,

offering some examples, espe cially in connection with jokes, stere otypes and harassment. This

could be loosely re ferred to as research into psychic injuries and psychological survival at

the workplace (see Sennett & Cobb, 1973; Wallraff, 1985; Te rkel, 1985; Fineman & Gabriel,

1996). This paper goe s be yond this work by placing insults and the e motions most closely

associated with them, anger, shame, and embarrassment, squarely at the center of its inves-

tigation.

re garde d as ridiculing, vilific ation, scapegoating, or oppre ssion.

Yet, the

intention to insult is not a necessary ingredient of an insult. Some insults,

notably in cases of blasphe my, may result without an inte ntion on the part

of the perpetrator, who finds himself/herself unwittingly to have broken a

taboo or violate d a deep sensitivity. If insult can occur where none was

intended, it can, more paradoxically, also occur where none was prope rly

expe rie nced. This is evide nt in

“

constructe d

”

or manufacture d insults, as

when an offer or a gift is dismisse d as derisory or offensive , even if no

offense was intended and no taboo was broke n.

Insults can then be part

of a scapegoating process, the insult but an engine ered pretext or provo-

cation for disproportion ate retaliation. It is also important to re cognize

“

se cond-orde r

”

insults, i.e., insults which are built on top of an initial one .

For instance, when an individual is genuine ly and dee ply insulted, the per-

petrator may offer the e xcuse that no insult was intended or that the targe t

has misinte rpreted the incide nt. In this way, the perpetrator may actually

compound the insult by insinuating that the insulte d party is oversensitive ,

paranoid, or lacks a sense of humor. In some instance s, the perpe trator

may then present him/he rse lf as the targe t of a constructe d insult.

THE RESEARCH MATERIAL

The research material on which this pape r is based was provide d by

university unde rgraduate s writing reports about significant moments the y

expe rie nced during 6-month industrial inte rnships. Stude nts returning from

such internships were aske d by the author to supply a critical incide nt re-

port, analyze it, and discuss the emotions it generated. Between 1990 and

1995, 374 such re ports were obtaine d. These reports cove r a range of or-

ganizational incide nts and expe riences, encompassing a gre at variety of

e motions, including amuse me nt, frustration, pride , anxie ty, bore dom,

shame, guilt, fear, e xcite ment, despair. The reports were analyze d with the

help of a special version of a compute r database package , Cardbox-Plus.

Each report was entered on a separate re cord and the following informa-

tion was recorded in distinct fields on each record: the names of the traine e

and the organization, the type of incide nt described, the emotions it gen-

erate d, the moral of the incide nt, the theory locations addressed by the

report, and the overall narrative quality of the report.

Social Psych ology of Insults 1333

Throughout this paper, it will become appare nt that individuals vary rare ly admit an intention

to insult someone else. Yet, insulted parties alm ost always impute the intention to insult in

their assailant. The intention of the assailant is a highly comple x motivational matter, far

more so than the experience of the victim. For this reason, I prefer to define insults in terms

of the latter rathe r than in terms of the former.

Iago in Shake speare

’

s Othello is maste r of the affected or manufactured insult.

The material was in the first place collected as part of the stude nts

’

learning process and its use as research material must be qualifie d. In no

way do the stude nts or the organizations where they spent their inte rnships

represe nt a sample . Nor is the material untainte d by the stude nts

’

attempts

to impre ss their lecturer and to show how much they learne d.

Yet, the

material posse sses seve ral positive qualitie s. Stude nts observe the ir organi-

zations with fresh, sharp eyes. They can

“

see

”

what more se asoned em-

ploye es no longe r notice or care about. An articulate , critical, but naive

worke r can offer poignant insights on the rights and wrongs of organiza-

tional life , its twists and turns. As short-term e mployees, trainees have ac-

ce ss to information unavailable to othe r employe es, many of them readily

take n into the confide nce of manage rs and peers, whose positions the y

could appreciate without threatening. Furthermore, as short-te rm employ-

ee s, they have no obvious axe to grind—their storie s are not molded by

vested organizational interests and long-standing agendas.

This kind of relative ly unstructure d and unmotivate d material serves

well the purpose s of an exploratory inquiry like the present one. Clearly,

no exhaustive surve y or taxonomy of all type s of insult can be based on

this data, nor is there here any evide nce regarding the extent or severity

of insulting behavior in different organizations. The data doe s, howeve r,

contain a numbe r of characteristic incide nts in conside rable detail, which

allows an insight into the psychological as well as the political consequences

of insulting be havior. The research mate rial was narrowe d, in the first

place , to 94 reports by sele cting only those reports whose ke y emotional

qualitie s include d the emotions traditionally associate d with insults: ange r,

shame, embarrassment, and guilt. The se were subse quently narrowe d down

to 21 reports, in which insults and associate d emotions were the dominant

feature. These reports have provide d the basis of most argume nts in this

pape r; seven of the m have been quote d at length.

INSULTS AND JOKES

Jokes are a good place to begin an inve stigation of insults. Like jokes,

insults de pend on timing and must touch a vital nerve. Like joke s, insults

play on hidde n desire s and vulne rabilitie s. Like jokes, they can be highly

imaginative and inge nious. Inge nuity is one of the feature s that distin-

1334 Gabriel

Interpretations of this type of material can never be unproblematic

—

in some instances, the

students may have been expressing themse lves within a transferential relationship to their

lecturer, seeking to elicit his sympathy, support, or admiration. However, the author

’

s knowl-

edge of those who provided the material enhances his confidence in his interpretations. This

will become cleare r in the interpretation provided for Narrative 6.

Some of this material has already been used in Fineman and Gabriel (1996) and in Gabriel

(1997) .

guishe s insults from mere abuse . Like joke s, insults can release a lot of

emotional energy with relative ly small e ffort. This economy of effort gives

insults both a magical and an e sthetic quality. Like magical words, a few

well-chose n insulting words can produce disproportionate re sults, such as

the crumbling of a self-confide nt exterior or the unle ashing of immense

amounts of ange r (La Barre 1979) . The esthe tic quality of insults resides

in the apposite ness of the stimulus; like an elegant mathematical proof, an

inventive , well-aime d insult proves the vulne rability of the subje ct, cutting

him/her down to size.

The main diffe rence between insults and joke s would se em to lie in

the ir emotional content. Jokes release mirth, whereas insults unle ash ange r.

Yet, as several the orists of jokes since Thomas Hobbe s have observe d, many

joke s contain an aggre ssive intent. Thus, setbacks and misfortunes of othe rs

may afford us comic ple asure if the y can be presented as

“

deserve d.

”

Ob-

serving or recounting the afflictions of a pompous pe rson is funny, in as

much as these afflictions have the quality of

“

comeuppance

”

or just des-

serts. Several studies have sugge sted that the greater our hostility toward

an individual, the more amusing his/her misfortune s appear to us (Zillman,

1983; Benton, 1988; Collinson, 1988, 1994; Davie s, 1988; Gabriel, 1991a) .

A joke then, just like an insult, can e xpress aggre ssion and hostility. Some

insults indeed are jokes; ridicule is an insult unde r the guise of joking. We

shall not be surprise d then if we discove r that many of the theories and

concepts which have e nhance d our understanding of joke s prove helpful

in this discussion of insults.

AN EXAMPLE

Here is an insult de scribed by the targe t, Jon, a trainee in a hospital

department:

The incident occurre d towards the end of my placement. I had returned from

lunch and was settling into my afternoon routine whe n Dick, my

“

boss,

”

asked

V al, the accountant, whether she was ready to go. She replied that she was and

the two of them, together with V al

’

s assistant Carol, promptly donne d their coats

and filed out of the room. A little later, I noticed through the window that the

original three had joined four more members of my department: the totality except

for me .

Not only had I been excluded from a departmental matter of some importance ,

I hadn

’

t e ven be en informed of its e xistence. So, I went over to a trainee from

another department (our office is shared by four departme nts) and asked about

the e vent. Just then, the othe rs r e turned to the room as the me e ting was

re arranged for later that afternoon.

Then, Lyn, in an intentionally loud and sarcastic voice, said:

“

Dick, you should

re ally inform

“

your boss

”

(meaning me) whe n you leave the room.

”

Social Psych ology of Insults 1335

I felt I had to defend myself to the now confused crowd ( everyone in the room

was listening):

“

’

s just that it looked like I wasn

’

t allowed to come along

”

(The

words didn

’

t come out right).

Dick retorte d, uncharacteristically:

“

We ll, you weren

’

”

Everyone laughed.

I expressed my point of view more clearly:

“

OK Dick, I take your point, but it

doesn

’

t make me feel very good, I

’

m supposed to be part of this department and

I wasn

’

t even told there was a meeting, let alone asked if I wanted to come along.

”

Later Dick apologise d, and he me ant it.

This incident summarized my placeme nt e xperience and espe cially the attitudes

of key e mployees I had to work with. What did the incide nt me an to me? Firstly

and most importantly, the fact that I wasn

’

t informed of the me eting demonstrated

my fellow e mployees

’

view of me as short-term and unimportant. A simple

“

’

got to go to this mee ting now Jon, OK?

”

would have been the minimum etiquette

I deserved, and would have allowed me to ask whether I could come along. E ven

if there was no other reason, it would have given a more extensive look into the

workings of a re al organisation, and would therefore he lp me when I was to come

back to study. It was as if they didn

’

t realise the se things were valuable to my

experie nce and therefore I should expe rience them: it was all one-sided.

