This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Mischo, C. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Cognitive, Emotional, And Verbal Responses In Unfair Everyday Discourse

University of Mannheim, Germany

Research about argumentational unfairness has focused primarily on the cognitive evaluation of argumentational rule violations, applying written argumentational scenarios, and structured answering format. This study investigates cognitive, emotional, and verbal responses to unfair contributions (nonrational vs. noncooperative speech acts) using an open-ended answering format in various presentation modalities (written, auditory, and role-play). No differences appeared between reactions to nonrational versus noncooperative contributions or between the different presentation modalities. The results replicate previous findings and provide support for the validity of attributional models in unfair everyday discourse, as well as for the position that argumentative behavior is rule governed by reciprocal expectancies.

Key Words: fairness • argumentative discourse • argumentational integrity • reaction

Journal of Language and Social Psychology, Vol. 22, No. 1, 119-131 (2003)
DOI: 10.1177/0261927X02250064


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?