The impact of argumentativeness and verbal aggression on communicator image: The exchange between George Bush and Dan Rather

Downs, Valerie C.; Kaid, Lynda Lee; Ragan, Sandra L.

doi:10.1080/10570319009374327

Cited by 16 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Communicators are under the constraints of social conventions when engaging in disputes with others and perhaps even more so when commenting in public. Moreover, the violation of appropriate rules of social exchange (e.g., politeness, Holtgraves, 1997;and fairness, Schreier et al, 1995) renders the communicator as less likable (e.g., Downs, Kaid, & Ragan, 1990). Because politeness has been found to mediate likability (Steffan & Eagly, 1985), fundamentally, the following expectation is warranted:…”

Section: Perceptions Of Rebuttal Analogy and Usersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rebuttal Analogy in Persuasive Messages

Whaley

Wagner

2000

Journal of Language and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research concerning rebuttal analogy suggests that communicators using this argument form are perceived unfavorably by message receivers. To further understand the effects of rebuttal analogy, the present investigation examines respondents’ perceived likability of rebuttal analogy users, respondents’ cognitive responses to the message, and their reported attitudes toward messages using rebuttal analogy. Respondents were either exposed to one of four persuasive messages employing rebuttal analogy or to one of the same four messages with a nonanalogy version of the argument. As predicted, results revealed that respondents rated the communicator using rebuttal analogy as less likable. Cognitive responses and argument recall showed the message-processing effects of rebuttal analogy. However, no significant difference for attitude was detected between groups. Implications of the findings are discussed and research directions concerning persuasion are offered.

show abstract

Section: Perceptions Of Rebuttal Analogy and Usersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rebuttal Analogy in Persuasive Messages

Whaley

Wagner

2000

Journal of Language and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One reason that negative campaigning may be ineffective, despite its popularity, is because it can include the use of verbal aggression, messages which “[attack] the self-concept of another person instead of, or in addition to, the person’s position on a topic of communication” (Infante & Wigley, 1986, p. 61). Verbal aggression has been shown to inhibit persuasive effectiveness across a variety of contexts because it negatively impacts perceptions of message sources’ credibility, competence, and trustworthiness (Downs, Kaid, & Ragan, 1990; Edwards & Myers, 2007; Infante et al, 1992; Infante & Rancer, 1996; Jordan-Jackson, Lin, Rancer, & Infante, 2008).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Verbal Aggression and Party Identification Bias on Perceptions of Political Speakers

Nau

Stewart

2013

Journal of Language and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two experiments investigated the effects of verbal aggression, specifically character and competence attacks, on perceptions of political speakers. Verbally aggressive political speakers were perceived as less communicatively appropriate and credible than nonaggressive speakers, and were less likely to win agreement with their messages. Some evidence was found that perceptions were biased in favor of those who share a political party identification with the message recipient, and that more strongly Republican Party–identified participants perceived more verbal aggression in messages with no character and competence attacks and considered verbally aggressive Republicans more tactful.

show abstract

“…Benoit (2004) demonstrated that when political candidates are issue focused they are received better by the public than those candidates who are person focused (e.g., attacking a person's character). Downs, Kaid, and Ragan (1990) indicated that in a 1988 interview with Dan Rather, President George Bush's use of verbal aggression negatively affected his communicator image. This demonstrates that the use of verbal aggressiveness can have a significant impact on a political figure's public image.…”

Section: Argumentativeness/aggressive Communicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Verbally aggressive attacks are not always seen as being harmful to an individual's credibility (see Infante & Rancer, 1996). Downs, et al (1990) found that, in the interview with Vice President George Bush, viewers saw Dan Rather's use of verbal aggression as acceptable, because Vice President Bush had attacked Rather first. If, as is suggested later, the use of verbally aggressive messages is strategic in Presidential debates, then a candidate could actually increase their credibility if he or she was to refrain from verbally aggressive utterances until they were attacked first.…”

Section: Argumentativeness/aggressive Communicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One area in which the research has seemingly ignored is the effects of aggressive communication in the political field. Downs, et al (1990) examined the use of argumentativeness and verbal aggression in an exchange between then Vice President George H. Bush and Dan Rather. Their results showed that both verbal aggressiveness and argumentativeness had an impact on communicator image and that Vice President Bush's verbal aggressiveness negatively affected his image (Downs et al, 1990).…”

Section: Negative Campaigning As Verbal Aggressionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A candidate's use of aggressive communication and the electorates' response: Predicting presidential election outcomes

Sutton¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this examination is to determine the role of verbal aggression in Presidential debates. Using six types of verbally aggressive messages, coders examined one Presidential debate from nine Presidential elections to determine the amount of verbal aggression used by each candidate. The findings from this examination indicate that there is a pattern for the use of verbal aggression in Presidential debates. Challengers use significantly more verbal aggression than incumbents while five of the nine elections had the winner using less verbally aggressive messages than the loser. Results of this study support the theory that challengers are forced to go on the attack and use verbal aggression more often than incumbents. Implications of the results and paths for further research are also offered.

show abstract

The impact of argumentativeness and verbal aggression on communicator image: The exchange between George Bush and Dan Rather

Cited by 16 publications

References 8 publications

Rebuttal Analogy in Persuasive Messages

Rebuttal Analogy in Persuasive Messages

Effects of Verbal Aggression and Party Identification Bias on Perceptions of Political Speakers

A candidate's use of aggressive communication and the electorates' response: Predicting presidential election outcomes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About