Dick

’

s lack of attention towards me was constant throughout the placeme nt. I don

’

belie ve it was intentional in my opinion; he simply didn

’

t know how to handle a

subordinate. I also don

’

t think he realised how capable and aspiring a trainee can

be. I probed him on the matter: he was a

“

you should be grateful for ge tting any

job in a rece ssion

”

and

“

I had to work my way up through the ranks

”

sort of

person.

And what of Lyn

’

s outburst? She had ove rheard my conversation but could not

se e my point of vie w at all. She epitomise d the others

’

fe elings but actually spoke

them, saying that Dick was my boss, not the other way around (as if be ing my

boss gave Dick a right to not treat me decently) . I was laughed at. OK, it probably

always happens, people not realising someone is upset about something, but it

showed that no-one felt I had a right to be at that meeting.

At the time , I felt neglecte d and alienated

—

also ANGRY that no-one understood

that I wanted to be an integral part of the te am. The incident reinforced the vie w

that I never quite fitted in. [Narrative 1]

The insult in this story comes in three installme nts: first, exclusion from

a see mingly important meeting; second, a sarcastic jibe (

“

Dick, you should

really inform

‘

your boss

’”

) which ironically reverses the subordinate

infe rior

relationship; and third, the refusal to offer a face -saving e xcuse (

“

Sorry, we

didn

’

t think the me eting would be of interest to you

”

“

Sorry, we forgot

”

EXCLUSION

Refusal or failure to invite a person to an important function or party

is a cause of innume rable family feuds and conflicts. It is also encounte red

in countle ss stories and myths, such as the incide nt that set in motion the

Trojan War. Eris, the godde ss of discord, who has not been invite d to the

nuptial re ception of Thetis and Peleus, take s her revenge by sending her

1336 Gabriel

carte-de-visite, the apple of discord. This will precipitate the dispute among

the godde sses, which in turn, will spark off the 10-ye ar war between Greeks

and Trojans. In the Grimm brothers

’

story Little Briar-Rose (the source text

of Sleeping Beauty), one of the 13

“

wise women

”

was not invite d to the

feast in honor of the newborn prince ss, be cause the king

“

only had twelve

plates.

”

She pronounce d he r curse that the princess would prick herself

with a spindle and die on he r fifte enth birthday.

Exclusion lie s at the heart of many insulting experiences, and invita-

tions are occasions par excellence whe n sharp line s between those in the

gue st lists and those out of them are drawn. Eve n if no slight is intended

it is easy for a person left out to feel offended. But, as the traine e

’

s story

suggests, the offe nse is compounde d by three factors: First, exclusion de-

rives from status and power differences, between Jon, the temporary, casual

traine e and the othe rs. The sarcasm

“

Dick, you should really inform

‘

your

boss

’”

serve s to

“

put Jon in his place,

”

not only reminding him who is boss

but further reinforcing his marginal position in the organization. Second,

the humiliation is public, so that the shame d victim finds himself further

isolate d. None of the audie nce haste n to take his side or offer him a face-

saving lifeline. Third, the insult, as though it were a physical blow, throws

the victim off balance so that his retort is feeble and ineffectual by his own

admission. This allows for a clumsy but we ighty rejoinde r (

“

Well, you

weren

’

”

) to comple te the insult. Jon ends up feeling ashamed not only

for the insult but, as importantly, for his own ine ffectual response.

Several of the incide nts in the data derive from the perceive d inferior

status of traine es as compared to full-time staff. In some instance s, student

traine es fe el insulte d not for being traine es but for being students. The

following telling example was provide d by Claire , a trainee at a provincial

accountants

’

firm:

Mr. North has worked at Porters for thirty years and this has earned him the unofficial

title of

“

Office Manager.

”

Our conversation moved onto what and where I was

studying. Once he had grasped that I was at university, that was it! Mr. North went

off the rails about how being a graduate meant nothing in accountancy. He hoped

I realised that even though I might have a degree one day, he would still be far

superior to me and not the other way around. I stood in his office nodding my head

in agreement but absolutely seething at his unprovoked attack. He seemed to think

that all university graduates viewed themselves as more knowledgeable than him. Mr.

North certainly made sure that I would not be under the same impression.

The close of our conversation only added insult to injury. Having made me feel

thorough ly asham e d to be in Highe r E ducation, he adde d:

“

When are you

re turning to BRISTO L to resume your holiday!

”

Politely, I answered his que stion

without correcting him on the location of my studies and left the room, closing

the door quie tly behind me. [Narrative 2]

The insult he re takes the form of a tirade which the traine e finds hard

to fend off. Her inability to confront her tormentor and reject his alle gations

Social Psych ology of Insults 1337

leaves he r feeling both angry and ashamed. Mr. North

’

s final comme nt illus-

trates two characteristics of insults that did not feature in the earlie r example,

stereotyping and obliteration of significant details in the victim

’

s identity (se e

below)—a combination of an unsubtle stereotype (stude nts on a pe rmane nt

holiday) with what Claire evide ntly regards as a belittling remark about her

unive rsity (Bristol suppose dly being an inferior institution to her own).

STEREOTYPING

Stereotyping is a common characte ristic of insults; it is also an area

of exte nsive theorizing. Paradoxicall y, howe ver, most of the the ory on

ste reotyping is unhe lpful in elucidating the emotional e xperie nce of an in-

sult

’

s targe t. Much of the acade mic lite rature on stereotype s regards them

as ove rsim plifie d vie ws of reality or as e rrors of ove rge ne raliza tion.

Martinko (1995) , for instance, approache s stereotype s as

“

a subcate gory of

perception and attribution

”

(1995, p. 533) offering an equivocal view of

the ir advantage s and shortcomings. This tradition of theorizing scrutinize s

the cognitive and pe rceptual proce sses involve d and ide ntifie s the delete-

rious group and organizational conseque nces of stereotyping, in phe nom-

ena such as

“

groupthink

”

(Janis, 1972) or authoritarianism (Dixon, 1976).

In contrast to this cognitive approach to stere otyping, the political and

the psychodynamic approache s see m to ground stereotypes in the political

and psychological re alitie s of organizations. The former views stereotypes

as forms of discrimination and oppre ssion, and, the second, as wish fulfill-

ments, especially as manifestations of unconscious aggre ssive fantasie s and

desire s. The political approach is adopted by Kanter (1977, p. 230ff) and

feminist theorists (see, e.g., Gutek, 1985, 1989; She ppard, 1989; Leidner,

1991; Auster, 1993) who regard the m as instrume nts of sexual oppre ssion

in and out of the workplace . Far from being the result of ignorance , naive t

or cognitive blind spots, these the orists vie w stereotype s as barriers to

equality which are systematically maintaine d and reproduce d. Enlighte n-

ment alone is not enough to overcome them, since the y support material

interests. The psychodynamic view, that of ste reotype s as wish-fulfillme nts,

reinforces the feminist contention that sexist stereotypes not only support

material male privile ge but also male psychological needs. Freud, on several

occasions, argued that men find it hard to view wome n be yond the stereo-

types of mothe r-figure s or temptre sse s (Freud, 1910, 1933; Rieff, 1959) .

More recent variants of these arguments have added some furthe r stereo-

types to the original two (e.g. pet, iron-maide n, etc.) but maintain the view

that such images meet various male desire s and fantasie s (Kante r, 1977) .

What these two approache s have in common is the view that stere otypes

1338 Gabriel

are no mere gene ralizations or eve n errors, but are mental forms supporting

and supporte d by psychological and political structures.

Stereotype s assume the character of insult pre cisely when the targe t

finds him/herself literally trappe d by the perpe trator

’

s biase d perception,

where his/her every action can be skewed to reinforce the stere otype. Al-

lowing the perpetrator to ge t away with an insulting ste reotype enhance s

its social acceptability and may lead to escalating insults. Challenging or

conte sting the stereotype may ofte n be accommodate d within the stereo-

type, under the guise of

“

temperame ntal,

” “

obstre pe rous,

” “

lacking in sense

of humor,

”

etc. (see Sims et al., 1993) . Thus, stereotypes strike at the heart

of the victim

’

s self-esteem, placing him/her in a position which exacerbates

feelings of powe rless and shame.

In the following narrative , Kevin found himself scape goate d when his

supervisor

’

s new compute r deve lope d a fault. His anger (

“

awful fee lings of

. . . angrine ss

”

) can hardly be containe d not so much be cause of the gravity

of the accusation against him as because he finds himself trappe d in the

stereotype of

“

irresponsible stude nt messing up other pe ople

’

s compute rs.

”

As they struggled to correct the problem a mini

“

investigation

”

starte d, to find

who had altered the configuration of the new computer. As time elapsed, I began

to realise that Mandy was quietly blaming me, after she was informed that I had

used her machine the previous evening. She made some sarcastic remarks, in effect

accusing me of making the mistake :

“

This wouldn

’

t have happened if someone

hadn

’

t messed around with my machine last night.

”

I pr ote ste d m y innoc e nce

—

sta ting that I hadn

’

t u se d Lotus, b ut I was

subconsciously found guilty by the office, and henceforth, I didn

’

t use Mandy

’

machine again as a matter of principle. This caused a great deal of friction betwee n

Mandy and myself, because it was obviously she who had made the mistake , and

it riled me to be a scapegoat for someone who didn

’

t have the strength of character

to admit her own mistakes.

