| Popis: |
This study examines how debate judges' perceptions of argumentativeness and verbal aggressiveness are influenced by sex in the "reason for decision" stage of parliamentary debate. Participants viewed one of four videos that manipulated the sex of the actor and the level of verbal aggressiveness used to express disagreement after a debate round. The results suggest that judges perceive female debaters as significantly more verbally aggressive than male debaters in their reasons for decisions. Other sex differences for perceived argumentativeness and verbal aggressiveness were not significant. The results also indicate that perceived debater argumentativeness is positively related to perceived debater credibility; conversely, perceived debater verbal aggressiveness is negatively related to perceived debater credibility. Finally, the results suggest that female debaters are perceived as significantly lower in interpersonal justice than male debaters in reason for decisions. |
