All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Argumentativeness and verbal aggressiveness: Type of argument as a situational constraint
Unformatted Document Text:  Argumentativeness 7 argumentative behavior to validate the original scale). Then, individuals reported an instance of the other type of argument and again filled out the scales in relation to that instance. Public issue arguments are expected to involve more argumentative behavior for several reasons. One, these arguments have fewer relational implications for the individuals involved. Therefore, emotions may be lower and argumentative behavior may be more likely. Two, Dowling and Flint (1990) talk about the negative views that some individuals have toward arguing. In regards to public issue arguments, this is suspected to only be found in low argumentatives. High argumentatives should see these arguments as game like and fun. However, both high and low argumentatives are expected to view personal issue arguments more negatively, because of their greater implications for behavior and greater potential to harm the relationship (Author, 2000). Therefore, individuals will probably seek to avoid these arguments when possible and to minimize the time spent in these arguments. This should lead to less argumentative behavior during these arguments. Because of the greater relational implications, emotions may run higher in the personal issue arguments, possibly leading to less ability to argue effectively and greater chances of verbal aggressiveness. H1: Reported levels of argumentative behavior will be higher in the public issue argument condition than the personal argument condition. In addition, past research has shown that males have been higher in argumentativeness (Infante, 1982; Nicotera & Rancer, 1994). Will this finding hold true for both types of arguments? Perhaps because public issue arguments are “game like,” these may be arguments that males enjoy enacting together. Does a tendency for males to exhibit greater argument behavior also generalize to personal issue arguments, which are more influential for the relationship?

Authors: Johnson, Amy.
first   previous   Page 7 of 24   next   last



background image
Argumentativeness 7
argumentative behavior to validate the original scale). Then, individuals reported an instance of
the other type of argument and again filled out the scales in relation to that instance.
Public issue arguments are expected to involve more argumentative behavior for several
reasons. One, these arguments have fewer relational implications for the individuals involved.
Therefore, emotions may be lower and argumentative behavior may be more likely. Two,
Dowling and Flint (1990) talk about the negative views that some individuals have toward
arguing. In regards to public issue arguments, this is suspected to only be found in low
argumentatives. High argumentatives should see these arguments as game like and fun.
However, both high and low argumentatives are expected to view personal issue arguments more
negatively, because of their greater implications for behavior and greater potential to harm the
relationship (Author, 2000). Therefore, individuals will probably seek to avoid these arguments
when possible and to minimize the time spent in these arguments. This should lead to less
argumentative behavior during these arguments. Because of the greater relational implications,
emotions may run higher in the personal issue arguments, possibly leading to less ability to argue
effectively and greater chances of verbal aggressiveness.
H1: Reported levels of argumentative behavior will be higher in the public issue
argument condition than the personal argument condition.
In addition, past research has shown that males have been higher in argumentativeness
(Infante, 1982; Nicotera & Rancer, 1994). Will this finding hold true for both types of
arguments? Perhaps because public issue arguments are “game like,” these may be arguments
that males enjoy enacting together. Does a tendency for males to exhibit greater argument
behavior also generalize to personal issue arguments, which are more influential for the
relationship?


Convention
All Academic Convention is the premier solution for your association's abstract management solutions needs.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 7 of 24   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.