In my opinion I gained a great deal of knowledge from this incident. Not only

was Mandy e xercising her formal power but also taking advantage of our relative

positions within the hierarchy of our office to influence the opinions of the other

office members; and the more I protested my innocence, the further I fell into a

grave which had been dug for me . . . . The image of British Plastics likes to, and

does, communicate is that the y are a very e fficient and caring company. Not very

true! This is espe cially so in Mandy

’

s case, as she was continually criticising

students, and in my opinion her attitudes got the better of her.

There is a system within the company which enables dissatisfied staff to air their

grievances . . . . I complained I had been unjustly accused. My complaint didn

’

succe e d; it was met with quite a cold response. I left with awful feelings of

frustration , angriness, uselessness and betrayal. [Narrative 3]

OBLITERATION OF SIGNIFICANT IDENTITY DETAILS

If stereotyping is one characte ristic of insults which strikes at a person

’

feelings of individuality and self-e steem, so too does the re lated charac-

Social Psych ology of Insults 1339

teristic note d earlier—failing to acknowle dge or honor an important detail

in a person

’

s ide ntity or e go. The use of the wrong form of addre ss, such

as Dr. inste ad of Profe ssor, though rarely intentional can be read as in-

sulting. Se veral examples in the data sugge st that students are insulte d

when a manage r or an employe r fails to registe r the prestige of the ir uni-

versity, mistaking it for a le sser institution.

Even more insulting, howe ve r,

is the mispronouncing or misspelling of a pe rson

’

s name. Still more insult-

ing can be forge tting someone

’

s name or getting it completely wrong. In

the following example (for a full discussion, se e Fine man and Gabrie l, 1996,

pp. 75-78) , a long litany of maltreatment is crowne d by the following ob-

servation:

It is characte ristic that, when speaking to me on the phone, Paul called me

“

Geoffre y,

”

as always, although I am known to all e lse as

“

Ge off.

”

He likewise

insists on calling his secre tary Suzanne, although her name is Su and is printed

as such on her birth certificate. (1996, p. 76) [Narrative 4]

Mispronouncing or misspe lling a person

’

s name may be an eccentric

affectation, a sign of familiarity and affection or, as in the case above , an

insult. Given the enormous powe r diffe rence between Geoff, a student

traine e, and Paul, a brash £200,000 per year merchant banker, it seems fair

to hypothe size that mispronouncing Geoff

’

s name is part of a ritual hu-

miliation, as if to show that even Geoff

’

s and othe r subordinate s

’

name s

may be used and abuse d as Paul pleases.

Th e Im portan ce of Detail in Insults

Narrative s 2 and 3 unde rline the importance of small details in insults.

This is further illustrate d in the following narrative , where the assailant

’

reference to

“

primroses

”

se ems to touch a raw nerve; it is offered by Matt,

a traine e with one of the Big Six accounting companie s:

On my last audit, I worked for the firm

’

s head partner. When he first turned up,

I was formally introduced to him by one of my colleague s. In the first instance,

he appeared to be a pleasant enough chap and I thought little of working for him.

Howe ver during his review of the work papers I had produced, he proceeded to

vocalise any spelling errors which he could manage to find. The se work pape rs

are simply drafts for internal use only, so making spelling e rrors had seemed quite

acceptable . Even so, he only managed to find thre e errors out of several thousand

words. I thought him quite UNFAIR when he finally turned around to me and

asked what kind of schooling system I went through. When I told him that I went

to a comprehensive school, he asked what A-level subjects I had taken. I had

1340 Gabriel

Gabrie l 1997 discusses in detail the account of a student trainee who is insulted when the

top leader of her organization asks her if she studies at

“

a poly.

”

Alternatively, it may be that Paul is a stickler for formality. This could also be a reason for

Geoff to be insulted, given that in his re port he describes how Paul expecte d him to do him

“

personal favours

”

and to be his

“

personal chauffeur

”

and

“

errand-boy

”

(see Fine man and

Gabrie l, 1996, pp. 75-78) .

hardly got the word

“

biology

”

out of my mouth when he laughed and interje cted

with,

“

We ll what can one expect from a man who has spe nt his life dissecting

primrose s!

”

I was justifiably annoye d by this comme nt and had to leave the room before my

mood becam e obvious. A fe w hours late r, afte r he had left, I ove rheard a

conversation in which one of my colle agues told another that it appeared David

had decided to spend the day insulting the

“

grunt

”

(

“

grunt

”

being the affectionate

te rm applied to all new starters at company) . [Narrative 5]

It is interesting that Matt seems prepared to accept a degree of be ing

put down as acceptable (the

“

grunt

”

labe l), while he views the spelling cor-

rections and the primrose barb as gratuitous and insulting. Insults are ex-

perienced as surplus to functional requirements as sugge ste d by expressions

“

rubbing salt to the wounds

”

“

adding insult to injury

”

and adje ctives

“

unwarrante d

”

“

uncalle d for

”

which are often used to describe the m.

Aristotle was aware of this in commenting that insults are

“

not for some

advantage to oneself . . . but for the fun of it.

”

What is e ven clearer, however, is that the insult, in this instance , seems

to touch a sensitive spot in Matt. It is not certain whe ther this vulnerability

derive s from Matt

’

s comprehensive education or from an unconscious guilt

regarding the spelling mistake s. It is clear, howeve r, that, as with the oblit-

eration of significant pe rsonal de tails, the highlighting of significant per-

sonal de fects are common and succe ssful targe ts for insults . This is

particularly so if the targe t of the insult is sensitive to these defects or has

been repeatedly insulte d on their account. This explains why a relative ly

small effort targe ted at the appropriate point can produce disproportionate

effects. It also explains why insults hurt eve n if not factually true , in that

the y touch an area of unconscious self-doubt. Two furthe r reasons why un-

true insults may be effective must be noted here. First, as Narrative 3 sug-

gests, an audie nce may seem to believe the alle gation, while the targe t

’

denials tend to reinforce the appearance of culpability. Second, an insult

may be untrue , but the targe t may blame him/herself for making him/he rself

vulne rable , e.g., by trusting someone they should not have trusted. This

may also account for the fact that many insults (including the ones repro-

duce d here) retrospe ctive ly tend to appe ar quite innocuous and seem to

produce emotion disproportionate to their offensiveness.

Alle gations of shoddy work, such as the sarcastic pointing out of spell-

ing mistake s, feature in several of the reports. In some cases, the traine es

are candid about accepting their responsibility in

“

honest mistake s.

”

These

range d from the production of expensive newsletters for a highly image-

conscious company which include d some embarrassing printing errors to

an error of ove r £1 million in compiling trading debt statistics. When train-

ee s are reminded of such mistake s in a sarcastic manne r, they feel embar-

rassed rather than insulte d. Whe n, on the other hand, the y are insulte d on

Social Psych ology of Insults 1341

account of mistake s which the y categorically deny being responsible for,

the n feelings are more likely to be ange r and frustration.

INSULTING DEEPLY HELD BELIEFS AND REVERED OBJECTS

In most of the e xample s examine d so far, insults have focuse d on rela-

tively small, though psychologically significant, facets of the victims

’

per-

sonality or performance . In other instances (which cannot be discusse d he re

for reasons of space), insults are directed at a person

’

s intellige nce (see

Gabriel, 1997) or tastes and fashion-consciou sness (Bourdie u 1984, p. 511;

Gabriel & Lang, 1995, p. 111). In some cases, they strike at some of an

individual

’

s most dee ply held beliefs or inde ed revered individuals. It is in

cases like these that insults become akin to blasphe my. In one incident,

Andre w, a deeply re ligious traine e, re late s his feelings when a religious

poste r he had displaye d was removed:

I decide d to use the notice board above my desk to display a yellow A4 poster

advertising a Mission to Gloucester being held at that time. This poster went up

on We dnesday and, while nothing was said to me about it, it was turned back to

front two evenings running

—

I re versed it the following morning on both occasions.

That Friday, the thirteenth of September, while I was out of the office the poster

was torn down (it ended up in the bin) and a large Health and Safety poster was

put up.

At lunchtime, Chris, my manager, had a quiet word with me in the rest room.

The upshot of this was that she told me I had upset more than one person

’

fe elings with the poster and that it was official policy for the office manager to

approve posters before they we re put up.

At the time of the incident my feelings were a mixture of pain and anger. It is

one thing to have your beliefs challenge d as to whether or not they are reasonable

but quite another to have your beliefs opposed and not be given the chance to

defend them. When Chris had a word with me it was like she was accusing me

of being narrow minded and trying to force my vie ws down other people

’

s throats.

This I felt to be particularly unfair since, at the time, my two closest friends were

Muslim and Bhuddist respectively. Looking back at the incident now I fe el a little

embarrassed that such an incident could be the cause of so much pain and worry

for both myse lf and the others in the office. [Narrative 6]

This narrative may be interpre ted in line with earlie r one s; Andre w is

insulte d be cause he feels stere otyped on the basis of little evide nce , as a

religious zealot who seeks to force his vie ws on othe rs. Yet, the tone of

the incide nt and the use of the word

“

pain

”

(which does not feature in

any other narrative s) may suggest a dee pe r type of insult than those of the

earlie r example s. Unlike the e arlie r example s, the insult he re is seen as

perpetrated in deed (the removal and binning of the poster) as well as in

word. Furthermore, unlike the previous cases, the pe rpe trator of the insult

is anonymous, unse en and unwilling to take responsibility for his/her action.

It is possible to conjecture the binning of the poster as a kind of profana-

1342 Gabriel

tion, compounde d by the anonymity of the culprit and furthe r exacerbate d

by Chris

’

s condoning of his/her be havior.

