A longitudinal analysis of the relationship between cultural adaptation and argumentativeness

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to first explore the extent to which argumentativeness changed during the adaptation process among Muslim immigrants to France from 2006 to 2015 and, second, to examine the cultural fusion process. The study investigates the influence of intercultural contact on communication traits by exploring the extent to which members of the dominant cultural group adapt their argumentativeness over time. Design/methodology/approach Through a longitudinal panel study, the paper investigates the influence of intercultural contact on communication traits by exploring the extent to which members of the dominant cultural group adapt their argumentativeness over time. Confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling are used to assess the hypotheses and research question. Findings Results revealed a curvilinear relationship between argumentativeness and time. Argumentativeness increased from 2006 to 2009, remained constant from 2009 to 2012 and then decreased after 2012. Furthermore, data analysis revealed argumentativeness levels among members of the dominant culture did not change. Research limitations/implications The results are potentially limited by the sample being a convenience sample and the presence of extenuating factors. Originality/value Argumentativeness is viewed by many researchers as a functional form of communication. However, few studies have longitudinally studied how this trait can change over time.

A multi-national validity analysis of the argumentativeness measure

“…Argumentativeness research is increasingly conducted outside of the US and cross-culturally. In fact, as researchers have asserted argumentativeness as a trait is a culturally universal trait (Rancer and Avtgis, 2014), the 20-item argumentativeness measure or variations of it have been translated into many languages including Chinese, Korean, Japanese, Thai, French, German, Finnish, Spanish, Slovakian, Romanian, Russian, Turkish and other languages (Avtgis and Rancer, 2002; Croucher et al , 2013, 2016, 2018; Gronostay, 2019; Hsu, 2007; Park and Kim, 1992; Subanaliev et al , 2018; Suzuki and Rancer, 1994). Argumentativeness studies conducted outside of the US have shown that non-US based samples tend to differ in levels of argumentativeness from US-based samples.…”

“…In cross-cultural and non-US based studies of argumentativeness, it is common for many researchers to attribute differences in levels of argumentativeness to varying levels of individualism/collectivism, power distance, high/low context, self-construal and/or gender roles in societies (Rancer and Avtgis, 2014 for a review). While some researchers have ran validity studies of the argumentativeness measure or variations of it outside the US, these studies have not retained the 20-item scale (Croucher et al , 2016, 2018; Suzuki and Rancer, 1994) or have used only a 10-item or eight-item argumentativeness measure (Avtgis et al , 2008; Subanaliev et al , 2018). Other have relied on the work of Infante and Rancer (1982) to demonstrate validity in non-US samples or not reported validity analysis results (Croucher et al , 2009, 2010; Hsu, 2007; Klopf et al , 1991; Rapanta and Hample, 2015; Xie et al , 2015).…”

“…A vast literature on argumentativeness exists (Croucher et al , 2018; Infante et al , 2011; Levine et al , 2012). Argumentativeness is conceptually defined as a trait that “predisposes people to advocate positions on controversial issues while attacking verbally the positions, which other people take on these issues” (Infante and Rancer, 1982, p. 72).…”