Abstract
People use editorial criteria to decide whether to say or to suppress potential arguments. These criteria constitute people's standards as to what effective and appropriate arguments are like, and reflect general interaction goals. A series of empirical investigations has indicated that the standards fall into three classes: those having to do with argument effectiveness, those concerned with personal issues for arguer and target, and those centered on discourse quality. The essay also sketches the affinities certain types of people have for the different criteria.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Benoit, P. J. and W. L. Benoit: 1986, ‘Consciousness: The Mindlessness/Mindfulness and Verbal Report Controversies’, Western Journal of Speech Communication 50, 41–63.
Benoit, P. J. and W. L. Benoit: 1989, Accounts of Success and Failures in Arguments, presented to SCA/AFA Summer Conference on Argumentation, Alta, UT.
Benoit, P. J. and W. L. Benoit: 1990, ‘Aggravated and Mitigated Opening Utterances’, Argumentation 4, 171–183.
Boster, F. J.: 1985, ‘Argumentation, Interpersonal Communication, Persuasion, and the Process(es) of Compliance Gaining Message Use’, in J. R. Cox, M. O. Sillars, and G. B. Walker (eds.), Argument and Social Practice, Annandale, VA: Speech Communication Association, pp. 578–591.
Brown, P. and S. C. Levinson: 1987, Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Christie, R. and F. L. Geis: 1970, Studies in Machiavellianism, New York: Academic Press.
Clark, R. A. and J. G. Delia: 1979, ‘Topoi and Rhetorical Competence’, Quarterly Journal of Speech 65, 187–206.
Cody, M. J. and M. L. McLaughlin: 1985, ‘The Situation as a Construct in Interpersonal Communication Research’, in M. L. Knapp and G. R. Miller (eds.), Handbook of Interpersonal Communication, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, pp. 263–312.
Crockett, W. H., A. N. Press, J. G. Delia, and C. J. Kenney: 1974, The Structural Analysis of the Organization of Written Impressions, unpublished manuscript, Department of Psychology, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS.
Crowne, D. and D. Marlowe: 1964, The Approval Motive, New York: Wiley.
Dallinger, J. M. and D. Hample: 1989a, Cognitive Editing of Arguments and Interpersonal Construct Differentiation, presented to ICA, San Francisco.
Dallinger, J. M. and D. Hample: 1989b, Biological and Psychological Gender Effects upon Cognitive Editing of Arguments, presented to SCA/AFA Summer Conference on Argumentation, Alta, UT.
Dillard, J. P., C. Segrin, and J. M. Harden: 1989, ‘Primary and Secondary Goals in the Production of Interpersonal Influence Messages’, Communication Monographs 56, 19–38.
Eemeren, F. H. van and R. Grootendorst: 1984, Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions, Dordrecht, Holland: Foris.
Ericsson, K. A. and H. A. Simon: 1984, Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Grice, H. P.: 1975, ‘Logic and Conversation’, in P. Cole and J. T. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 3, New York: Academic Press, pp. 41–58.
Gudykunst, W. B., S.-M. Yank, and T. Nishida: 1987, ‘Cultural Differences in Self-consciousness and Self-monitoring’, Communication Research 14, 7–34.
Habermas, J.: 1979, Communication and the Evolution of Society, trans. by T. McCarthy, Boston: Beacon Press.
Hample, D.: 1984a, ‘On the Use of Self-Reports’, Journal of the American Forensic Association 20, 140–153.
Hample, D.: 1984b, Roads Not Taken, Arguments Not Made, presented to CSSA, Chicago.
Hample, D.: 1985, ‘A Third Perspective on Argument’, Philosophy and Rhetoric 18, 1–22.
Hample, D.: 1986, ‘Argumentation and the Unconscious’, Journal of the American Forensic Association 23, 82–95.
Hample, D.: 1988, ‘Argument: Public and Private, Social and Cognitive’, Argumentation and Advocacy 25, 13–19.
Hample, D. and J. M. Dallinger: 1985, ‘Unused Compliance Gaining Strategies’, in J. R. Cox, M. O. Sillars and G. B. Walker (eds.), Argument and Social Practice, Annandale, VA.: Speech Communication Association, pp. 675–691.
Hample, D. and J. M. Dallinger: 1987a, ‘Cognitive Editing of Argument Strategies’, Human Communication Research 14, 123–144.
Hample, D. and J. M. Dallinger: 1987b, ‘Self-monitoring and the Cognitive Editing of Arguments’, Central States Speech Journal 38, 152–165.
Hample, D. and J. M. Dallinger: 1987c, ‘Argument Editing Choices and Argumentative Competence’, in J. W. Wenzel (ed.), Argument and Critical Practices, Annandale, VA: Speech Communication Association, pp. 455–464.
