Date: 25 Nov 2009
The Aggressiveness of Playful Arguments
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
Some people report that they argue for play. We question whether and how often such arguments are mutually entertaining for both participants. Play is a frame for arguing, and the framing may not always be successful in laminating the eristic nature of interpersonal argumentation. Previous research and theory suggest that playfulness may be associated with aggression. Respondents (N = 199) supplied self-report data on their arguing behaviors and orientations. We found support for the hypothesis that self-reported playfulness and aggression are directly associated. We found less evidence for our hypothesized inverse association between self-reported playfulness and indices of cooperation and avoidance. Self-reports of playfulness are not significantly associated with expert coders’ ratings of either playfulness or aggressiveness. The claim that an argument is playful should be met with skepticism, although playful arguments are possible.
Bing Han and David Payne made equal contributions to this project, and are listed alphabetically.
Bateson, G. 1987. A theory of play and fantasy. In Steps to an ecology of mind (pp. 177–193). Northvale NJ: Jason Aronson. Chapter originally published, 1955.
Bem, S.L. 1974. The measurement of psychological androgeny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 42: 155–162.CrossRef
Dowd, E.T., C.R. Milne, and S.L. Wise. 1991. The therapeutic reactance scale: A measure of psychological reactance. Journal of Counseling & Development 69: 541–545.
Goffman, E. 1974. Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
Hample, D. 2003. Arguing skill. In Handbook of communication and social interaction skill, vol. 11, ed. J.O. Greene and B.R. Burleson, 439–478. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hample, D. 2005. Argument frames: An initial investigation into operationalizations. In Critical problems in argumentation, ed. C.A. Willard, 568–576. Washington DC: National Communication Association.
Hample, D. 2008. Reflections on framing arguments as playful. Paper presented to the biennial Wake Forest Conference on Argumentation, Venice, Italy.
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.
Hample, D., B. Warner, and H. Norton. 2006. The effects of arguing expectations and predispositions on perceptions of argument quality and playfulness. Argumentation and Advocacy 43: 1–13.
Hample, D., B. Warner, and D. Young. 2009. Framing and editing interpersonal arguments. Argumentation 23: 21–37.CrossRef
Infante, D.A., and A.S. Rancer. 1982. A conceptualization and measure of argumentativeness. Journal of Personality Assessment 46: 72–80.CrossRef
Infante, D.A., and C.J. Wigley. 1986. Verbal aggressiveness: An interpersonal model and measure. Communication Monographs 53: 61–69.CrossRef
Levine, T.R., M.J. Beatty, S. Simon, M.A. Hamilton, R. Buck, and R.M. Chory-Assad. 2004. The dimensionality of the verbal aggressiveness scale. Communication Monographs 71: 245–268.CrossRef
McCroskey, J.C. 1978. Validity of the PRCA as an index of oral communication apprehension. Communication Monographs 45: 192–203.CrossRef
O’Keefe, B.J., and P.J. Benoit. 1982. Children’s arguments. In Advances in argumentation theory and research, ed. J.R. Cox and C.A. Willard, 154–183. Carbondale IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
- The Aggressiveness of Playful Arguments
Volume 24, Issue 4 , pp 405-421
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer Netherlands
- Additional Links
- Argument frames
- Verbal aggressiveness
- Industry Sectors