All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Attributions and Outcomes: Hurtful Communication in Families
Unformatted Document Text:  Attributions and Outcomes 9 H 2: Senders who direct a hurtful message at a family member will report higher levels of relational satisfaction than those who receive a hurtful message from a family member. Perceptions of intentionality are one of the main interpretations people make when evaluating others’ behavior (Stamp & Knapp, 1990; Weiner, 1995). Messages perceived to have been intentionally spoken often have different consequences than those that are seen as unintentional (Knapp, 1984). Previous research (e.g., Vangelisti & Young, 2000) has revealed that recipients who viewed hurtful comments as intentional were likely to relationally distance themselves from the source of their emotional pain. This example (i.e., distancing) is just one type of negative communicative response that people can employ. When people think they have been hurt on purpose, in short, they may be more likely to respond with negative behavior and less likely to react productively/positively to the hurt-evoking comments. To investigate this premise further, we posited the following hypotheses: H 3a: The extent to which recipients view a hurtful message as intentional will be directly associated with negative communicative responses, such that recipients will report engaging in more Active Distancing, more Negative Affect Expression, more Distributive Communication, more Avoidance/Denial, and more Violent Communication/Threats. H 3b: The extent to which recipients view a hurtful message as intentional will be inversely associated with positive communicative responses, such that recipients will report engaging in less Integrative Communication. People in satisfying relationships tend to view their partners in the best possible light; whereas people in unsatisfying relationships tend to view their partners in the worst possible light (Fincham et al., 1987). The attributions people make about their partner’s behavior

Authors: Young, Stacy., Kubicka, Tara., Tucker, Caralyn., McCoy, Jamie., Kanaan, Kanaan., Johnson, Jarvis., Chavez-Appel, Desi. and Dinger, Michelle.
first   previous   Page 9 of 23   next   last



background image
Attributions and Outcomes
9
H 2: Senders who direct a hurtful message at a family member will report higher levels
of relational satisfaction than those who receive a hurtful message from a family member.
Perceptions of intentionality are one of the main interpretations people make when
evaluating others’ behavior (Stamp & Knapp, 1990; Weiner, 1995). Messages perceived to have
been intentionally spoken often have different consequences than those that are seen as
unintentional (Knapp, 1984). Previous research (e.g., Vangelisti & Young, 2000) has revealed
that recipients who viewed hurtful comments as intentional were likely to relationally distance
themselves from the source of their emotional pain. This example (i.e., distancing) is just one
type of negative communicative response that people can employ. When people think they have
been hurt on purpose, in short, they may be more likely to respond with negative behavior and
less likely to react productively/positively to the hurt-evoking comments. To investigate this
premise further, we posited the following hypotheses:
H 3a: The extent to which recipients view a hurtful message as intentional will be
directly associated with negative communicative responses, such that recipients will
report engaging in more Active Distancing, more Negative Affect Expression, more
Distributive Communication, more Avoidance/Denial, and more Violent
Communication/Threats.
H 3b: The extent to which recipients view a hurtful message as intentional will be
inversely associated with positive communicative responses, such that recipients will
report engaging in less Integrative Communication.
People in satisfying relationships tend to view their partners in the best possible light;
whereas people in unsatisfying relationships tend to view their partners in the worst possible
light (Fincham et al., 1987). The attributions people make about their partner’s behavior


Convention
All Academic Convention makes running your annual conference simple and cost effective. It is your online solution for abstract management, peer review, and scheduling for your annual meeting or convention.
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 9 of 23   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.