Argumentative and Aggressive Communication in Bulgaria: Testing for Conceptual and Methodological Equivalence

This study sought to investigate argumentative and aggressive communication and to test for conceptual/methodological equivalence in the Bulgarian culture. One hundred and twenty six Bulgarian residents completed short forms concerning argumentativeness and verbal aggressiveness. Confirmatory factor analysis revealed support for conceptual and methodological equivalence of both constructs. However, gender differences that have historically been observed in other cultures were not observed in Bulgaria. The findings support the growing body of research indicating that argumentativeness and verbal aggressiveness are etic in nature.     

An Examination of Aggression and Adaption Traits with Moral Foundation

ABSTRACT

Moral Foundation Theory forwards that morality is a traitlike disposition that guides one's behaviors, attitudes, and communication. This study examined the relationship between participants' moral foundations and their aggressive and adaptation communication traits. Results of this study suggest that the foundations that concern others (i.e., harm/care and fairness/reciprocity) were associated negatively to verbal aggressiveness, argumentativeness, and Machiavellianism and associated positively with responsiveness, assertiveness, and cognitive flexibility. The foundations that concern socially binding constructs (i.e., in-group/loyalty, authority/respect, and purity/sanctity) were negatively related to Machiavellianism and cognitive flexibility.     

Acculturation and Communication Traits: A study of Cross-Cultural Adaptation among Chinese in America

This study investigated the relationships between acculturation and communication traits. One hundred and seventy-five Chinese across from the United States participated in this study. Participants received a battery of questionnaires in the mail, including the measures of communication apprehension, willingness to communicate, communication competence, argumentativeness, general disclosiveness and cultural identity. Results indicated that as proportion of life in America increased, Chinese identified more with American culture; in turn, they became less fearful, more willing and competent in communication. Their self-disclosure also became less frequent and intimate, but more positive, with longer time living in America. These findings suggest that culture shapes communication traits through exposure to and identification with the host culture to some extent.     

Need for Cognition as a Mediating Variable Between Aggressive Communication Traits and Tolerance for Disagreement

This study examined the need for cognition as a mediator between aggressive communication traits and tolerance for disagreement. Previous research suggests that argumentativeness is a positive predictor of tolerance for disagreement, while verbal aggressiveness is a negative predictor of tolerance for disagreement. Our findings indicate that need for cognition positively mediates the relationship between argumentativeness and tolerance for disagreement, as well as verbal aggressiveness and tolerance for disagreement.     

Approaching and avoiding arguments: The role of epistemological beliefs, need for cognition, and extraverted personality traits

Because argumentation may promote deeper processing of content, this study examined factors affecting students’ dispositions to engage in argument, specifically epistemological beliefs, need for cognition, and extraversion (assertiveness and warmth). An instrument developed by [Infante and Rancer, 1982] was used to measure dispositions to approach or avoid arguments. Subjects were 238 undergraduates who completed surveys of the relevant constructs. Contrary to expectation that epistemological beliefs would predict the approach component by affecting the perceived usefulness of argumentation, regression analysis indicated that epistemological beliefs instead predicted the avoidance component (as did a desire to maintain warm relationships). Need for cognition predicted the approach component, whereas assertiveness predicted both. The need to better understand why some students avoid arguments is discussed.     

Relationship with instructor and other variables influencing student evaluations of instruction

This study examined some of the factors which influence college students’ evaluations of their instructors. Data were collected from 557 students enrolled in a basic speech communication course. Overall, a student's relationship with the instructor was the best predictor of the student's evaluation of the instructor. This study lends partial support to the idea that students evaluate male and female instructors differently. The variables examined in this study were better predictors of student evaluation of female than male instructors.     

Organizational Dissent and Argumentativeness: A Comparative Analysis between American and Indian Organizations

Individuals were recruited from India (1111) and the United States (1087) to complete a survey analyzing the relationship between organizational dissent and argumentativeness. Correlation analysis revealed contrary to previous research, argumentativeness and the three types of organizational dissent were not positively correlated. Hierarchical regression modeling illustrated nationality to have a significant effect on the relationship between argumentativeness and displaced dissent and between argumentativeness and latent dissent. An individual's organizational tenure did not significantly influence the relationship between dissent and argumentativeness. Significant effects emerged between dissent and argumentativeness for the interaction between nationality and an individual's organizational tenure.     

Orientations to Interpersonal Arguing in the United Arab Emirates,with Comparisons to the United States,China, and India

United Arab Emirates (UAE) is currently a hub of 200 nationalities with a variety of lifestyles and religions. Nonetheless, the attitudes of locals towards reasoning with others have not yet been investigated. This investigation studied fundamental orientations to arguing among UAE residents (N = 157), with a range of self-report instruments including argument frames, personalization of conflict, argumentativeness, and verbal aggressiveness. Data analysis showed that UAE respondents had responses comparable to three comparison countries (US, India, and China) in terms of argument motives, but they manifested differences regarding argument frames and taking conflict personally. These are discussed in relation to cultural dimensions and their significance for business and education.     

Reported Argumentativeness and Verbal Aggressiveness Levels: The Influence of Type of Argument

Arguments in interpersonal relationships can be divided into two types: public issue arguments and personal issue arguments. This study examines the ability of type of argument, trait argumentativeness and verbal aggressiveness, and gender to predict reported argumentativeness and verbal aggressiveness levels related to a particular argument episode. Reported argumentativeness levels were higher in the public argument condition, and reported verbal aggressiveness levels were higher in the personal argument condition. Trait argumentativeness predicted reported argumentativeness levels better in the public argument condition than the personal argument condition, suggesting that type of argument may serve as a moderator for the relationship between trait argumentativeness levels and argument-specific argumentativeness levels. Implications for using these two scales to examine interpersonal argument are discussed.     

The Effects of Self-Construal and Perceived Control on Argumentativeness and Communication Apprehension

This study investigates the relationships between self-construal, perceived control in communication interaction, and communication predispositions (e.g., argumentativeness and communication apprehension [CA]). The results indicate that the independent self-construal constitutes a significant predictor of perceived internal control in interaction, whereas the interdependent self-construal constitutes a significant predictor of perceived external (chance and powerful others) control in interaction. Moreover, the findings of this research indicate that perceived internal control constitutes a significant predictor of argumentativeness, whereas perceived external control is a significant predictor of CA. Contrary to expectations, the interdependent self-construal also constitutes a predictor of perceived internal control, which in turn constitutes a significant predictor of CA.