Framing and Editing Interpersonal Arguments

Hample, Dale; Warner, Ben; Young, Dorian

doi:10.1007/s10503-008-9107-x

Cited by 39 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These are initial grounds for suspicion that argumentative play may not be pure: if it were, why would it be connected so strongly to competition, verbal aggressiveness, masculinity, or arguing to display dominance? Hample et al (2009) replicated several of these results. Play correlated significantly with identity (r = .56), dominance (r = .41), competitiveness (r = -.14), masculinity (r = .25), femininity (r = -.20), verbal aggressiveness (r = .35), argument-approach (r = .52), argument-avoid (r = -.44), and psychological reactance (r = .52).…”

Section: Goffman On Frames and Hample On Argument Framesmentioning

confidence: 55%

The Aggressiveness of Playful Arguments

2009

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.Although many argument theorists see the goal of arguing as persuasion or consensus, arguments can in fact be undertaken for a variety of personal reasons. Someone may argue to display a positive identity (e.g., a student writing an answer on an essay exam), to project dominance over another person (e.g., a supervisor Bing Han and David Payne made equal contributions to this project, and are listed alphabetically.

show abstract

Section: Goffman On Frames and Hample On Argument Framesmentioning

confidence: 55%

The Aggressiveness of Playful Arguments

2009

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…En este marco, se obtuvo una muestra inicial de 418 estudiantes, de primero a cuarto año de estudio, pertenecientes a universidades privadas y estatales de la Cuarta Región de Coquimbo, Chile, de carreras asociadas tanto al área de ciencias como de Cristián Noemi -Sebastián Rossel humanidades, a quienes se les aplicó un instrumento tipo Likert diseñado por Hample et al (2009), con el propósito de establecer la norma argumentativa psicosocial recurrente para este tipo de hablantes.…”

Section: Metodologíaunclassified

“…Con la información obtenida a partir del instrumento Hample et al (2009), se levantó una base de datos, utilizando el software SPSS, que permitió describir los diferentes tipos de esquemas desde los cuales los estudiantes generan sus discursos. A este instrumento, se le agregó también una sección cualitativa del Test Tasks in Critical Thinking (TCT), Livingston (1999), validado para Chile (Jélvez & Zambrano, 2005), consistente en una tarea a partir de la cual los estudiantes debieron generar un discurso tipo ensayo, sobre la base de una situación crítica planteada.…”

Section: Metodologíaunclassified

“…Enseguida, desde una perspectiva cualitativa, a partir de los puntajes obtenidos en el instrumento Hample et al (2009), se procedió a realizar un procedimiento de muestreo no probabilístico intencionado (Taylor & Bogdan, 1992), a partir del cual se obtuvo una submuestra de 40 estudiantes a los que se les aplicó una entrevista ad hoc, que fue transcrita y analizada mediante una técnica de análisis de discurso descriptiva que especificó sus esquemas, estructura y tipos de argumentos, con el fin de identificar algunos alumnos que fuesen cercanos o distantes en sus resultados, a fin de referir su apego respecto de la norma psicosocial (norma argumentativa). Esta metodología mixta, con énfasis en lo cualitativo, permitió en definitiva levantar las variables y dimensiones que caracterizan parcialmente la norma argumentativa propia del contexto de estudiantes universitarios.…”

Section: Metodologíaunclassified

See 1 more Smart Citation

Competencia argumentativa psicosocial: esquemas, estructura y tipos de argumentos en estudiantes universitarios chilenos

