Abstract
This research explores the dynamics of interpersonal arguing in South Korea by considering cultural influence, individual traits, and contexts. In a cross-cultural study (Study 1) where Koreans (N = 349) were compared to U.S. Americans (N = 237) on basic measures of argument orientations, several interesting contrasts emerged, along with considerable similarity. Koreans evaluated conflicts more positively than Americans even though they were more worried about the relational consequences of arguing. Within the Korean sample, sex difference was pronounced. Study 2 (N = 491) found that power distance orientation was critical individual-level cultural value for Koreans’ argument motivations. When power distance orientation was controlled, argument partner’s social status was significantly associated with Koreans’ motivation to both avoid and approach arguing but not with verbal aggressiveness. The discussion highlights the importance of considering situational as well as individual factors in intercultural studies.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
The translated instruments are available from any of the authors.
The cut-off value to divide younger and older group, 40, was set based on the median age of Korean participants recruited via quota sampling. Hence, people in their twenties and thirties were classified as the younger group whereas people who are 40 or older were classified as the older group. The Korean sample consisted of 167 (48%) participants in the younger group and 182 (52%) participants in the older group while US participants included 173 (73%) in the younger group and 64 (27%) in the older group.
Of note, linear regression analyses for argument related dependent variables where age was used as a continuous variable and sex and education was controlled for showed slightly different results. Age was significantly related to two variables: identity frame, F (2, 582) = 4.19, Adjusted R2 = 0.02, β = −11, p < .05, play frame, F (2, 582) = 12.10, Adjusted R2 = 0.05, β = −11, p < .01.
The level of education was included as one of the predictors of argument motivation in the initial analyses, but it did not predict any of the four argument motivation dimensions; thus, it was excluded in the analyses for RQ4 and RQ5.
References
Brewer, N., P. Mitchell, and N. Weber. 2002. Gender role, organizational status, and conflict management styles. International Journal of Conflict Management 13: 78–94. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb022868.
Brockner, J., G. Ackerman, J. Greenberg, M. Gelfand, A. Francesco, Z. Chen, and D.L. Shapiro. 2001. Culture and procedural justice: The influence of power distance on reactions to voice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 37: 300–315. https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.2000.1451.
Callahan, W.A. 1999. Negotiating cultural boundaries: Confucianism and trans/national identity in Korea. Journal for Cultural Research 3: 329–364. https://doi.org/10.1080/14797589909367170.
Charles, M., and K. Bradley. 2009. Indulging our gendered selves? Sex segregation by field of study in 44 countries. American Journal of Sociology 114: 924–976. https://doi.org/10.1086/595942.
Cho, Y., and G.N. McLean. 2018. Korean women in leadership. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Cho, M.K., and A. Sillars. 2015. Face threat and facework strategies when family (health) secrets are revealed: A comparison of South Korea and the United States. Journal of Communication 65: 535–557. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12161.
Choi, H. 2009. “Wise mother, good wife”: A transcultural discursive construct in modern Korea. Journal of Korean Studies 14: 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1353/jks.2009.0004.
Dale, A., S. Arbor, and M. Procter. 1988. Doing secondary analysis. London: Unwin Hyman.
Gudykunst, W.B., Y. Matsumoto, S. Ting-Toomey, T. Nishida, K.S. Kim, and S. Heyman. 1996. The influence of cultural individualism-collectivism, self construals, and individual values on communication styles across cultures. Human Communication Research 22: 510–543. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1996.tb00377.x.
Gudykunst, W.B., Y.C. Yoon, and T. Nishida. 1987. The influence of individualism-collectivism on perceptions of communication in ingroup and outgroup relationships. Communication Monographs 54: 295–306. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1996.tb00377.x.
Fagenson, E.A. 1990. Perceived masculine and feminine attributes examined as a function of individuals’ sex and level in the organizational power hierarchy: A test of four theoretical perspectives. Journal of Applied Psychology 75: 204–211. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.75.2.204.
Hample, D. 2003. Arguing skill. In Handbook of communication and social interaction skills, ed. J.O. Greene and B.R. Burleson, 439–478. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Hample, D. 2005. Arguing: Exchanging reasons face to face. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hample, D. (in press). Argumentativeness and verbal aggressiveness are two things apiece. In C. Winkler (Ed.), Networking argument. New York: Taylor and Francis.
Hample, D. 2018. Interpersonal arguing. New York: Peter Lang.
