Factors in Reader Responses to Negative Letters

Journal of Business and Technical Communication Jan 1999

Factors in Reader Responses to Negative Letters

Kitty O. Locker The Ohio State University

Abstract

This article summarizes the scholarly discussion about negative messages and reports the results of two pretests and two experiments using negative letters. The results show that buffers did not significantly affect college students' responses to simulated letters refusing credit and denying admission to graduate school and that strong resale was counterproductive. Students responded least favorably to rejection when they were surprised by it and when their other options were limited. On the basis of these experiments and the published literature, the author recommends that negative letters normally begin with the reason for the refusal. If the reason makes the company look good, then it should be spelled out in as much detail as possible. If an alternative or a compromise exists, then the writer should suggest it. Although a positive ending is not necessary, if one is used, then a bland positive is better than a strong one, especially in letters to clients or customers.

Journal: Journal of Business and Technical Communication
Published: 1999-01-01
DOI: 10.1177/105065199901300101
Open Access: Closed
Topics: multilingual writers affect and writing

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (9)

Thoms et al. (2020)

Is Bad News Difficult to Read? A Readability Analysis of Differently Connoted P…

Journal of Business and Technical Communication
Thominet (2020)

We’ve Selected a Candidate Who More Closely Fits Our Current Needs: A Genre Ana…

Journal of Business and Technical Communication
Westerman et al. (2015)

Opening a Performance Dialogue With Employees

Journal of Business and Technical Communication
Mackiewicz (2011)

Epinions Advisors as Technical Editors

Journal of Business and Technical Communication
Friess (2011)

Politeness, Time Constraints, and Collaboration in Decision-Making Meetings: A …

Technical Communication Quarterly

Show all 9 →

Jansen et al. (2011)

Explanations First: A Case for Presenting Explanations Before the Decision in D…

Journal of Business and Technical Communication
Mackiewicz (2007)

Compliments and Criticisms in Book Reviews About Business Communication

Journal of Business and Technical Communication
Ding (2006)

An Indirect Style in Business Communication

Journal of Business and Technical Communication
Rogers et al. (2003)

Reconceptualizing Politeness to Accommodate Dynamic Tensions in Subordinate-to-…

Journal of Business and Technical Communication

Cites in this index (3)

Brown (1994)

Facing Multiple Audiences in Engineering and R&D Writing: The Social Contex…

Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
HAGGE et al. (1989)

Linguistic Politeness in Professional Prose

Written Communication
JABLIN et al. (1984)

Characteristics of Rejection Letters and their Effects on Job Applicants

Written Communication

Also cites 17 works outside this index ↓

10.1177/002194368502200201

↗
10.1037/0022-3514.64.2.187

↗
10.2307/378429

↗
10.1177/002194369002700403

↗
10.1177/002194369403100403

↗
10.1177/002194367601400108

↗
10.1177/108056999205500316

↗
10.1177/0893318988002001006

↗
10.1177/108056999706000204

↗
10.1177/108056999405700206

↗
10.1177/002194368802500103

↗
10.1177/108056999205500104

↗
10.1037/0022-3514.51.3.515

↗
10.1177/002194368802500203

↗
10.1177/002194369503200401

↗
10.1177/108056999605900106

↗
10.1177/002194368802500204

↗

CrossRef global citation count: 26 View in citation network →