Such interpretation may seem

spe culative and cannot be corroborate d on the e vide nce of the above text

alone . The author, howeve r, knew the student well and on several instance s

obse rve d similar responses to perceived insults to his religious sensitivitie s

and fe els fairly confide nt about the interpretation. The inte rpretation does

suggest that diffe rent insults may strike at different parts of our psyche . In

most of the earlie r example s, insults were dire cted at the individuals

’

ide n-

tity, pride in their work, intellige nce, or institutional affiliation, in short, at

the ir ego or their social persona. This instance indicate s a de eper type of

injury, an injury predominantly to a person

’

s ego-ide al, the part of the men-

tal apparatus which contains ide alized image s (such as role mode ls) and

obje cts (such as religious or patriotic relics and family he irlooms) , which

we may seek to emulate or which inspire us. The se nse of outrage when

such idealize d things are insulte d may be even more acute than the ange r

and shame caused by insults to the ego.

RESISTING INSULTS

In the example s thus far, insulte d individuals feel upset, shamed, and

angry but seem mostly unable to act on these feelings. In the next and

final example , Tonya describe s her outrage at what she vie ws as a sexist

slur, in one of the world

’

s large st corporate finance provide rs. This report,

which hinge s on an ove rlap of three negative ste re otypes

“

woman,

” “

stu-

dent,

”

and

“

back office,

”

elaborates conside rably the points raise d e arlier

and raise s two furthe r issues, re sistance to insulting behavior and the trad-

ing of insults.

I worked in the foreign exchange (FX) back-office, where deals done by our 150

dealers were checked, payme nt instructions were added and queries addressed.

My job was to resolve problems arising from deals. Much of the time, this meant

going upstairs and talking to the dealers.

Social Psych ology of Insults 1343

A different interpretation of the incident is that Andre w simply has not understood the

secular norms of the organization and that he is over-reacting in a situation where no insult

to him or his religious belief was intended. Thus a

“

neutral

”

observer may adjudge that no

real insult has taken place. Ye t the fact remains that Andrew feels insulted in a profound

moral way and he impute s the intention to insult him in the person who binned the poster.

The position taken in this pape r is that the occurrence of the insult is coexte nsive with the

experience of the victim rather than the intention of the perpetrator which is ve ry much

harder to establish. See Footnote 2 and section

“

Insults as tests e stablishing organizational

pecking orders.

”

It is possible that some of the earlier example s also e ntail elements of ego-ideal insults. The

student who has idealize d her University is insulted when some one se ems unable or unwilling

to distinguish it from a supposedly lesser institution. Like wise, criticisms of a trainee

’

s spelling

strike both at his ego (his competence and performance ) but also his ego-ideal (his idealized

image of himself as a flawless professional).

Now, you never told a de aler that he or she was wrong, even when handling those

dealers who, throughout the whole of my placeme nt, were never correct. You just

briefly stated what the problem was and asked them to kindly look into it.

This particular incident involves Nick, one of the men who always

“

cocked up.

”

This time he had mixed-up the currencies on a deal. The payment was due in half

an hour, so it was important to get him to amend the deal. I went up to see him,

but Le e, also from the back-office, was already talking to him about something

else. Because my problem was urgent, I waited for Le e to finish. When Le e left,

Nick glanced at me and then, to my surprise, left his desk and went ove r to another

dealer, John, from whom we had heard juicy comments for quite a while. A group

of dealers assembled and I could hear and se e from the ir behavior that they were

not discussing business.

I we nt over and discovered that the reason for their behavior was two pages from

The Sun newspape r filled with pictures of posing, naked wome n. Some thing inside

me just snapped. I told Nick that my job was actually meant as a service to the

dealers, to help make them aware of errors before it costs them money. I e xplained

how m uch work I had to do and how m uch othe r de ale rs appre ciate d my

corre ctions, so by ignoring me he was not only wasting my time, but his own

colleagues

’

right to the service the back-office offers. And with his error-statistics,

I would imagine he had better things to do than to stare at page -3 girls.

I turned round, left my sheet of paper on his desk and departed.

My main emotion both then and now is anger. I felt I had been patient and taken

much more stick and rude behavior than was acce ptable. The way Nick ignored

me to go and look at page-3 girls was the straw that broke the camel

’

s back. I

also felt helpless and vulnerable. They were discussing naked women in detail in

a room with almost only me n, and I kne w my views were in minority. I was afraid

any reaction from me would be ridiculed. Writing about it now, I also feel proud

for having had the courage to tell him off.

The Foreign Exchange dealers, nearly all me n, were the most arrogant group of

people I have e ver come across in my life. If it had not been for me gradually

understanding some of the reasons for their behavior, an outburst like the one I

have just described would have come much earlier. You need to appreciate the

fact that the FX departme nt is, at the moment, one of the be st departments

re sult-wise in FinInter and this create s a feeling of invulnerability and extre me

se lf-importance among those working there. I did not fe el that this was a valid

excuse for their behavior; still, I learnt to acce pt it.

The back-office policy was to accept any amount of stick from the dealers, and

then let it all come out afterwards whe n you we re safely back at your desk. This

policy was no good as it only helped to increase the hostility between deale rs and

back-office. My telling the dealer off, meant that I had broken the main taboo in

the office. O ver seve ral weeks, I realized that this earne d me much respect. I had

done some thing many of my colleagues had wanted to do for ye ars, but dared not

to. The risk was smalle r for me as I was only there for a short while. So, I achieved

re spect both from the back-office and from some of the dealers. And perhaps,

even more importantly, I respected myself more for having done what I felt was

right. [Narrative 7]

The essence of the insult in this re port is containe d in the sente nce

“

The

way Nick ignored me to go and look at page-3 girls was the straw that broke

the camel

’

s back.

”

Being ignored is a common enough type of insult. In or-

ganizations, it takes the form of having one

’

s requests, memos, and reports

1344 Gabriel

disre garde d, or, more commonly, being kept waiting. No fewer than nine of

the 21 incide nts of insult reported by traine es contain direct or indirect ref-

erence to their time be ing wasted. However, it is clear that what is experi-

enced as insulting is not the actual wasting of time but the pre sumption that

their time has a low value compared to someone else

’

s. This confirms the

Aristotelian idea of insults be ing gratuitous, something aimed at consciously

or unconsciously humiliating someone

’

s pride rather than at exploiting them

dire ctly economically or eve n politically. The waste d time, howeve r, is often

but a toke n of deeper humiliations. In Tonya

’

s case, it is cle ar that the wasted

time is symptomatic of a status differential, an attitude of

“

She can wait; she

’

only back-office .

”

Yet, what turns an every day indignity into a major insult

is the dealers

’

ostentatious leering, which makes Tonya fe el inse cure and ex-

pose d. It is the dealers

’

sexism, no less odious for being accepte d as the pre-

rogative of financial success, which Tonya finds insulting.

Helplessness and vulne rability turn into ange r whe n compounde d by in-

sult. What sets this narrative apart from previous one s is that it le ads to an

act of resistance, in which Tonya gives the assailant a

“

pie ce of her mind,

”

expre ssing he r moral indignation at his be havior. Whe n she speaks out, she

crosses the boundary between acce ptable behavior (

“

disparage and be little

deale rs behind their backs

”

) and unacceptable behavior (

“

tell them to their

faces

”

). What Tonya told Nick is pe rhaps less important than the act of cross-

ing of this boundary, which turns the incide nt from an instance of psychic

injury into an e pisode of organizational politics (see Gabriel 1991a).

Her rebuke to the deale r is not a head-on challe nge of his sexism,

which may have laid her ope n to ridicule and disparage ment. Instead her

rebuke is

“

profe ssional,

”

giving him little leeway for retaliation, but its tail

contains a sting. The meaning of

“

and with his error-statistics, I would

imagine he had bette r things to do than to stare at page -3 girls

”

is unlike ly

to have been lost on the dealer. It is, in fact, an atte mpte d insult, in its

own right. We do not know whe the r the dealer read it as an insult and

how he may have reacted. It is certainly the case that, like the other insults

we have examine d thus far, it could be painful even if not exactly true,

provide d that Nick had a sensitive spot about be ing erratic. If, on the other

hand, Nick was the kind of person who, rightly or wrongly, regards the

making of supe rficial mistakes as a prerogative of his brilliance , then the

insult might have gone unnotice d.

RETALIATION: FROM PSYCHIC INJURY TO POLITICAL

CONFLICT

This e xample further highlights the political nature of insulting behav-

ior. While individual insults have a gratuitous character, cumulative ly insults

Social Psych ology of Insults 1345

can be seen as a device for keeping subordinate partie s in the ir place , by

unde rlining their he lple ssness and vulne rability. An unanswe red insult has

a lowering effect on an individual

’

s self-e steem. An unanswe red insult in

the presence of an audience has a still more de vastating effect. What can

be more devastating for a young boy than to see his own fathe r insulte d,

ye t una ble to re talia te . In Dostoe vsky

’

s Brothers Karam azov, Dimitri

Karamazov insults an old army captain, whom he drags by the beard, in

front of a group of childre n, while Ilyusha, the captain

’

s son, in vain trie s

to help his fathe r. Karamazov challe nges the captain to a due l, knowing

full we ll that such a challe nge would ruin the latte r. The fathe r

’

s humili-

ation (both his being dragge d by the beard and his unwillingne ss to face

his assailant in a due l) le ads to vicious baiting of Ilyusha by his schoolmate s.

