Beliefs about arguing as predictors of trait argumentativeness: Implications for training in argument and conflict management

Autor:	Robert A. Baukus, Roberta L. Kosberg, Andrew S. Rancer
Rok vydání:	1992
Předmět:	Communication education Dysfunctional family Variance (accounting) humanities Language and Linguistics Education Argumentation theory Argument Conflict resolution Trait Conflict management Set (psychology) Psychology Social psychology
Zdroj:	Communication Education. 41:375-387
ISSN:	1479-5795 0363-4523
DOI:	10.1080/03634529209378899
Popis:	Previous research suggests that altering predispositions toward communication may be an effective prerequisite in training efforts that emphasize communication skill development. Utilizing a theoretical framework that maintains that a predisposition is controlled by a set of beliefs, this study sought to (a) identify beliefs about arguing that could explain variance in argumentativeness, and (b) determine beliefs that discriminate individuals who vary in the trait. Five composite beliefs about arguing (enjoyment, self‐concept, pragmatic outcomes, dysfunctional outcomes, and ego‐involvement) were found to explain significant variance in underlying motivation to argue and to discriminate between individuals who vary in the predisposition. Implications of the identification and use of these beliefs for communication pedagogy and curriculum design in argumentation and conflict management courses are discussed.
Databáze:	OpenAIRE
Externí odkaz:	https://explore.openaire.eu/search/publication?articleId=doi_________::591f41383aaa320ee8ae9d97dd1a8a1e https://doi.org/10.1080/03634529209378899 Zobrazit plný text záznamu