Hample, D., and D. Anagondahalli. 2015. Understandings of arguing in India and the United States: Argument frames, personalization of conflict, argumentativeness, and verbal aggressiveness. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research 44: 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/17475759.2014.1000939.
Hample, D., and I.A. Cionea. 2010. Taking conflict personally and its connections with aggressiveness. In Arguments, aggression, and conflict: New directions in theory and research, ed. T.A. Avtgis and A.S. Rancer, 372–387. New York: Routledge, Taylor, and Francis.
Hample, D., Y. Dai, and M. Zhan. 2016. Argument stakes: Preliminary conceptualizations and empirical descriptions. Argumentation and Advocacy 52: 199–213. https://doi.org/10.1080/00028533.2016.11821870.
Hample, D., and J.M. Dallinger. 1995. A Lewinian perspective on taking conflict personally: Revision, refinement, and validation of the instrument. Communication Quarterly 43: 297–319. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463379509369978.
Hample, D., B. Han, and D. Payne. 2010. The aggressiveness of playful arguments. Argumentation 24: 405–421. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-009-9173-8.
Hample, D., and A.L. Irions. 2015. Arguing to display identity. Argumentation 29: 389–416. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-015-9351-9.
Hample, D., A.S. Richards, and C. Skubisz. 2013. Blurting. Communication Monographs 80: 503–532.
Hamilton, M., and D. Hample. 2011. Testing hierarchical models of argumentativeness and verbal aggressiveness. Communication Methods and Measures 5: 250–273. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2011.596991.
Heine, S.J. 2001. Self as cultural product: An examination of East Asian and North American selves. Journal of Personality 69: 881–905. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6494.696168.
Hofstede, G. 1980. Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Hofstede, G. 1985. The interaction between national and organizational value systems [1]. Journal of Management Studies 22: 347–357. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.1985.tb00001.x.
Hofstede, G. 2003. Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Hui, C.H., and H.C. Triandis. 1986. Individualism-collectivism a study of cross-cultural researchers. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 17: 225–248. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002186017002006.
Infante, D.A., and A.S. Rancer. 1982. A conceptualization and measure of argumentativeness. Journal of Personality Assessment 46: 72–80. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4601_13.
Infante, D.A., and C.J. Wigley III. 1986. Verbal aggressiveness: An interpersonal model and measure. Communications Monographs 53: 61–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637758609376126.
Itoh, Y. 1991. Socio-cultural backgrounds of Japanese interpersonal communication style. Civilisations 31: 101–128.
Ivanhoe, P.J., and S. Kim (eds.). 2016. Confucianism, a habit of the heart: Bellah, civil religion, and East Asia. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Jabs, L.B. 2005. Collectivism and conflict: Conflict response styles in Karamoja, Uganda. International Journal of Conflict Management 16: 354–378.
Johnston, M.P. 2017. Secondary data analysis: A method of which the time has come. Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Libraries 3: 619–626.
Kim, H., and H.R. Markus. 1999. Deviance or uniqueness, harmony or conformity? A cultural analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 77: 785–800. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.77.4.785.
Kim, J. 2017. # iamafeminist as the “mother tag”: feminist identification and activism against misogyny on Twitter in South Korea. Feminist Media Studies 17: 804–820. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2017.1283343.
Kim, M.S., H.J. Kim, K.S. Aune, J.E. Hunter, and J.S. Kim. 2001. The effect of culture and self-construals on predispositions toward verbal communication. Human Communication Research 27: 382–408. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2001.tb00786.x.
Kim (2016) Beyond a disciplinary society: Reimagining Confucian democracy in South Korea. In Ivanhoe, P. J. and Kim. M. S. (Eds.), Confucianism, a habit of the heart (pp. 113–138). Albany: State University of New York Press.
Kirkman, B.L., G. Chen, J.L. Farh, Z.X. Chen, and K.B. Lowe. 2009. Individual power distance orientation and follower reactions to transformational leaders: A cross-level, cross-cultural examination. Academy of Management Journal 52: 744–764. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2009.43669971.
Kluckhohn, C. 1962. Culture and behavior. Oxford: Free Press Glencoe.
Kuhn, D. 1991. The skills of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Loi, R., L.W. Lam, and K.W. Chan. 2012. Coping with job insecurity: The role of procedural justice, ethical leadership and power distance orientation. Journal of Business Ethics 108: 361–372. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-1095-3.
Malis, R.S., and M.E. Roloff. 2006. Demand/withdraw patterns in serial arguments: Implications for well-being. Human Communication Research 32: 198–216. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2006.00009.x.
