The relationships among instructors’ antisocial behavior alteration techniques and student resistance

Student Antisocial Compliance-Gaining as a Function of Instructor Aggressive Communication and Classroom Justice

“…The finding that student perceptions of instructor VA negatively predicted classroom justice and that justice perceptions predicted students' use of antisocial BATs is in line with past research (Chory, 2007;Chory-Assad, 2002;Chory-Assad & Paulsel, 2004a, 2004bHoran et al, 2010;Paulsel & Chory-Assad, 2004;. Like the VA results, these findings are consistent with equity theory in that students may perceive VA instructors' unfairness as resulting in an inequitable costs/ benefits ratio that they seek to redress through antisocial BATs.…”

“…This definition compliments the beliefs that studentÁinstructor communication is a transactional process and that the studentÁinstructor relationship is interdependent and interpersonal in nature (Baringer & McCroskey, 2000;Frymier & Houser, 2000;Paulsel & Chory-Assad, 2004). Although instructional communication research has not often captured the mutual power that exists between instructors and students (Baringer & McCroskey, 2000;Sprague, 1992), most scholars would likely agree that students and instructors interact, in part through the use of BATs, to negotiate power.…”

“…Instructors should avoid using VA, which is linked to students' perceptions of injustice, leading them to use aggression, hostility, deception, revenge, dissent, and antisocial compliance-gaining with their instructors (Chory-Assad, 2002;Chory-Assad & Paulsel, 2004a, 2004bHoran et al, 2010;Paulsel & Chory-Assad, 2004). As communication scholars have noted over the past decade (e.g., Chory-Assad & Paulsel, 2004b), this consequence of classroom injustice is especially significant given the concern about school violence, bullying, and aggression prevention and management in schools.…”

College Students’ Use of Behavioral Alteration Techniques as a Function of Aggressive Communication

“…Previous research has indicated that instructors' use of prosocial BATs is related positively to student outcomes (e.g., student motivation, learning) whereas instructors' use of antisocial BATs is related negatively (Richmond, 1990;Richmond, McCroskey, Kearney, & Plax, 1987). More recently, researchers have found that instructors' use of prosocial BATs has a stronger connection to students' interest than instructors' use of antisocial BATs (Weber, 2004) and that instructors' use of antisocial BATs is related positively to students' use of resistance strategies (Paulsel & Chory-Assad, 2004).…”

Verbal Aggressiveness and Argumentativeness in Physical Education: Perceptions of Teachers and Students in Qualitative and Quantitative Exploration

“…Argumentativeness uses premise as a way for verbal persuasiveness in advocating the original aim (Hample, Han, & Payne, 2010) or give a character's impression (Hample & Irions, 2014). Com-Psychology munication between students and teachers is considered a relational process, dynamic, transactional and interdependent, where force is constantly negotiable (Claus, Chory, & Malachowski, 2012;Golish & Olson, 2000;Paulsel & Chory-Assad, 2004). Argumentativeness is a constructive communicational trait, as its results focus and orient to the substance of the message transmitted, without verbally attacking the opponent (Infante, Myers, & Buerkel, 1994;Infante & Rancer, 1996;Rancer & Avtgis, 2006).…”