Cognitive, emotional, and verbal responses in unfair everyday discourse

Journal of Language and Social Psychology

Volumn 22, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 119-131

  Mischo, Christoph ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ERLANGEN NUREMBERG   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MANNHEIM   (Germany)

Author keywords

Argumentational integrity; Argumentative discourse; Fairness; Reaction

Indexed keywords

EID: 0037276398     PISSN: 0261927X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0261927X02250064     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Burgoon, J. K. (1993). Interpersonal expectations, expectancy violations, and emotional communication. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 12, 30-48.
2. Chaiken, S., & Eagly, A. H. (1986). The heuristic model of persuasion. In M. P. Zanna, J. M. Olson, & C. P. Herman (Eds.), Social influence: The Ontario symposium (Vol. 5, pp. 340). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
3. Christmann, U., & Groeben, N. (1993). Argumentationsintegrität (XIV): Der Einfluß von Valenz und Seguemstruktur argumentativer Unintegrität auf kognitive und emotionale Komponenten von Diagnose- und Bewertungsreaktionen [Argumentational integrity (XIV); Effect of valence and sequence on cognitive and emotional components of diagnosis and evaluation of unfair contributions] (Rep. No. 67). Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany: Sonderforschungsbereich 245 "Sprache und Situation."
4. Christmann, U., & Mischo, C. (2000). The efficacy of communicative fairness and rhetorical aesthetics in contributions to argumentations: An experimental testing in written and auditory presentation mode. Language and Speech, 43, 229-259.
5. Christmann, U., Mischo, C., & Flender, J. (2000). Argumentational integrity: A training program for dealing with unfair argumentative contributions. Argumentation, 14, 339-360.
6. Christmann, U., Mischo, C., & Groeben, N. (2000). Components of the evaluation of integrity violations in argumentative discussions: Relevant factors and their relationships. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 19, 315-341.
7. Cody, M. J., & McLaughlin, M. L. (1990). Interpersonal accounting. In H. Giles & W. P. Robinson (Eds.), Handbook of language and social psychology (pp. 227-255). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
8. Eemeren, F. V., & Grootendorst, R. (1992). Argumentation, communication, and fallacies: A pragma-dialectical perspective. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
9. Groeben, N., Nüse, R., & Gauler, E. (1992). Diagnose argumentativer Unintegrität. Objektive und subjektive Tatbestandsmerkmale bei Werturteilen über argumentative Sprechhandlungen [Diagnosis of severity and awareness in evaluating argumentative speech acts]. Zeitschrift für Experimentelle und Angewandte Psychologie, 39, 533-558.
10. Holtgraves, T. M. (2002). Language as social action: Social psychology and language use. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
11. Krupat, E., & Garonzik, R. (1994). Subject's expectations and the search for alternatives to deception in social psychology. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 211-222.
12. Mikula, G. (1993). On the experience of injustice. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 223-244). New York: Wiley.
13. Mischo, C. (2000a). Fair oder Unfair? Übergehen oder Ansprechen? Bewertung argumentativer Unintegrität und Reaktionsmöglichkeiten [Fair or unfair? To ignore or to respond? Evaluation of argumentational integrity and possible reactions]. Zeitschrift für Experimentelle Psychologie, 47, 281-296.
14. Mischo, C. (2000b). Reaktionen auf unfaire Argumente: kognitive, emotionale und konative Aspekte [Reactions to unfair contributions: Cognitive, emotional and conative aspects]. Lengerich: Pabst.
15. Mischo, C. (2002). Personality and ability effects on reactions to argumentative unfairness. Social Justice Research.
16. Ng, S. H. (1990). Language and control. In H. Giles & W. P. Robinson (Eds.), Handbook of language and social psychology (pp. 271-285). New York: Wiley.
17. Nüse, R., Groeben, N., & Gauler, E. (1991). Argumentationsintegrität (V): Diagnose argumentativer (Un-)Integrität-(Wechsel-)-Wirkungen von Komponenten subjektiver Werturteile über argumentative Sprechhandlungen[Argumentational integrity (V): Diagnosis of argumenational integrity: (Interaction) effects of components of speech act-evaluation] (Rep. No. 33). Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany: Sonderforschungsbereich 245 "Sprache und Situation."
18. Schönbach, P., & Kleibaumhüter, P. (1989). Severity of reproach and defensiveness of accounts. In M. J. Cody & M. L. McLaughlin (Eds.), The psychology of tactical communication (pp. 229-243). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
19. Schreier, M., Groeben, N., & Buckle, G. (1995). The effects of (un)fairness and (impoliteness on the evaluation of argumentative communication. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 14, 260-288.
20. Schreier, M., Groeben, N., & Christmann, U. (1995). That's not fair! Argumentational integrity as an ethics of argumentative communication. Argumentation, 9,267-289.
21. Smith, C. A., Haynes, K. N., Lazarus, R., & Pope, L. K. (1993). In search of the "hot" cognitions: Attributions, appraisals, and their relation to emotion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 916-929.
22. Van de Vliert, E., & Euwema, M. C. (1994). Agreeableness and activeness as components of conflict behaviors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 674-678.
23. Weiner, B. (1995). Judgments of responsibility: A foundation of a theory of social conduct. New York: Guilford.