Hample, D. and J. M. Dallinger: 1987d, ‘The Judgment Phase of Invention’, in F. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J. A. Blair, and. A. Willard (eds.), Argumentation: Perspectives and Approaches, Dordrecht, Holland: Foris, pp. 225–234.
Hample, D. and J. M. Dallinger: 1987e, The Effects of Machiavellianism, Social Desirability, Gender, and Grade Point Average on Cognitive Editing of Arguments, presented to SCA, Boston.
Hample, D. and J. M. Dallinger: 1988, The Use of Multiple Goals in Cognitive Editing of Arguments, presented to Temple University Discourse Conference, Philadelphia.
Hample, D., J. M. Dallinger, and K. A. Myers: 1989, Marital Argument, presented to SCA, San Francisco.
Hunter, J. E., M. Hamilton, and M. Allen (in press), ‘The Design and Analysis of Language Experiments in Communications’, Communication Monographs.
Infante, D. A. and A. S. Rancer: 1982, ‘A Conceptualization and Measure of Argumentativeness’, Journal of Personality Assessment 46, 72–80.
Infante, D. A. and C. J. Wigley: 1986, ‘Verbal Aggressiveness: An Interpersonal Model and Measure’, Communication Monographs 53, 61–69.
Jackson, D. D.: 1977, ‘Family Rules: Marital quid pro quo’, in P. Watzlawick and J. H. Weakland (eds.), The Interactional View, New York: Norton, pp. 21–31. Originally published in 1965: Archives of General Psychiatry 12, 589–594.
Jackson, S. and D. Backus: 1982, ‘Are Compliance-gaining Strategies Dependent on Situational Variables?’ Central States Speech Journal 33, 469–479.
Jackson, S. and S. Jacobs: 1983, ‘Generalizing About Messages: Suggestions for Design and Analysis of Experiments’, Human Communication Research 9, 169–181.
Jackson, S., D. J. O'Keefe, S. Jacobs, and D. E. Brashers (in press), ‘Messages as Replications: Toward a Message-centered Design Strategy’, Communication Monographs.
Marwell, G. and D. R. Schmitt: 1967, ‘Dimensions of Compliance-gaining Behavior: An Empirical Analysis’, Sociometry 30, 350–364.
McLaughlin, M. L.: 1984, Conversation: How Talk Is Organized, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
O'Keefe, B. J. and J. G. Delia: 1982, ‘Impression Formation and Message Production’, in M. E. Roloff and C. R. Berger (eds.), Social Cognition and Communication, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, pp. 33–72.
O'Keefe, B. J. and G. J. Shepherd: 1987, ‘The Pursuit of Multiple Objectives in Face-toface Persuasive Interaction: Effects of Construct Differentiation on Message Organization’, Communication Monographs 54, 396–419.
Raush, H. L., W. A. Barry, R. K. Hertel, and M. A. Swain: 1974, Communication, Conflict and Marriage, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Rosenberg, M. J.: 1969, ‘The Conditions and Consequences of Evaluation Apprehension’, in R. Rosenthal and R. L. Rosnow (eds.), Aratifact in Behavioral Research, New York: Academic Press, pp. 279–349.
Rosenfeld, L. B.: 1979, ‘Self-disclosure Avoidance: Why I Am Afraid to Tell You Who I Am’, Communication Monographs 46, 63–74.
Schenck-Hamlin, W. J., R. L. Wiseman, and G. N. Georgacarackos: 1982, ‘A Model of Properties of Compliance-gaining Strategies’, Communication Quarterly 30, 92–100.
Seibold, D. R., J. G. Cantrill, and R. A. Meyers: 1985, ‘Communication and Interpersonal Influence’, in M. L. Knapp and G. R. Miller (eds.), Handbook of Interpersonal Communication, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, pp. 551–614.
Snyder, M.: 1974, ‘Self-monitoring of Expressive Behavior’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 30, 526–537.
Swap, W. C. and J. Z. Rubin: 1983, ‘Measurement of Interpersonal Orientation’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 44, 208–219.
Trapp, R.: 1986, The Concept of Argumentative Competence, paper presented to SCA, Chicago.
Wheeless, L. R., R. Barraclough, and R. Steweart: 1983, ‘Compliance-gaining and Power in Persuasion’, in R. Bostrom (ed.), Communication Yearbook 7, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, pp. 105–145.
Wheeless, L. R. and V. E. Wheeless: 1981, ‘Attribution, Gender Orientation, and Reconceptualization, Measurement, and Research Results’, Communication Quarterly 30, 56–66.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hample, D., Dallinger, J.M. Arguers as editors. Argumentation 4, 153–169 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00175420
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00175420