Article published in:Interpersonal Argumentation
Edited by Harry Weger, Jr
[Journal of Argumentation in Context 4:1] 2015
► pp. 110–133
Extending the argument engagement model
Expected utility and interacting traits as predictors of the intent to argue with friends
This investigation considers the factors that predict the intent to engage in interpersonal arguments. By adapting the argument engagement model (Hample, Paglieri, and Na 2012), a subjective expected utility model was tested to determine the effects of (1) evaluative assessments, in addition to probabilistic assessments, and (2) probabilistic assessment-trait interactions on argument engagement. Participants (N = 273) read three argument vignettes and answered questions about their intent to argue in each situation. Results were mixed regarding the significance of expected values and situation-trait interactions in predicting intentions to argue. Participants overwhelmingly reported an optimism bias, whereby they tended to perceive positive outcomes of argument as likely and negative outcomes of argument as unlikely. Possible reasons for these findings and their implications are discussed.
Keywords: argumentativeness, expected utility, interpersonal communication, argument engagement model, verbal aggressiveness
Published online: 08 June 2015
Andersen, Peter A.
Armor, David A., and Shelley E. Taylor
Berger, Charles R.
Cionea, Ioana A., Dale Hample, and Fabio Paglieri
Condit, Celeste M.
Dillard, James P.
Fink, Clinton F.
Fink, Edward L., Deborah A. Cai, and Qi Wang
Hample, Dale, Fabio Paglieri, and Ling Na
Infante, Dominic A.
Infante, Dominic A., and Andrew S. Rancer
Infante, Dominic A., and Charles J. Wigley
Johnson, Amy J.
Johnson, Amy J., Jennifer A.H. Becker, Shelley Wigley, Michael M. Haigh, and Elizabeth A. Craig
Magnusson, David, and Norman S. Endler
Paglieri, Fabio, and Cristiano Castelfranchi
Rancer, Andrew S., and Theodore A. Avtgis
Sillars, Alan L.
Cited by 2 other publications
Cionea, Ioana A., Adam S. Richards & Sara K. Straub
Hample, Dale, Yiwen Dai & Mengqi Zhan
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 september 2021. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.