IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i10p8012-d1147030.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Organizing Emotions throughout Disenfranchised Grief: Virtual Support Group Sensemaking through Emotion Discourses

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Cody Coker

    (Department of Communication, Boise State University, Boise, ID 83725, USA)

  • Sarah E. Riforgiate

    (Department of Communication, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI 53211, USA)

Abstract

Online support groups provide members a space to express emotions and gain emotional support, contributing to individual and organizational sustainability. Communication in these virtual spaces organizes and is simultaneously organized by member interactions and emotion expressions. To better understand how communication contributes to emotion, organizing, and meaning making, this study draws on Weick’s communication sensemaking theory and uses qualitative netnographic methods to analyze interactions in an online pet loss support group. Following pet loss, many American caregivers share their grief over the loss of a pet through online support groups, which help bereaved individuals acquire support, make sense of their experiences, and support similar others. Importantly, existing research indicates that virtual support groups provide members a safe space to engage their emotions. However, competing communication discourses uphold restrictive emotion rules across organized settings and can challenge how individuals perform their emotions. This study uses qualitative netnographic data gathered over 5 months from 106 participants, to better understand how virtual support group members used communication to understand, resist, reify, and reimagine emotions. We found that organizational members grappled with their grief at work and at home, often regulating their negative emotions in pursuit of advancing their workplace productivity and deferring to others’ expectations. Furthermore, although grieving members used communication processes to legitimize the virtual support group as an organizational safe space for displaying authentic emotions, site members controlled their emotions and reinforced managerialist discourses in their communication, demonstrating that emotion discourses are far-reaching and can contribute to or distract from sustainable healing practices. We offer implications regarding how online experiences complicate emotion rules, how safe spaces reinforce professionalism and managerialism, and how organized spaces can promote sustainable practices to support members.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Cody Coker & Sarah E. Riforgiate, 2023. "Organizing Emotions throughout Disenfranchised Grief: Virtual Support Group Sensemaking through Emotion Discourses," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-16, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:10:p:8012-:d:1147030
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/10/8012/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/10/8012/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Minkyung Kim & Elizabeth A. Williams, 2022. "Emotional Sustainability in Human Services Organizations: Cultural and Communicative Paths to Dealing with Emotional Work," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-17, November.
    2. Karl E. Weick & Kathleen M. Sutcliffe & David Obstfeld, 2005. "Organizing and the Process of Sensemaking," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(4), pages 409-421, August.
    3. Hooria Khan & Md Sohel Chowdhury & Dae-seok Kang, 2022. "Leaders’ Emotion Regulation and the Influence of Respect and Entitlement on Employee Silence," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-14, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Carlos Martin-Rios, 2016. "Innovative management control systems in knowledge work: a middle manager perspective," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 181-204, May.
    2. Verena Brinks, 2016. "Situated affect and collective meaning: A community perspective on processes of value creation and commercialization in enthusiast-driven fields," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 48(6), pages 1152-1169, June.
    3. Stefan Gröschl & Patricia Gabaldón & Tobias Hahn, 2019. "The Co-evolution of Leaders’ Cognitive Complexity and Corporate Sustainability: The Case of the CEO of Puma," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 155(3), pages 741-762, March.
    4. Elena Antonacopoulou, 2018. "Energising critique in action and in learning: The GNOSIS 4R Framework," Action Learning: Research and Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(2), pages 102-125, May.
    5. Guiette, Alain & Vandenbempt, Koen, 2017. "Change managerialism and micro-processes of sensemaking during change implementation," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 65-81.
    6. Martina Linnenluecke & Andrew Griffiths & Peter Mumby, 2015. "Executives’ engagement with climate science and perceived need for business adaptation to climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 131(2), pages 321-333, July.
    7. Per Engelseth & Richard Glavee-Geo & Artur Janusz & Enoch Niboi, 2020. "The Emergent Nature of Networked Sustainable Procurement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-18, December.
    8. Femke Hilverda & Margôt Kuttschreuter, 2018. "Online Information Sharing About Risks: The Case of Organic Food," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(9), pages 1904-1920, September.
    9. Jeffery S. McMullen & Dimo Dimov, 2013. "Time and the Entrepreneurial Journey: The Problems and Promise of Studying Entrepreneurship as a Process," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(8), pages 1481-1512, December.
    10. Emil Evenhuis, 2017. "Institutional change in cities and regions: a path dependency approach," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 10(3), pages 509-526.
    11. Minkkinen, Matti, 2019. "The anatomy of plausible futures in policy processes: Comparing the cases of data protection and comprehensive security," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 172-180.
    12. Stea, Diego & Foss, Nicolai J. & Christensen, Peter Holdt, 2015. "Physical separation in the workplace: Separation cues, separation awareness, and employee motivation," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 462-471.
    13. Heather Rosoff & Robert Siko & Richard John & William J. Burns, 2013. "Should I stay or should I go? An experimental study of health and economic government policies following a severe biological agent release," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 121-137, March.
    14. Tiina J. Peltola & Hanna Tiirinki, 2020. "More Than Numbers: Discourses of Health Care Quality in Finland," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(4), pages 21582440209, December.
    15. Rydén, Pernille & Ringberg, Torsten & Wilke, Ricky, 2015. "How Managers' Shared Mental Models of Business–Customer Interactions Create Different Sensemaking of Social Media," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 1-16.
    16. Patrice M. Buzzanell & Colleen Arendt & Rebecca L. Dohrman & Carla B. Zoltowski & Prashant Rajan, 2023. "Engineering Emotion Sustainably: Affective Gendered Organizing of Engineering Identities and Third Space," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-20, March.
    17. Amal Aouadi & Sylvain Marsat, 2018. "Do ESG Controversies Matter for Firm Value? Evidence from International Data," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 151(4), pages 1027-1047, September.
    18. Joseph McManus, 2021. "Emotions and Ethical Decision Making at Work: Organizational Norms, Emotional Dogs, and the Rational Tales They Tell Themselves and Others," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 169(1), pages 153-168, February.
    19. Hendrik Vollmer, 2013. "What kind of game is everyday interaction?," Rationality and Society, , vol. 25(3), pages 370-404, August.
    20. Tongyu Meng & Jamie Newth & Christine Woods, 2022. "Ethical Sensemaking in Impact Investing: Reasons and Motives in the Chinese Renewable Energy Sector," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 179(4), pages 1091-1117, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:10:p:8012-:d:1147030. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.