Trait argumentativeness, verbal aggressiveness, and minimally rational argument: An observational analysis of friendship discussions

Abstract

Many studies have been published that assume connections between argumentativeness and verbal aggressiveness, and argument behavior. However, research is limited regarding the links between these personality factors and actual communication behavior (i.e., observations of messages spontaneously exchanged between participants). To explore directly the manner in which these personality factors correspond to argument behavior, a view of argument as minimally rational discourse was adopted. This view stresses that argument constitutes a social, communicative activity and occurs in various kinds of argument structures that reflect rational logic. In this study, the relative frequency of argument development was coded from 31 friendship dyad conversations. Results revealed that argumentativeness and verbal aggressiveness did not correlate meaningfully with the development and defense of one's ideas. However, the composition of the dyad in terms of argumentativeness and verbal aggressiveness did affect the proportion of ideas developed through argument. The findings suggest that the argumentativeness and aggressiveness research cannot presume linear associations to argument behavior, at least in the domain of friendship discussion. Yet, the findings provide confirmation that these personality constructs can affect minimally rational argument.