This incide nt drives one of the most moving subplots of the nove l, which

involve s the younge r Karamazov trying to e xpiate his brother

’

s wrongdoing

and culminate s in the de ath and fune ral of young Ilyusha at the ve ry end

of the nove l. Freud reports in The Interpretation of Dreams his own disil-

lusionme nt on hearing the story of how his fathe r had received uncom-

plainingly an anti-Se mitic slur and a blow (1900, p. 286).

An unanswe red insult then marks a breach in justice which goe s un-

punishe d. It is highly effective at reaffirming power relations and laying

bare relations of domination and subordination. The insulte d party inter-

nalize s his/her ange r into shame, an inability to restore justice by doing

what is seen as the honorable thing, hence he/she is dishonore d in addition

to be ing humiliate d. The assailant, for his/her part, manife sts his/her power

and draws the audie nce into a coalition at the expense of the victim

(Bacharach & Lawle r, 1980).

By contrast, an insult which is met with a counte rinsult can restore

the honor of the insulte d party, even if it does not transform the balance

of power. It may be acce pted by the perpetrator of the initial insult as

acceptable retaliation, reparte e, or face -saving gesture. As with the trading

of gifts, the trading of insults follows ce rtain rule s of commensurability. A

poor relative may successfully reciprocate an expe nsive gift from a rich re la-

tive by offering a gift which requires a lot of time , care, and thought, even

if it doe s not compare in price with the rich relative

’

s gift (see Gabrie l &

Lang, 1995) . Like wise an insulte d party may be allowe d to save face with

a token retaliation. Provide d that the magnitude of a counte rinsult is not

incomme nsurable with that of the initial one, it may restore orde r. Football

crowds supporting oppose d te ams routine ly e ngage in the trading of insults,

seeking to outdo each other in wit, inventiveness, and targeting of sensi-

tivitie s, though they rarely exceed the limits which would lead to physical

viole nce .

1346 Gabriel

There are times, however, when unde r the partial amnesty afforde d

by an insult, a disproportionate re taliation leads to a state of continuous

and possibly escalating strife . This is akin to a vendetta where e ach insult

or blow must compe nsate for and surpass its pre decessor. Calasso observes

precisely this sort of e scalation of insults in the ancient Gre ek myth of the

brothe rs Atreus and Thyestes.

The ve ndetta between the two brothers loses all touch of psychology, become s

pure virtuosity, trace s out arabesque s. Thye stes disappears again, a horrified

fugitive. There

’

s just one thing in his mind: how to invent a revenge that will

outdo his brother

’

s, who in turn had thought up his with the intention of making

it unbeatable . (1993, p. 185)

The plot of many Greek trage die s is built on a still more unequal dy-

namic of insult trading. A mortal

’

s te mporary lapse of arrogance , a hubris

against a god, brings about disproportionate retaliation from the god, the

hero

’

s neme sis. As Dodds observed

“

to speak lightly of a god, to neglect

his cult, to maltreat his priest, all these understandably make him angry;

in a shame -culture gods, like me n, are quick to resent a slight

”

(1950/1968,

p. 32) . Alasdair MacIntyre has further emphasize d the centrality of insults

to the cultural and political life of ancie nt Greeks and othe r societies which

are organize d along the axis shame-honor.

“

To dishonour someone is to

fail to acknowle dge what is thus due . Hence the conce pt of an insult be-

comes a socially crucial one and in many such societies a certain kind of

insult merits death

”

(1981, p. 116) . Following work by Berge r (1973),

MacIntyre goe s on to sugge st that in modern societies insults are no longe r

political events.

“

Insults have been displaced to the margins of our cultural

life where they are e xpre ssive of private emotion rather than public con-

flicts. And unsurprisingly this is the only place left for them in Goffman

’

writings

”

(ibid.).

Tonya

’

s narrative casts a doubt on MacIntyre

’

s hypothe sis that, along

with morality, insults have been restricted by contemporary socie ties to the

cultural margins, reduce d to pe rsonal chagrins and humiliations. Insults

may be endure d passive ly, ge nerating feelings of shame , anger, and guilt

for the victim. Alternative ly, howe ver, they may set in motion a dynamic

whose nature is undoubtedly political. This may le ad to a re solution

through an apology or an acceptance of a commensurable retaliatory insult.

Furthe rmore, the y may lead to a continuous state of insult-trading which

may be containe d within certain parame te rs (as with football crowds) or

may escalate into eve r-incre asing, offensive , and damaging actions. The

trading of insults can obse rve highly elaborate rule s of re ciprocity and

equivale nce. At times, the trading of insults, like the trading of gifts, may

become institutionalize d into a ritual, as is the case in joking relations. The

trading of gifts and the trading of insults can turn into each other. Insults

Social Psych ology of Insults 1347

can take the form of insole nt gifts or may result from the spurning of sup-

posedly unworthy ones. Likewise a truce in the exchange of insults may be

marke d by an exchange of gifts.

INSULTS AS TESTS ESTABLISHING ORGANIZATIONAL

PECKING -ORDERS

Narrative 7 is the only one of the 21 in which the narrator actively

insults, albeit in self-de fense, someone else (

“

with his error-statistics

”

). It

is a curious thing about insults that they far more commonly fe ature in

narratives as suffered rather than as perpetrated, i.e ., the y are part of tragic

narratives from the pe rspective of the victim, rather than of epic narrative s

from that of the perpetrator. Inde e d, it is unlike ly that most people would

admit to insulting anyone without provocation. Yet, in most cases, individu-

als who are insulte d impute motive on their assailant. This is what makes

the

“

intention to insult

”

so difficult to establish and an unre liable crite rion

for defining insults.

We have noted that, cumulative ly, insults are part of a trading process,

itself part of an organization

’

s political process. But what drives individual

insults? Here we e nter into more speculatory terrain; the research material

doe s not warrant anything more than some tentative conje cture s. Clearly

some insults are uninte ntional, therefore motivele ss. O the rs, like Tonya

’

reprimand in Narrative 7, are retaliatory. But would Nick, the page-3 ad-

miring broke r, have recognize d his own behavior toward Tonya as insulting?

This seems rathe r unlikely. He may have viewed the situation as an instance

of ove r-reaction by an over-sensitive trainee who has not yet learne d the

organizational rope s. Yet, was his ostentatious reading of material intended

to provoke the traine e and his delibe rate shunning of he r, not precisely

aime d at

“

teaching this awkward young custome r a little lesson?

”

The ex-

cuse that

“

No insult was intended

”

may have be en ge nuine , yet one suspects

that, eve n if not conscious, Nick

’

s behavior was driven by a desire to deflate ,

if not to humiliate , Tonya. If Tonya

’

s reference to Nick as

“

one of the men

who always

‘

cocke d up

’”

(in Narrative 7) is not a post facto construction,

could it be that Nick was himse lf the targe t of insults by othe r dealers or

by his supe riors? Unable to retaliate against them, he redire cts his aggre s-

sion at a soft targe t, a young female , back-office traine e, whose humiliation

is not only meant to keep her in her place , but also earn him the esteem

of his pee rs. In this way, some insults could be said to said re-directed re-

taliation s, i.e., retaliations against innoce nt but weaker surrogate s. It is, of

course , not possible to test this hypothe sis on the material available , but

what it sugge sts is that insults are not merely instruments for establishing

inclusion and exclusion, domination and subordination, but also fine r gra-

1348 Gabriel

dations of status and power. We may hypothe size then that insults help to

establish coalitions and sustain a

“

pe cking orde r

”

among members of a

colle ctivity while at the same time allowing for a degree of mobility by

testing the resilience and morale of pe ople up and down the order.

In this way, some insults may be construed as tests. They can function

as initiation rites, establishing inclusion and exclusion, or classification rite s

establishing status and powe r hie rarchie s or te sts of loyalty, establishing

coalitions and alliance s. The assailant

’

s motive then is to provide him/he r-

self and his/he r target with a challe nge , an opportunity to prove themselves,

from which they hope to improve their position in the pe cking order or to

mold a ne w coalition. Unde r such circumstance s, insults provide a continu-

ous mechanism for maintaining some mobility within a hierarchy of power

and status. At times, an insult may thus prove a visible use of power, which,

Pfeffe r has forcibly argue d, is a preamble to its own dissipation. Powe r is

lost through the subordinate

’

s successful retaliation or through the under-

mining of a coalition (Pfeffer, 1981, 1992) .

Is there a class of insults which, unlike motive less and retaliatory ones,

is driven by conscious or unconscious destructive desire s pure and simple ?