Markus, H.R., and S. Kitayama. 1991. Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review 98: 224–253. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.98.2.224.
Mertler, C.A., and R.A. Vannatta. 2002. Advanced and multivariate statistical methods: Practical application and interpretation. 2nd ed. Los Angeles: Pyrczak.
Minkov, M. 2018. A revision of Hofstede’s model of national culture: Old evidence and new data from 56 countries. Cross Cultural & Strategic Management 25: 231–256. https://doi.org/10.1108/CCSM-03-2017-0033.
Oetzel, J., S. Ting-Toomey, T. Masumoto, Y. Yokochi, X. Pan, J. Takai, and R. Wilcox. 2001. Face and facework in conflict: A cross-cultural comparison of China, Germany, Japan, and the United States. Communication Monographs 68: 235–258. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637750128061.
Oliver, R.T. 1971. Communication and culture in ancient India and China. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.
Park MS, Kim MS (1992) Communication practices in Korea. Communication Quarterly, 398–404. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463379209369857.
Rancer, A.S., and T.A. Avtgis. 2014. Argumentative and aggressive communication: Theory, research, and application. 2nd ed. New York: Peter Lang.
Rapanta, C., and D. Hample. 2015. Orientations to interpersonal arguing in the United Arab Emirates, with Comparisons to the United States, China, and India. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research 44: 263–287. https://doi.org/10.1080/17475759.2015.1081392.
Rhee, E., J.S. Uleman, and H.K. Lee. 1996. Variations in collectivism and individualism by ingroup and culture: Confirmatory factor analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 71: 1037–1054. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.5.1037.
Schmitt, D.P., A. Realo, M. Voracek, and J. Allik. 2008. Why can’t a man be more like a woman? Sex differences in big five personality traits across 55 cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 94: 168–182. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.94.1.168.
Shim, T.Y.J., M.S. Kim, and J.N. Martin. 2008. Changing Korea: Understanding culture and communication, vol. 10. New York: Peter Lang.
Sillars, A., L.J. Roberts, K.E. Leonard, and T. Dun. 2000. Cognition during marital conflict: The relationship of thought and talk. Journal of Social and Personal relationships 17: 479–502. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407500174002.
Son, A. 2006. Confucianism and the lack of the development of the self among Korean American women. Pastoral Psychology 54: 325–336. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11089-005-0003-0.
Suzuki, S., and A.S. Rancer. 1994. Argumentativeness and verbal aggressiveness: Testing for conceptual and measurement equivalence across cultures. Communication Monographs 61: 256–279. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637759409376336.
Ting-Toomey, S. 1985. Toward a theory of conflict and culture. In Communication, culture, and organizational processes, ed. W.B. Gudykunst, L.P. Stewart, and S. Ting-Toomey, 71–86. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Ting-Toomey, S. 2010. Applying dimensional values in understanding intercultural communication. Communication Monographs 77: 169–180. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751003790428.
Triandis, H.C., and M.J. Gelfand. 1998. Converging measurement of horizontal and vertical individualism and collectivism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 74: 118–128. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.1.118.
Xie, Y., D. Hample, and X. Wang. 2015. A cross-cultural analysis of argument predispositions in China: Argumentativeness, verbal aggressiveness, argument frames, and personalization of conflict. Argumentation 29: 265–284. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-015-9352-8.
Xie, Y., S. Shi, S. Evans, and D. Hample. 2013. Exploring the meaning of argument in China. In D. Mohammed and Lewiński (Eds.) Virtues of argumentation: Proceedings of the 10th international conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA) (pp. 1–16). Windsor, ON: OSSA. ISBN: 978-0-920233-66-5.
Yoo, B., N. Donthu, and T. Lenartowicz. 2011. Measuring Hofstede’s five dimensions of cultural values at the individual level: Development and validation of CVSCALE. Journal of International Consumer Marketing 23: 193–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/08961530.2011.578059.
Yum, J.O. 1988. The impact of Confucianism on interpersonal relationships and communication patterns in East Asia. Communication Monographs 55: 374–388. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637758809376178.
Acknowledgements
We want to thank Alan Sillars for his feedback on an earlier version of this paper. This work was supported by BK21 + Project of Korea National Research Foundation (21B20130011127). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the views of the funding agencies.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kim, Y., Chung, S. & Hample, D. How do Culture, Individual Traits, and Context Influence Koreans’ Interpersonal Arguing? Toward a More Comprehensive Analysis of Interpersonal Arguing. Argumentation 34, 117–141 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-019-09482-2
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-019-09482-2