Page 190 - Essentials of Human Communication

Conflict Management Strategies 169

verbal aggressiveness anD arguMentativeness
An especially interesting perspective on conflict has emerged from
work on verbal aggressiveness and argumentativeness, concepts that
were isolated by communication researchers but quickly interested
people in other disciplines such as psychology, education, and man-
agement, among others (Infante, 1988; Rancer, 1998; Wigley, 1998;
Rancer & Avtgis, 2006). Understanding these two concepts will help
you understand some of the reasons why things go wrong and some
of the ways in which you can use conflict to improve rather than dam-
age your relationships (see Table 8.2).
Verbal aggressiveness is a method of winning an argument by
inflicting psychological pain, by attacking the other person’s self-
concept. The technique is a type of disconfirmation in that it seeks
to discredit the individual’s view of self. Argumentativeness, a
quality to be cultivated rather than avoided, refers to your willing-
ness to argue for a point of view, your tendency to speak your mind
on significant issues. It’s the mode of dealing with disagreements vieWpOints
that is the preferable alternative to verbal aggressiveness (Infante & your Conflict style
Rancer, 1996). How would you describe your conflict style in your own close
Argumentativeness differs greatly from verbal aggressiveness relationships in terms of competing-avoiding-compromising-
(Rancer & Avtgis, 2006). Argumentativeness is constructive in a vari- accommodating- collaborating? Is it the same at work?
ety of communication situations and leads to relationship satisfaction.
In organizations, it enhances relationships between subordinates and supervisors. Verbal
aggressiveness is destructive and leads to relationship dissatisfaction. In organizations, it
demoralizes workers.
Argumentative individuals are generally seen as having greater credibility; they’re seen as Watch the Video “Jim
more trustworthy, committed, and dynamic than their aggressive counterparts. In addition, and Jack Joust” at
MyCommunicationLab
argumentativeness is likely to increase your power of persuasion and will also increase the
likelihood that you’ll be seen as a leader. Aggressiveness tactics, on the other hand, decrease
your power and your likelihood of being seen as a leader.

Table 8.2 Differences between verbal aggressiveness and argumentativeness
Here are just a few differences between being verbally aggressive and arguing (Atvgis & Rancer, 2010; Infante & Rancer,
1996; Rancer & Atvgis, 2006). As you read this table consider your own conflict tendencies.
verbal aggressiveness argumentativeness
Is destructive; the outcomes are negative in a variety Is constructive; the outcomes are positive in a variety of
of communication situations. communication situations.
Leads to relationship dissatisfaction, not surprising for a Leads to relationship satisfaction.
strategy that aims to attack another’s self-concept.
May lead to relationship violence. May prevent relationship violence, especially in domestic
relationships.

Damages organizational life and demoralizes workers on enhances organizational life; for example, subordinates prefer
varied levels. supervisors who encourage argumentativeness.
prevents meaningful parent-child communication and makes enhances parent-child communication and enables parents to
corporal punishment more likely. gain greater compliance.
Decreases the user’s credibility, in part because it’s seen as a increases the user’s credibility; argumentatives are seen as
tactic to discredit the person rather than address the argument. trustworthy, committed, and dynamic.

Decreases the user’s power of persuasion. increases the user’s power of persuasion; argumentatives are
more likely to be seen as leaders.