Clearly, the research material does not permit any systematic discussion of

this possibility, since no accounts are provide d by the assailants. We may

speculate , all the same , that some insults, notably those perpetrated by

some of Dostoe vsky

’

s antihe roe s, assume an existential, life-affirming, and

life -denying quality, setting them apart from the ones discusse d in this pa-

per. Not content to defeat an oppone nt, such characte rs seek in an irra-

tional Nietzsche an way, to humiliate and oblite rate him/he r, as if their own

life and vitality derive s from the unpre meditated humiliations which they

inflict on others. Yet, such characters also seem to suffer from profound

guilt, following the ir action. The ir insults resemble the hubris of ancie nt

Greek trage dy, the outrage ously boastful claims made by mortals in a mo-

ment of madne ss (ate), which invariably bring about disproportionate re-

taliation from the insulte d god, only in the existe ntial he ro

’

s case, the

retaliation appears to stem from his own supe rego. Such insults could be

said to derive from a kind of inebriation of

“

getting away

”

with something

outrage ous, expressing a de ep wish for self-aggrandise ment, and for the

belittle ment of an oppone nt. If insults like the one described in Narrative

7 repre sent a public challe nge within a shame culture , existe ntial insults,

in spite of the ir public dimension, may be said to represent private chal-

Social Psych ology of Insults 1349

David Sims has pointed out that human groups usually entail multiple pecking orders, and

that actions which raise one in one pecking order simultaneously lower one in one of the

concurrent ones. A mischievous child may be raising himse lf in the pecking order of his peer

group, e ven as he lowers himself in the school

’

s pecking orde r. This opens up some intriguing

possibilities for the study of insults.

lenges that individuals in certain psychological state s are apt to set for

the mselves.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

This introduction to the study of insults in organizations sugge sts that

insults are quite an important social and organizational phenomenon, one

which causes powerful emotions and enters people

’

s personal historie s. It

was sugge sted that insults involve a pe rpetrator, a targe t and, ofte n, an

audie nce. The intention to insult is not necessary, as some insults are the

result of misunde rstanding or accident. However, the experience of being

gratuitously offende d and the corresponding fee lings of shame , guilt, and

ange r are fundame ntal to insults. Several types of insults were observed.

Exclusion, stereotyping, oblite ration of significant ide ntity details, ingrati-

tude, scapegoating, rudeness, broke n promises, and being ignore d or kept

waiting, were all see n as insulting by different individuals. It was further

suggested that even more potent insults may re sult from the defamation

or despoiling of idealize d objects, persons, or ide as.

Different insult dynamics were note d; these include d an apology, a com-

mensurate retaliation, a disproportionate retaliation and possible escalation,

a retaliation against a surrogate and we aker targe t than the pe rpetrator of

the initial insult, an affe cted indiffe rence with a possible delayed re taliation,

or more commonly a resigne d tolerance which may fuel subse que nt insults.

Retaliation and resistance led to a discussion of the conce pt of trading of

insults as part of an organization

’

s political process which establish, first, line s

of domination/subordination, second, finer gradations of status and power,

i.e., a pecking order, and third, opportunitie s for building coalitions and al-

liance s. It is argue d that insults allow for a certain mobility within a pecking

orde r, by offering

“

matches

”

for contestants to pitch their wit, venom, and

courage against each other. They also e nable audiences to take sides, thus

influencing and testing the operation of coalitions and alliance s.

This introductory discussion of insults in organizations points at several

line s of further inquiry. First, it would be interesting to extend and develop

the taxonomy of insults tentative ly presented here and to establish other

forms that insulting behavior take s. Se cond, it is important to elaborate on

the nature of multiple interpretations in insults. It would be interesting to

juxtapose the interpretations offered by the victim with those offe red by

the assailant, especially in what concerns intention ality. How do victims seek

to establish the intention of their assailant to insult them? And how do

the assailants

“

construct

”

their be havior which is seen as insulting by the

victim? In some cases, an insult may be unambiguous —a common unde r-

standing be twe en assailant and victim. In other cases, diffe rent or compe t-

1350 Gabriel

ing interpre tations may be proffered. In some cases, it would be possible

to argue that an insult is a multiple interpretation , as anyone who has tried

to adjudicate dispute s between childre n may realize. An insult that hits the

mark may inde ed be equivale nt to a successful psychoanalytic interpreta-

tion.

These competing inte rpretations may offer valuable insights into

transference and counte rtransference processe s occurring across organiza-

tional hierarchie s. Third, inte nsive qualitative research with victims of par-

ticular insults may te st the hypothe sis presented here, that different insults

assault different parts of the mental personality and lead to diffe rent de-

fense mechanisms. Under what circumstance s are insults repressed, ration-

alize d or de fende d against, and when do they lead to a burning desire for

retaliation? A fourth line of inquiry would be an ethnographic account of

insults in different institutions (including schools, business organizations,

training college s, and military outfits) to inve stigate the extent to which

the y serve as tests e stablishing political coalitions and pecking orde rs. It

would be espe cially inte resting to explore the nature and magnitude of per-

missible retaliations, obse rving closely the group dynamics involve d.

In conclusion, we could argue that the study of insults can be of use to

thre e groups of organizational scholars. Stude nts of organizational culture

and symbolism may gain considerable insights by focusing on the nature of

insults in particular organizations. Equally, re searchers exploring organiza-

tional emotions, in particular negative emotions, like anger, shame, and guilt,

would do well to explore how narrative s associated with such emotions in-

corporate insults. Finally, researche rs who are exploring the political dimen-

sions of organizations, including labor proce ss theorists, would find the study

of organizational insults valuable in unde rstanding why resistance is so often

bred not simply by long-term exploitation or oppre ssion but by mome ntary

lapse s in the de fe nses against displaying arrogance and contempt.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to acknowle dge the contribution of many of my students

who supplie d narrative mate rial used in this pape r. Several colle agues, in-

cluding Steve Fine man, Annie Pye, Judi Marshall, John Purce ll, and Ian

Colville , have give n me valuable sugge stions. David Sims and Andre w

Sturdy gave me very extensive and helpful feedback on the original draft.

Several participants in the 1997 Symposium of the International Society

for the Psychoanalytic Study of O rganizations, including Glenn Swogge r

and David M. Sachs, offe red extremely perceptive observations as did the

Social Psych ology of Insults 1351

This fascinating idea was suggested by Dr. David M. Sachs.

two anonym ous refe ree s who reviewed the pape r for Hum an Relation s.

Thanks to all of them.

REFERENCES

ALBRO W, M. Sine ira et studio

—

or Do organizations have feelings? Organization Studies,

1992, 13(3), 313-329.

ASHFO RTH, B. E., & HUMPHREY , R. H. Emotional labor in service role s: The influence

of identity. Academ y of Managem ent Review, 1993, 18(1), 88-115.

ASHFO RTH, B. E., & HUMPHRE Y, R. H. Emotion in the workplace

—

A reappraisal. Hu-

man Relations, 1995, 48(2), 97-125.

AUSTE R, E. R. Demystifying the glass ceiling: Organizational and interpersonal dynamics of

ge nder bias. Business and the Contem porary World, 1993, 5( Summer), 47-68.

BACHARACH, S. B., & LAWLER, E. J. Power and politics in organizations . San Francisco:

Jossey-Bass, 1980.

BAUM, H. S. The invisible bureaucracy. Oxford: O xford Unive rsity Pre ss, 1987.

BENTO N, G. The origins of the political joke. In C. Powell and G. E. C. Paton (Eds.), Hu-

mour in society. London: Macmillan, 1988.

BERGER, P., BERGE R, B., & KELLNER, H. The homeless m ind. Garden City, NY: Anchor,

1973.

BOJE, D. M. The storytelling organization: A study of story performance in an office-supply

firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1991, 36, 106-126.

BOURDIEU, P. Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Pre ss, 1979.

BOURDIEU, P. Distinction : A social critique of the judgement of taste. London: Routledge,

1984.

CALASSO, R. The m arriage of Cadmu s and harm ony. London: Jonathan Cape, 1993.

CASE, P. Re prese ntations of talk at work: Performatives and

“

performability.

”

Managem ent

Learning, 1995, 26(4), 423-444.

CLEGG, S., & JEFFCUTT, P. Modern organizations

—

organization studies in the postmodern

world. Adm inistrative Science Quarterly, 1993, 37, 686-688.

CLEGG, S. Modern organizations: Organization studies in the postm odern world. London: Sage,

1990.

COLLINSO N, D. L.

“

Engineering humour

”

: Masculinity, joking and conflict in shop-floor

relations. Organization Studies, 1988, 9(2), 181-199.

COLLINSO N, D. L. Strategies of resistance: Powe r, knowledge and subjectivity in the work-

place. In J. Jermie r, W. Nord, and D. Knights (Eds.), Resistance and power in organizations.

London: Routledge, 1994, pp. 25-68.

COO PER, R., & BURRELL, G. Modernism, postmodernism and organizational analysis: An

introduction. Organization Studies, 1988, 9(1), 91-112.

DAVIES, C. Stupidity and rationality: Jokes from the iron cage. In C. Powell and G. E. C.

Paton (Eds.), Hum our in society. London: Macmillan, 1988, pp. 1-32.

DIAMO ND, M. A. The social characte r of bureaucracy: Anxiety and ritualistic defe nse. Po-

litical Psychology, 1985, 6(4), 663-679.

DIAMO ND, M. A. The unconscio us life of organizations: Interpreting organizational identity.

London: Quorum Books, 1993.

DIXON, N. F. On the psychology of military incom petence. London: Jonathan Cape, 1976.

DO DDS, E. R. The G reeks and the irrational. Berkele y, CA: University of California Press,

1950/1968.

DRE W, P., & HERITAGE, J. (Eds.). Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings. Cam-

bridge : Cambridge University Press, 1992.

ELMES, M. B., & KASO UF, C. J. Knowledge workers and organizational learning: Narratives

from biotechnology. Managem ent Learning, 1995, 26(4), 403-422.

FINEMAN, S. (Ed.). Em otion in organizations, London: Sage, 1993.

FINEMAN, S. Emotions in organizations. In N. Nicholson (Ed.), The encyclopedic dictionary

of organizational behavior. London: Blackwell, pp. 151-152.

1352 Gabriel

FINEMAN, S. Emotion and managemen t learning. Managem ent Learning, 1997, 28(1), 13-26.

FINEMAN, S., & GABRIEL, Y. Experiencing organizations . London: Sage, 1996.

FREUD, S. The interpretation of dream s. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1900.

