How do Chilean seniors think about arguing?

Abstract

This project investigates orientations toward interpersonal arguing among Chilean seniors (N = 243), having a mean age of 72 years. We found no prior attention to seniors in the interpersonal arguing literature, and only a little to Chileans. Sited within the US framework for studying interpersonal arguing (see Hample, 2016), this project collected seniors’ responses to survey items indexing argumentativeness, verbal aggressiveness, argument frames, personalization of conflict, and power distance. Our exploratory work involved use of a second sample of Chilean undergraduates (N = 80) for comparison. Comparisons showed that the seniors were less likely to argue, especially for play. Seniors were more interested in asserting dominance and were less cooperative and civil. Few sex differences were observed among the seniors, whereas quite a few had been previously found for Chilean undergraduates. These differences are attributed to the age of the seniors, although the possibility of a cadre effect is considered. Neither Chilean seniors nor younger adults displayed negative correlations between approaching and avoiding arguments, a result which has become an increasingly urgent theoretical issue across the world.

Conflict personalization: a systematic literature review and the development of an integrative definition

“…When reviewing the conceptualizations within the cognition theme, we discovered variety in the way in which scholars talk about the cognitive aspect of conflict personalization. Firstly, conflict personalization is seen as a cognitive experience (Hample et al , 2019), cognitive appraisal (Curran and Allen, 2016) or cognitive reaction (Demir and Hample, 2019; Hample et al , 2021; Santibáñez et al , 2021). Secondly, some refer to expectations (Kim et al , 2020; Worley and Aloia, 2019) and the application of past experiences (Aloia and Worley, 2019; Hample and Cionea, 2010).…”