Cover not available
Article published In:
Pragmatics
Vol. 25:3 (2015) ► pp.453–476

Orientations toward interpersonal arguing in Chile

This paper reports the first empirical results aiming to characterize argumentative practices in Chile. We described features of Chilean interpersonal arguing among university students, compared those results with others obtained in the United States, and also compared the associations among variables from country to country. Chilean men displayed more aggressive and self-oriented arguing profiles than Chilean women. Compared to U.S. Americans, Chileans were more motivated to argue and saw the practice of arguing as more cooperative and civil. Many results and correlational patterns were recognizable from one nation to the other, but some differences deserve notice. For example, several measures that are routinely seen as opposites in the U.S. (e.g., impulses to approach or avoid arguing) have only modest negative correlations in the Chilean data.
Keywords: Cooperativeness, Chile, Argument frames, Interpersonal arguing, Individualism
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.
Published online: 1 September 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.25.3.06san
References (50)
Avtgis, Theodore A., Andrew S. Rancer, Penka. A. Kanjeva, and Rebecca M. Chory (2008) Argumentative and aggressive communication in Bulgaria: Testing for conceptual and methodological equivalence. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research 371: 17-24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baño, Rodrigo, Carlos Ruiz, and María Eugenia Ruiz-Tagle (2008) Enzo Faletto: Obras Completas. Tomo I. Santiago: Random House Mondadori.Google Scholar
Cademartori, Yanina, and Dolores Parra (2004) Reforma educativa y teoría de la argumentación. Revista Signos 33.48: 69-85.Google Scholar
Cionea, Ioana A., Dale Hample, and Fabio Paglieri (2011) A test of the argument engagement model in Romania. In F. Zenker (ed.), Argument cultures: Proceedings of the 8th international conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA), May 18-21, 2011. Windsor, ON: Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation.Google Scholar
Cordero, Marcela. (2004) El componente ‘tesis’ en los textos argumentativos escolares. Revista Signos 33.48: 87-96.Google Scholar
Crespo, Nina (2005) La importancia de la argumentación matemática en el aula. Premisa. Revista de la Sociedad Argentina de Educación Matemática 7.23: 23-29.Google Scholar
Croucher, Stephen (2013) The difference in verbal aggressiveness between the United States and Thailand. Communication Research Reports 30.3: 264-269. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Croucher, Stephen M., Deepa Oommen, Manda V. Hicks, Kyle J. Holody, Samura Yoon Anarbaeva, Spencer Antony T. Kisung, Chrishawn Marsh, and Abdulrahman I. Aljahli (2010) The effects of self-construal and religiousness on argumentativeness: A cross-cultural analysis. Communication Studies 611: 135-155. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Croucher, Stephen M., Rand Otten, Methan Ball, Tamara Grimes, Brett Ainsworth, Kieran Begley, and Laci Corzo (2013) Argumentativeness and political participation: A cross-cultural analysis in the United States and Turkey. Communication Studies 64.1: 18-32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dillard, James (1990) A goal-driven model of interpersonal influence. In J.P. Dillard (ed.), Seeking compliance: The production of interpersonal influence messages. Scottsdale, AZ: Gorsuch Scarisbrick, pp. 41-56.Google Scholar
Dillard, James Price, Chris Segrin, and Janie M. Harden (1989) Primary and secondary goals in the production of interpersonal influence messages. Communication Monographs 561: 19-38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eysenck, H.J., and S.B.G. Eysenck (1975) Manual of the Eysenck personality questionnaire. London: Hodder and Stoughton.Google Scholar
Eysenck, S.B.G., H.J. Eysenck, and Paul Barrett (1985) A revised version of the psychoticism scale. Personality and Individual Difference 61: 21-29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
González, Cristian (2009) La interacción verbal argumentativa en la sala de clases: La participación de los alumnos y el rol de profesor. RLA 47.1: 125-144.Google Scholar
Goodnight, Thomas (1982) The personal, technical, and public spheres of argument: A speculative inquiry into the art of public deliberation. Journal of the American Forensic Association 181: 214-227.Google Scholar