FREUD, S. A special type of choice of object made by men (S.E. XI) . London: Hogarth

Press, 1910.

FREUD, S. New introductory lectures on psychoanalysis (S.E. XXI, 1). London: Hogarth Press,

1933.

GABRIEL, Y. Turning facts into stories and stories into facts. Hum an Relation s, 1991, 44(8),

857-875. (a)

GABRIEL, Y. On organizational stories and myths: Why it is easier to slay a dragon than

to kill a myth. International Sociology. 1991, 6( 4), 427-442. (b)

GABRIEL, Y. O rganizations and the ir discontents: A psychoanalytic contribution to the study

of corporate culture. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 1991, 27( 3), 318-336. (c)

GABRIEL, Y. Putting the organization on the analyst

’

s couch. European Journal of Manage-

ment, 1992, 10(3), 348-352.

GABRIEL, Y. Organizational nostalgia: Reflections on

“

The Golden Age.

”

In S. Fine man

(Ed.), Em otion in organizations. London: Sage , 1993, pp. 118-141.

GABRIEL, Y. The unmanaged organization: Stories, fantasies, subjectivity. Organization Stud-

ies, 1995, 16(3) , 477-501.

GABRIEL, Y. Me eting God: When organizational membe rs come face to face with the su-

pre me leader. Hum an Relations, 1997, 50(4), 315-342.

GABRIEL, Y., & LANG, T. The unm anageable consum er: Contem porary consum ption and its

fragmentation . London: Sage, 1995.

GEO RGE, J. M. Personality, affect, and behavior in groups. Journal of Applied Psychology,

1990, 75(2), 107-116.

GEO RGE, J. M., & JO NES, G. R. Expe riencing work: Values, attitudes, and moods. Hum an

Relations, 1997, 50(4), 393-416.

GIO IA, D. A. Symbols, scripts and se nsemaking: Creating me aning in the organizing e xperi-

ence. In H. P. Sims, D. A. Gioia, and Associate s (Eds.), The thinking organization . San

Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1986, pp. 49-74.

GRANT, D., & O SWICK, C. (Eds.). Metaphor and organizations. London: Sage, 1996.

GUTEK, B. A., Sex and the workplace: Im pact of sexual behavior and harassm ent on women,

men and organizations , San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass, 1985.

GUTEK, B. A., (1989) . Sexuality in the workplace: Key issues in social re search and organ-

izational practice . In J. Hearn, D. L. Sheppard, P. Tancre d-Sheriff, and G. Burrell (Eds.),

The sexuality of organization . London: Sage, 1989.

HALL, E. J. Smiling, deferring and flirting: Doing ge nder by giving

“

good se rvice.

”

Work and

Occupations , 1993, 20(4) , 452-471.

HASSARD, J., & PARKER, M. (Eds.). Postmodernism and organizations. London: Sage, 1993.

HIRSCHHO RN, L. The workplace within. Cambridge , MA: MIT Pre ss, 1988.

HO CHSCHILD, A. The managed heart. Berkeley: Unive rsity of California Pre ss, 1983.

JAQUES, E. Social systems as a defence against persecutory and depre ssive anxiety. In M.

Klein, P. Heimann, and R. E. Money-Kyrle (Eds.), New directions in psychoanalysis. Lon-

don: Tavistock, 1955.

JANIS, I. Victims of grou pthink. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1972.

KANTER R. M. Men and wom en of the corporation . New York: Basic Books, 1977.

KAPUSCINSKI R. The emperor. London: Picador, 1983.

KETS DE V RIES, M. F. R., & MILLER, D. The neurotic organ ization. San Fransisco: Jossey-

Bass, 1984.

LA BARRE, W. Species-specific biology, magic and religion. In R. H. Hook (E d.), Fantasy

and symbol. London: Acade mic Press, 1979.

LE IDNER, R. Se rving hamburgers and se lling insurance: Gender, work, and identity in in-

teractive se rvice jobs. G ender and Society, 1991, 5(2), 154-177.

MacINTYRE, A. After virtue. London: Duckworth, 1981.

MANGHAM, I. L. Power and perform ance in organ izations. O xford: Blackwell, 1986.

MANGHAM, I. L. Scripts, talk and double talk. Managem ent Learning. 1995, 2(4), 493-512.

Social Psych ology of Insults 1353

MARTIN, J. Deconstructing organizational taboos: The suppression of ge nder conflict in or-

ganizations. Organization Science, 1990, 1(4), 339-359.

MARTINKO, M. J. Stereotyping. In N. Nicholson (Ed.), Encyclopedic dictionary of organ iza-

tional behavior. Oxford: Blackwell, 1995.

MENZ IES, I. A case study in functioning of social systems as a defence against anxie ty. Hu-

man Relations, 1960, 13, 95-121.

NEUMANN, J. E., & NOUMAIR, D. A. Wome n, Envy and Contemporary O rganizational

Life. Paper presente d to the Symposium of the International Society for the Psychoana-

lytic Study of Organizations, Philadelphia, June 27-29, 1997.

PARKER M. Post-modern organizations or postmodern the ory? Organization Studies, 1992,

13(1) , 1-17.

PARKER, M. Critique in the Name of What? Postmodernism and critical approaches to or-

ganization. Organization Studies, 1995, 16(4) , 553-564.

PARKINSON, B. Emotions are social. British Journal of Psychology, 1996, 87(4), 663-683.

PFEFFER, J. Power in organizations. Marshfield, MA: Pitman, 1981.

PFEFFER, J. Managing with power. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 1992.

PO O LE , P. P., GRAY, B., & GIOIA, D. A. O rganization script deve lopment through inter-

active accommodation. G roup and Organization Studies, 1990, 15(2), 212-232.

PYE, A. Strategy through dialogue and doing. Managem ent Learning, 1995, 26(4), 445-462.

RAFAELI, A., & SUTTO N, R. I. Expre ssion of emotion as part of the work role. Academ y

of Managem ent Review, 1987, 12(1), 23-37.

RAFAELI, A., & SUTTON, R. I. The expression of emotion in organizational life. Research

in Organizational Behavior, 1989, 11, 1-42.

RIEFF, P. Freud: The mind of a m oralist. Ne w York: Doubleday, 1959.

SCHWARTZ, H. S. Narcissistic process and corporate decay. New York: New York University

Press, 1990.

SCHWARTZ, H. S. Narcissistic emotion and university administration: An analysis of

“

politi-

cal correctne ss.

”

In S. Fineman (Ed.), Emotion in organizations. London: Sage, 1993, pp.

190-215.

SENNETT, R., & COBB, J. The hidden injuries of class. Ne w York: Random House, 1973.

SHE PPARD, D. L. Organizations, power and sexuality: The image and se lf-image of women

manage rs. In J. Hearn, D. L. Sheppard, P. Tancre d-Sheriff, and G. Burrell (Eds.), The

sexuality of organization . London: Sage, 1989.

SIMS D., FINEMAN, S.,& GABRIEL, Y. Organizing and organizations. London: Sage, 1993.

TERKEL S. Working. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1985.

TSIVAKO U, I. The written form of planning. Scandinavia n Journal of Managem ent, 1996,

12(1) , 69-88.

WALLRAFF, G. Lowest of the low. London: Methuen, 1985.

ZILLMAN, D. Disparagemen t humor. In P. E . McGhee , and J. H. Goldstein (Eds.), Handbook

of hum or research . New York: Springer Verlag, 1983.

BIOGRAPHICAL NOTE

YIANNIS GABRIEL is a Lecturer in Organizational Studies at Bath Unive rsity. He is the

author of Freud and society, Working lives in catering, joint author of Organizing and organ iza-

tions, Experien cing organizations, and The unm anageable consum er and author of various arti-

cles on social psychology, organizational culture, and symbolism. His rese arch interests lie

mainly in organizational and psychoanalytic theories in are as which include organizational

storytelling and folklore, contemporary consumption, and the concepts of the unmanaged and

unmanageable . He is joint Editor of the journal Managem ent Learning.

1354 Gabriel

EMOTIONSSOCIOLOGI

Book

Full-text available

Sep 2024

Åsa Wettergren

This book was published in 2013 and is now sold out. The copyrights are now with me and the MS is thus provided OA by myself. The book veriiosn can be found in libraries.

African Identities No laughing matter: (self) ridiculing and reputational risk on Ghanaian and Zimbabwean TikTok No laughing matter: (self) ridiculing and reputational risk on Ghanaian and Zimbabwean TikTok

Article

Full-text available

May 2025
Afr Ident

The positive branding of a country is vital in its global standing and recognition. In light of this, the Africa Rising campaign was launched to sell the potentials of the continent globally. However, some citizens do not always share the same reputational goals with their states. Their perceptions may conflict with the reputational agendas of state institutions. This paper argues that in an attempt to speak [in]directly to significant public issues, and in simple merrymaking, some Africans also unconsciously contribute to defaming their nations and the continent at large, exacerbating the long-standing problem of Afro-pessimism fueled by Western media. To examine this phenomenon, this qualitative study utilises a phenomenological paradigm and the framing theory to conduct a content analysis of 50 purposively selected Ghanaian and Zimbabwean TikTok videos. This study aims to establish that the production of these videos constitutes what we term 'fun journal-ism' that draws global attention to critical public issues on the continent but paradoxically results in what we conceptualise as self-defamation. In the end, the study shows that while the Western media is not exonerated from damaging Africa's reputation globally , some Africans have unconsciously also contributed to this negativity by 'ridiculing' the motherland. ARTICLE HISTORY

Just a joke? Humour and gender in a far-right party

Article

Full-text available

May 2025

Elisa Bellè

The populist radical right (PRR), or far right, frequently resorts to jokes, irony, and humour, particularly in relation to major markers of ideology and identity such as gender/sexuality. Despite the empirical factuality of such humour—from the sexist outbursts of Trump to the homophobic jokes of Bolsonaro—few contributions have analysed the humoristic performances of this political family. The article aims to fill this gap by focusing on the Italian League (former Northern League). Based on ethnographic fieldwork in a local branch, I identify two main humorous codes, corresponding to two different socio-political functions: ‘humour as male-inflicted punishment’ and ‘humour as virility battle’. The paper illuminates the intertwinement of power and gender hierarchies, reproduced through sexist humour in the branch. It also shows how humoristic codes employed by national leaders circulate in the branch, in a process of remodulation of gender, ideology, and sexism between micro and macro levels of politics.

