All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Attributions and Outcomes: Hurtful Communication in Families
Unformatted Document Text:  Attributions and Outcomes 8 dramatically underestimated recipients’ reactions to the messages and also underestimated the negative effects the hurtful messages had on the relationship. Additionally, recipients of hurtful messages viewed senders as more hostile than senders believed themselves to be. Likewise, recipients thought senders liked them less than senders claimed they did, and recipients felt more rejected by senders than senders realized. Senders also claimed they apologized more than recipients claimed they did, and recipients indicated that senders acted “unconcerned” and “did nothing” much more than senders indicated they did. In short, recipients perceived that the hurtful message had a more negative effect on their relationships than senders suspected, and this was the case both temporarily and in the long term (Leary et al., 1998). According to Betancourt (1990), the fundamental attribution error predisposes people to attribute others’ negative behaviors to internal causes and their own negative behaviors to external causes. As such, receivers should perceive the cause of hurtful messages to be internally motivated and therefore under the control of the sender (i.e., intentional); whereas senders of hurtful messages should perceive their own behavior as externally motivated and therefore beyond their control (i.e., unintentional). H 1: Senders who direct a hurtful message at a family member will perceive the message as less intentional than recipients who receive a hurtful message from a family member. Cramer (2000) reported that individuals who felt they were intentionally hurt reported lower levels of relationship satisfaction than individuals who felt they were hurt by accident. Since receivers should perceive hurtful messages to be more intentional than senders, receivers should also report lower levels of relationship satisfaction than by senders (Cramer, 2000). Therefore, the following hypothesis was proposed:

Authors: Young, Stacy., Kubicka, Tara., Tucker, Caralyn., McCoy, Jamie., Kanaan, Kanaan., Johnson, Jarvis., Chavez-Appel, Desi. and Dinger, Michelle.
first   previous   Page 8 of 23   next   last



background image
Attributions and Outcomes
8
dramatically underestimated recipients’ reactions to the messages and also underestimated the
negative effects the hurtful messages had on the relationship. Additionally, recipients of hurtful
messages viewed senders as more hostile than senders believed themselves to be. Likewise,
recipients thought senders liked them less than senders claimed they did, and recipients felt more
rejected by senders than senders realized. Senders also claimed they apologized more than
recipients claimed they did, and recipients indicated that senders acted “unconcerned” and “did
nothing” much more than senders indicated they did. In short, recipients perceived that the
hurtful message had a more negative effect on their relationships than senders suspected, and this
was the case both temporarily and in the long term (Leary et al., 1998).
According to Betancourt (1990), the fundamental attribution error predisposes people to
attribute others’ negative behaviors to internal causes and their own negative behaviors to
external causes. As such, receivers should perceive the cause of hurtful messages to be
internally motivated and therefore under the control of the sender (i.e., intentional); whereas
senders of hurtful messages should perceive their own behavior as externally motivated and
therefore beyond their control (i.e., unintentional).
H 1: Senders who direct a hurtful message at a family member will perceive the message
as less intentional than recipients who receive a hurtful message from a family member.
Cramer (2000) reported that individuals who felt they were intentionally hurt reported
lower levels of relationship satisfaction than individuals who felt they were hurt by accident.
Since receivers should perceive hurtful messages to be more intentional than senders, receivers
should also report lower levels of relationship satisfaction than by senders (Cramer, 2000).
Therefore, the following hypothesis was proposed:


Convention
Convention is an application service for managing large or small academic conferences, annual meetings, and other types of events!
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 8 of 23   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.