Noemi

Rossel

2017

Lenguaje

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ResumenEl trabajo ha develado parte de los conocimientos de naturaleza psicosocial asociados a la práctica argumentativa de estudiantes universitarios chilenos; y por otra, ha referido su desempeño argumental. Para esto, se utilizó una muestra de 418 estudiantes pertenecientes a universidades privadas y estatales de la Región Coquimbo a quienes se les aplicó un instrumento tipo Likert. El trabajo permitió descubrir que, a inicios del proceso curricular, los estudiantes utilizan preferentemente esquema sintomático a través de una estructura múltiple coordinada que vehicula argumento causal, ad misericordiam y por el ejemplo. En igual sentido, se pudo establecer que el esquema analógico predomina en el género femenino en etapa de término curricular; y que el esquema instrumental constituye una característica vinculada con el género masculino.Palabras claves: competencia argumentativa, esquemas argumentativos, norma argumentativa, práctica argumentativa. Abstract Psychosocial argumentative competence: schemes, structures and types of arguments among Chilean university studentsThe current study identified the psychosocial knowledge associated with the argumentative performance of Chilean university students. For this purpose, a 1 Este trabajo forma parte del proyecto de investigación regular Nª 1130584: "Valor, función y complejidad argumentativa en estudiantes universitarios chilenos: el caso de las regiones de Coquimbo y Metropolitana", financiado por el Fondo Nacional de Desarrollo Científico y Tecnológico del Ministerio de Educación del Gobierno de Chile. El investigador principal es el Dr. Cristián Santibáñez, de la Universidad Diego Portales, y los coinvestigadores son el Dr. Claudio Fuentes, de la Universidad Diego Portales, y el Dr. Cristián Noemi, de la Universidad de La Serena, Chile. Universidad del Valle 12Cristián Noemi -Sebastián Rossel Likert-type instrument was administered to a sample of 418 students from private and public universities from the region of Coquimbo. The analysis showed that students starting higher education use a symptomatic scheme by means of a multiple coordinated structure leading to causal, ad misericordiam and by example arguments. It was also established that the analogic scheme is more frequent among female students towards the end of their studies while the instrumental scheme is more frequent among male students at this point of their studies.Key words: argumentative competence, argumentative schemes, argumentative rule, argumentative practice. RésuméCompétence argumentative psychosociale: schémas, structure et types d'arguments chez les étudiants universitaires chiliens Les résultats de cette recherche ont révélé de la connaissance psychosociale liée à la pratique argumentative des étudiants universitaires chiliens et ont indiqué leur niveau de performance argumentative. Pour ce faire, l´on a pris un échantillon de 418 étudiants appartenant à des universités privées et publiques de la région de Coquimbo, qui ont fourni des informations à propos de leurs pratiques argumenta...

show abstract

“…Due to an absence of similar studies, we designed our interview on the basis of the quantitative instruments used in the previously mentioned studies, and more precisely on the scales of argument framing, motives, and influence on personal relations (for more information on these scales see Hample, Warner, & Young, 2009). …”

Section: Journal Of Media Critiques [Jmc] -Coming 123mentioning

confidence: 99%

Same but Different: Perceptions of Interpersonal Arguing In Two Arabic Populations (UAE & Lebanon)

Rapanta

Badran

2015

JMC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In a region characterized by internal socio-political differences and instabilities, such as the Middle East, the need to study and understand interpersonal arguing is becoming more and more critical. Our focus is on the perception of two socially different populations, the Emirati and the Lebanese, regarding their everyday argumentative interactions. Our sample consisted of 50 Lebanese and 34 Emirati young adults, all of them University students in different majors. The standardised interview used aimed at identifying how people define and perceive the process and outcomes of arguing with one another in different contexts. The Lebanese sample displayed a major understanding of efficient argumentative processes, while the Emiratis seemed more susceptible to the power of the speaker as a prerequisite to success in argumentation. Moreover, the Lebanese mainly defined argument as a process of learning from each other, whereas the Emirati mostly defined it as a fight or strong disagreement leading to an outcome.

show abstract

Framing and Editing Interpersonal Arguments

Cited by 39 publications

References 11 publications

The Aggressiveness of Playful Arguments

The Aggressiveness of Playful Arguments

Competencia argumentativa psicosocial: esquemas, estructura y tipos de argumentos en estudiantes universitarios chilenos

Same but Different: Perceptions of Interpersonal Arguing In Two Arabic Populations (UAE & Lebanon)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About