Research Misconduct in Chinese Universities: Towards an Emotional Analysis

Article

Full-text available

Apr 2025
J Acad Ethics

Xinqu Zhang

Studies about the causes of research misconduct focus on a limited range, and negative emotions are an omitted but critical area. By utilizing theories from sociology and criminology of emotions, the current study adopts an emotional aspect to analyze researchers’ academic integrity issues in Chinese universities. Particularly, it examines how working stress, caused by the aggressive implementation of national policies for chasing more influential academic publications in top domestic and international journals, influences faculty members’ emotional feelings, arguing that due to worries about job security and a lack of means to release negative emotions, some scholars may choose to engage in misconduct to cope with, seeing it as reasonable and acceptable. The author adopts a qualitative approach (i.e., in-depth interviews and content analysis of official documents) for data collection and analysis. This study contributes to the study of research misconduct because it provides an emotional aspect to analyze the causes of such deviance in academics. It does not aim to defend wrongdoers’ breaching academic integrity; it provides a new angle to analyze the causes of research integrity issues.

El acaparamiento del conocimiento como “mala conducta organizacional” y algunos de sus antecedentes: Una perspectiva de intercambio social

Article

Full-text available

Jan 2025

En este trabajo se aborda el acaparamiento del conocimiento como una forma de mala conducta en el trabajo. Se analiza la posible relación de la justicia organizacional, el incumplimiento del contrato psicológico y el compromiso organizacional con dicha variable. Se analizó una muestra de 125 trabajadores de una institución educativa y después de aplicar un modelo de regresión múltiple se identificó que sólo el incumplimiento del contrato psicológico podría predecir el acaparamiento del conocimiento.

Forms and Functions of Dysphemism in Some Selected Egyptian T.V. Talk Shows Concerning Sport Discourse

Article

Jan 2025

Hamdi E. Khalil

Reality television and the promotion of problematic behavior among cast members: a case study content analysis through the lens of feminist and media framing theories

Article

Feb 2024

Karla R. Hamlen

Threatened Identities: Mobbing as a Form of Violence in Organizations

Article

Jan 2023

On (Im)politeness

Chapter

Oct 2023

Sara Orthaber

This chapter provides a comprehensive literature review on the concept of face, Goffman’s theoretical framework, and the study of (im)politeness, encompassing both traditional and contemporary approaches to analysing these phenomena within interactions. The primary focus lies in exploring the intricate relationship between face and (im)politeness, particularly within the complex and contextually rich environment of customer service.

Influencer transgressions: The impacts on endorser and brand

Article

Jul 2023

Emotional labor in service roles: The influence of identity

Article

Full-text available

Jan 1993

Emotional labor is the display of expected emotions by service agents during service encounters. It is performed through surface acting, deep acting, or the expression of genuine emotion. Emotional labor may facilitate task effectiveness and self-expression, but it also may prime customer expectations that cannot be met and may trigger emotive dissonance and self-alienation. However, following social identity theory, we argue that some effects of emotional labor are moderated by one's social and personal identities and that emotional labor stimulates pressures for the person to identify with the service role. Research implications for the micro, meso, and macro levels of organizations are discussed.

The Social Character of Bureaucracy: Anxiety and Ritualistic Defense

Article

Full-text available

Dec 1985

Michael A. Diamond

In analyzing the social character of bureaucracy, one must examine the psychodynamics of obsessional neurosis in the individual and ritualistic practices in the bureaucracy. Much of organization theory either implicitly or explicitly characterizes bureaucratic behavior as ritualistic. [See, for example, Weber (1947); Hummel (1977, 1982); Merton (1940, 1963); Crozier (1964); Argyris and Schon (1974, 1978); and Zaleznik and Kets de Vries (1975).] A more complete appreciation of the role of ritualistic behavior in bureaucracy recognizes its origins in the human personality. “The culture of the system reflects:…the types of people the organization attracts” (Burke, 1982, p. 76).

Experiencing Organizations

Book

Jan 1996

The Workplace Within: Psychodynamics of Organizational Life

Book

Jan 1988

Larry A Hirschhorn

In this revealing study, Larry Hirschhorn examines the rituals, or social defenses, organizations develop to cope with change. Using extended ease studies from offices, factories, and social services, he describes why these often irrational practices that fragment and injure individuals within the workplace exist, how they operate, and how they can be reshaped to enhance people's work experience.

Stupidity and Rationality: Jokes from the Iron Cage

Chapter

Jan 1988

Christie Davies

One of the most outstanding features of the jokes told in industrial societies is the enormous and universal popularity of jokes told at the expense of allegedly stupid groups of people. In the Western industrial countries these jokes are usually told about an ethnic group or minority, whilst in Eastern Europe the jokes are of a political nature. It is perhaps not surprising that, apart from jokes about sex, ethnic jokes of all kinds are perhaps the most popular and numerous of all jokes in the West whilst political jokes tend to dominate the popular humour of Eastern Europe. However, what is remarkable is the range, durability and popularity of jokes about stupidity in both types of industrial society. It is a phenomenon that calls for a sociological explanation. Why, for instance, do people in Western industrial societies prefer jokes about ‘stupid’ ethnic minorities to almost any other kind of joke? Why are they so fond of jokes like these: A Polish couple decided to have a chicken farm. They bought two chickens, took them home, dug a hole in their backyard and buried the chickens head first. Next morning they discovered the chickens were dead.

The Origins of the Political Joke

Chapter

Jan 1988

Gregor Benton

Political jokes run in the veins of modern dictatorships of all political sorts, but they are at their best and most plentiful in the Soviet Union, and it is with the Soviet joke and its close relatives that these pages will chiefly engage.

The function of social systems as a defence against anxiety

Article

Jan 1960

I.E.P. Menzies

Disparagement Humor

Chapter

Jan 1983

Dolf Zillmann

Much has been said and written about humor that disparages, belittles, debases, demeans, humiliates, or otherwise victimizes. A myriad of observations and opinions on the subject eventually found expression in theoretical proposals, and these proposals have been reviewed in considerable detail (e.g., Berlyne, 1969; Keith-Spiegel, 1972). The research efforts spawned by the proposals, together with theoretical advances and refinements suggested or demanded by the findings, also have been detailed and summarized (e.g., La Fave, 1972; Zillmann & Cantor, 1976). Obviously, there is little merit in restating the various theoretical views and in rehashing research findings that have been reported repeatedly already. This chapter, consequently, traces the evolution of disparagement theory in its essentials only and then focuses on new developments, both theoretical and empirical, that have occurred since the publication of the reviews in the early and mid-seventies. More specifically, extensions of theoretical approaches to disparagement humor are reported and the generality and specificity of these approaches is assessed. Efforts at integrating disparagement theory with other approaches to humor are reported. New findings concerning the ontogeny of mirthful reactions to disparagement are discussed. Finally, the discontent with the “incompleteness” of disparagement-centered theories of humor is detailed, and recent efforts at removing the apparent incompleteness of older models in the construction of more integrative theories are described. Much attention is given to the issue of converting the potential enjoyment of disparagement into amusement.

Modern Organizations: Organization Studies in the Postmodern World.

Article

Dec 1992

Theoretical Contrasts and International Contexts Organizations and the Modernization of the World Why and Where did Bureaucracy Triumph? Contingencies, Markets and Hierarchies Ecologies, Institutions and Power in the Analysis of Organizations French Bread, Italian Fashions and Asian Enterprise The Embeddedness of Organizational Diversities Organizational Diversities and Rationalities Modernist and Postmodernist Organization Postmodern Skill Formation and Postmodern Capital Formation?

Expression of Emotion as Part of the Work Role

Article

Jan 1987

Research in organizational behavior focuses on expressed and felt emotions as indicators of employee health and satisfaction. In contrast, less conceptual and empirical work addresses the display of feelings as part of the job. This paper proposes a conceptual framework to guide theory development and research about the causes, qualities, and consequences of emotions that are expressed to fulfill role expectations.

An Introduction to the Social Psychology of Insults in Organizations

Abstract

Recommended publications

How we’re using technology to enhance and improve the physical and cognitive capabilities of individ...

How the University of Bath is solving some of the 21st Century’s most-pressing health challenges

How the University of Bath is addressing global challenges around energy systems

How research at the University of Bath is combating modern slavery

"Matriz sin tumba": The Trash Goddess and the Healing Matrix of Gloria Anzaldúa's Reclaimed Womb

Stigma, Shame, and Blame Experienced by Patients with Lung Cancer: Qualitative Study

The virtue of righteousness in mencius

Patients with Psoriasis Feel Stigmatized