Hamilton, Mark A., and Dale Hample (2011) Testing hierarchical models of argumentativeness and verbal aggressiveness. Communication Methods and Measures 51: 250-273. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hample, Dale (2003) Arguing skill. In J.O. Greene, and B.R. Burleson (eds.), Handbook of communication and social interaction skills. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 439-478.Google Scholar
(2005) Arguing: Exchanging reasons face to face. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Hample, Dale, and Deepa Anagondahalli (2015) Understandings of arguing in India and the United States: Argument frames, personalization of conflict, argumentativeness, and verbal aggressiveness. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research 441: 1-26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hample, Dale, and Judith M. Dallinger (1987) Cognitive editing of argument strategies. Human Communication Research 141: 123-144. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1992) The use of multiple goals in cognitive editing of arguments. Argumentation and Advocacy 281: 109-122. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hample, Dale, Adam S. Richards, and Christina Skubisz (2013) Blurting. Communication Monographs 801: 503-532. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hample, Dale, Benjamin Warner, and Dorian Young (2009) Framing and editing interpersonal arguments. Argumentation 231: 21-37. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Herrera, Florencia, and Berta Teitelboim (2011) La mirada de los chilenos a la familia. In Sexta encuesta nacional UDP. Chile 2010: Percepciones y actitudes sociales. Santiago: ICSO-UDP, pp. 121-135.Google Scholar
Hrdy, Sarah (2009) Mothers and Others. The Evolutionary origins of Mutual Understanding. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Infante, Dominic A., and Andrew S. Rancer (1982) A conceptualization and measure of argumentativeness. Journal of Personality Assessment 461: 72-80. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Infante, Dominic A., and Charles J. Wigley (1986) Verbal aggressiveness: An interpersonal model and measure. Communication Monographs 531: 61-69. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jélvez, Lorena (2008) Esquemas argumentativos en textos escritos: un estudio descriptivo en alumnos de tercero medio de dos establecimientos de Valparaíso. Cyber Humanitatis 451: 1-21.Google Scholar
Johnson, Amy (2002) Beliefs about arguing: A comparison of public issue and personal issue arguments. Communication Reports 151: 99-112. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Larraín, Antonia, and Paulina Freire (2012) El uso de discurso argumentativo en la enseñanza de ciencias: Un estudio exploratorio. Estudios Pedagógicos 38.2: 133-155. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marinkovich, Juana (2007a) Las estrategias cognitivo-retóricas y la dimensión dialéctica de la argumentación oral en una clase de lengua castellana y comunicación. Revista Signos 40.63: 127-146. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2007b) La interacción argumentativa en el aula: Fases de la argumentación y estrategias de cortesía verbal. In C. Santibáñez, and B. Riffo (eds.), Estudios en Argumentación y Retórica. Teorías contemporáneas y aplicaciones. Concepción: Universidad de Concepción Press, pp. 227-252.Google Scholar
Marinkovich, Juana, and Pilar Morán (1995) La calidad del texto argumentativo en estudiantes de 4 medio: Algunos rasgos significativos. Estudios Filológicos 301: 48-56.Google Scholar
McCroskey, James (1978) Validity of the PRCA as an index of oral communication apprehension. Communication Monographs 451: 192-203. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meza, Paulina (2009) Las interacciones argumentativas orales en la sala de clases: Un análisis dialéctico y retórico. Unpublished Master Thesis, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso, Chile.
O’Ryan, Raúl, Carlos de Miguel, and Camilo Lagos (2007) Evaluación de Estrategias de Desarrollo para Alcanzar los Objetivos del Milenio en América Latina. El Caso de Chile. Santiago: PNUD.Google Scholar
Moulian, Tomás (2009) Contradicciones del desarrollo político chileno: 1920-1990. Santiago: Ediciones LOM.Google Scholar
Parodi, Giovanni (2000) La evaluación de la producción de textos escritos argumentativos: Una alternancia cognitivo/discursiva. Revista Signos 33.47: 151-16.Google Scholar
Poblete, Claudia (2003) Relación entre competencia textual argumentativa y metacognición. Unpublished doctoral dissertation Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso.
