China has a longstanding tradition of stressing the values of harmony and coherence, and Chinese society has often been portrayed as a culture in which conflict avoidance is viewed more positively than direct confrontation and argumentation. In order to evaluate the validity of this claim, this paper sketches Chinese people’s feelings and understandings about interpersonal arguing by reporting results of a data collection in China, using measures of argumentativeness, verbal aggressiveness, argument frames, and personalization of conflict. These results were compared to those from a US sample. Chinese and US data differed in complex ways, but did not show Chinese respondents to be more avoidant. The Chinese correlations among variables were a reasonable match to expectations based on Western argumentation theories, although they did not replicate the US results precisely. The paper offers evidence that Chinese respondents had a more sophisticated understanding of interpersonal arguing than their US counterparts, and were more sensitive to the constructive possibilities of face-to-face disagreement.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Avtgis, T.A., and A.S. Rancer. 2004. Personalization of conflict across cultures: A comparison among the United States, New Zealand, and Australia. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research 33: 109–118.
Becker, C.B. 1986. Reasons for the lack of argumentation and debate in the Far East. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 10(1): 75–92.
Bresnahan, M.J., S.M. Shearman, S.Y. Lee, R. Ohashi, and D. Mosher. 2002. Personal and cultural differences in responding to criticism in three countries. Asian Journal of Social Psychology 5(2): 93–105.
Garrett, M. 1993. Pathos reconsidered from the perspective of classical Chinese rhetorical theories. Quarterly Journal of Speech 79(1): 19–39.
Gernet, J. 1995. Buddhism in Chinese society: An economic history from the fifth to the tenth Centuries. New York: Columbia University Press.
Hample, D. 2003. Arguing skill. In Handbook of communication and social interaction skills, ed. J.O. Greene, and B.R. Burleson, 439–478. Mahwah: Erlbaum.
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. doi: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., 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. Han, and D. Payne. 2010. The aggressiveness of playful arguments. Argumentation 24: 405–421.
Hample, D., A.S. Richards, and C. Skubisz. 2013. Blurting. Communication Monographs 80: 503–532.
Hample, D., B. Warner, and D. Young. 2009. Framing and editing interpersonal arguments. Argumentation 23: 21–37.
Hsu, C.F. 2007. A cross-cultural comparison of communication orientations between Americans and Taiwanese. Communication Quarterly 55(3): 359–374.
Infante, D.A., and A.S. Rancer. 1982. A conceptualization and measure of argumentativeness. Journal of Personality Assessment 46: 72–80.
Infante, D.A., and C.J. Wigley. 1986. Verbal aggressiveness: An interpersonal model and measure. Communication Monographs 53: 61–69.
Jensen, J. 1987. Rhetorical emphasis of Taoism. Rhetorica 5: 219–229.
Jensen, J. 1992. Values and practices in Asian argumentation. Argumentation and Advocacy 28(4): 153–166.
Kennedy, G.A. 1980. Classical rhetoric and its christian and secular tradition from ancient to modern times. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press.
Kim, Ej, A. Yamaguchi, M.-S. Kim, and A. Miyahara. 2015. Effects of taking conflict personally on conflict management styles across cultures. Personality and Individual Differences 7: 143–149.
Kincaid, D.L. (ed.). 1987. Communication theory: Eastern and western perspectives. San Diego: Academic Press.
Leung, K. 1988. Some determinants of conflict avoidance. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 19: 35–49.
Leung, K. 1997. Negotiation and reward allocations across cultures. In New perspectives on international industrial and organizational psychology, ed. P.C. Earley, and M. Erez, 640–675. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Lin, Y., A.S. Rancer, and Q. Kong. 2007. Family communication patterns and argumentativeness: An investigation of Chinese college students. Human Communication 10: 121–135.
Lin, Y., J. Zhao, and F. Zhao. 2010. Exploring constructive aggressive communication in China: Its cultural roots, strategies, and new developments. In Arguments, aggression, and conflict: New directions in theory, ed. T. Avtgis, and A. Rancer, 82–99. New York: Routledge Press.
Lorenzo-Seva, U., and J.M.F. ten Berge. 2006. Tucker’s congruence coefficient as a meaningful index of factor similarity. Methodology 2: 57–64. doi:10.1027/1614-18220.127.116.11.
Lu, X., and D. Frank. 1993. On the study of the ancient Chinese rhetoric/bian. Western Journal of Communication 57: 445–463.
Mercier, H., and D. Sperber. 2011. Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentation theory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 34: 57–111.
Oetzel, J.G., and S. Ting-Toomey. 2003. Face concerns in interpersonal conflict: A cross-cultural empirical test of the face negotiation theory. Communication Research 30: 599–624.
Oetzel, J.G., S. Ting-Toomey, T. Masumoto, Y. Yokichi, 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.
Oliver, R. 1971. Communication and culture in ancient India and China. NY: Syracuse University Press.
Rancer, A.S., and T.A. Avtgis. 2014. Argumentative and aggressive communication, 2d ed. New York: Peter Lang.
Triandis, H. 1995. Individualism and collectivism. Boulder: Westview.
Tucker, L.R. 1951. A method for synthesis of factor analysis studies (Personnel Research Section Report No. 984). Washington, DC: Department of the Army.
Xie, Y., S. Shi, S. Evans, and D. Hample. 2013. Exploring the meaning of argument in China. In Virtues of argumentation: Proceedings of the 10th international conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA), ed. D. Mohammed, and M. Lewiński, 1–16. Windsor: OSSA.
Yeh, J.H., and L. Chen. 2004. Cultural values and argumentative orientations for Chinese people in Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Mainland China, 51–64. Intercultural communication: A global reader.
We are grateful to two anonymous reviewers for their criticisms, which are very helpful for us to improve the paper. Yun Xie would like to acknowledge the support from the National Social Science Fund Projects (13CZX063), (13&ZD186), and the Chinese MOE Project of Key Research Institute of Humanities and Social Sciences at Universities (12JJD720006).
About this article
Cite this article
Xie, Y., Hample, D. & Wang, X. A Cross-Cultural Analysis of Argument Predispositions in China: Argumentativeness, Verbal Aggressiveness, Argument Frames, and Personalization of Conflict. Argumentation 29, 265–284 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-015-9352-8
- Argument predispositions
- Cross-cultural analysis
- Interpersonal arguing