Puga, Juana (1997) La Atenuación en el Castellano de Chile. Un enfoque pragmalingüístico. Valencia: Universitat de Valéncia.Google Scholar
Rancer, Andrew S., and Theodore A. Avtgis (2014) Argumentative and aggressive communication. 2d. Ed. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Salazar, Juan (2008) Estrategias de cortesía verbal en interacciones argumentativas ocurridas en contexto escolar. Alpha 271: 77-92.Google Scholar
Santibáñez, Cristián (2006) Retórica y argumentación en la política de sentencias populares. Praxis: Revista de Psicología y Ciencias Humanas 91: 183-196.Google Scholar
(2010) Metaphors and argumentation: The Case of Chilean Parliamentarian Media Participation. Journal of Pragmatics 42.4: 973-989. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Singelis, Theodore (1994) The measurement of independent and interdependent self-construals. Personality and Social Psychological Bulletin 201: 580-591. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Torche, Florencia, and Guillermo Wormald (2004) Estratificación y movilidad social en Chile: Entre la adscripción y el logro. Serie Políticas públicas 981: 1-85.Google Scholar
Vicuña, Ana, and Juana Marinkovich (2008) Un análisis de la discusión acerca de temas controversiales en Enseñanza Media desde la pragma-dialéctica. Revista Signos 41.68: 439-457. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vitale, Luis (2001) Balance de dos décadas de Neoliberalismo. Santiago: Universidad de Chile.Google Scholar
Wittig, Fernando (2005) Perspectivas argumentales en disputa en torno a la distribución de la ‘píldora del días después’. Alpha 211: 159-175.Google Scholar
Xie, Yun, Dale Hample, and Xiaoli Wang (in press) A cross-cultural analysis of argument predispositions in China: Argumentativeness, verbal aggressiveness, argument frames, and personalization of conflict. Argumentation. DOI logo
Cited by (9)

Cited by nine other publications

Mamberti, Juan & Dale Hample
2022. Interpersonal arguing in Argentina. Argumentation and Advocacy 58:3-4 ► pp. 214 ff. DOI logo
Valchev, Hristo
2022. The Cultural Embeddedness of Arguments Raised as a Part of the Bulgarian Debate About the Ratification of the Istanbul Convention. Argumentation 36:2 ► pp. 177 ff. DOI logo
Hample, Dale, Fernando Leal & Judith Suro
2021. Arguing in Mexico: How Uniquely Mexican Is It?. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research 50:4 ► pp. 389 ff. DOI logo
Howe, William T. & Ioana A. Cionea
2021. Exploring the associations between debate participation, communication competence, communication apprehension, and argumentativeness with a global sample. Argumentation and Advocacy 57:2 ► pp. 103 ff. DOI logo
Santibáñez, Cristian, Dale Hample & Jessica M. Hample
2021. How do Chilean seniors think about arguing?. Journal of Argumentation in Context 10:2 ► pp. 202 ff. DOI logo
Benavides, Paloma & Taekyun Hur
2020. Self-Construal Differences in Chile and South Korea: A Brief Report. Psychological Reports 123:6 ► pp. 2410 ff. DOI logo
Labrie, Nanon, Aranka Akkermans & Dale Hample
2020. A Dutch dose of dissent. Journal of Argumentation in Context 9:2 ► pp. 219 ff. DOI logo
Demir, Yeliz & Dale Hample
2019. A Cross-Cultural Study of Argument Orientations of Turkish and American College Students: Is Silence Really Golden and Speech Silver for Turkish Students?. Argumentation 33:4 ► pp. 521 ff. DOI logo
Lewiński, Marcin, Dale Hample, João Sàágua & Dima Mohammed
2018. Arguing in Portugal: A cross-cultural analysis. Journal of International and Intercultural Communication 11:3 ► pp. 233 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 december 2024. 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.