Personality and Ability Effects on Reactions to Argumentative Unfairness

Social Justice Research

Volumn 15, Issue 1, 2002, Pages 1-18

  Mischo, Christoph ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MANNHEIM   (Germany)

Author keywords

Argumentative integrity; Personality; Reaction; Unfairness

Indexed keywords

EID: 0038572346     PISSN: 08857466     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1016090430823     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In Berkowitz, L. (ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 2, Academic Press, New York, pp. 267-297.
2. Albin, C. (1992). The role of fairness in negotiation. Negot. J. 3: 223-244.
3. Albright, J. S., and Henderson, M. C. (1996). How real is depressive realism? A question of scales and standards. Cogn. Ther. Res. 19: 589-609.
4. Arbuckle, L. (1999). Amos V. 4.01, Small Waters Corporation, Chicago, IL.
5. Averill, J. R. (1983). Studies on anger and aggression: Implications for theories of emotion. Am. Psychol. 38: 1145-1160.
6. Becker, P. (1995). Seelische Gesundheit und Verhaltenskontrolle: Eine integrative Persönlichkeitstheorie und ihre klinischen Anwendungen [Mental Health and Behavior Control: An Integrative Personality Theory and It's Applications], Hogrefe, Göttingen.
7. Becker, P. (1999). Beyond the Big Five. Pers. Ind. Diff. 26: 511-530.
8. Brunswik, E. (1956). Perception and the Representative Design of Psychological Experiments, University of California Press, Berkely, CA.
9. Campbell, D. T., and Fiske, D.W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychol. Bull. 56: 81-105.
10. Chaiken, S., and Eagly, A. H. (1986). The heuristic model of persuasion. In Zanna, M. P., Olson. J. M., and Herman, C. P. (eds.), Social Influence: The Ontario Symposium, Vol. 5, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 3-40.
11. Christmann, U., and Groeben, N. (1993a). Argumentationsintegrität (XI): Retrognostische Überprüfung der Handlungsleitung Subjektiver Theorien über Argumentations(un-)integrität von Kommunalpolitikern/ innen [Argumentative integrity (XI): Retrognostic proof of action-leading aspects of politicians' subjective theories] (Rep. No. 64), Sonderforschungsbereich 245 'Sprache und Situation,' Heidelberg/Mannheim.
12. Christmann, U., and Groeben, N. (1993b). Argumentationsintegrität (XIV): Der Einfluβ von Valenz und Sequenzstruktur argumentative Unintegrität auf kognitive und emotionale Komponenten von Diagnose- und Bewertungsreaktionen [Argumentative integrity (XIV): Effect of valence and sequence on cognitive and emotional components of diagnosis and evaluation of unfair contributions] (Rep. No. 67), Sonderforschungsbereich 245 'Sprache und Situation,' Heidelberg/ Mannheim.
13. Christmann, U., and Mischo, C. (2000). The efficacy of communicative fairness and rhetorical aesthetics in contributions to argumentations: An experimental testing in written and auditory presentation mode. Lang. Speech 43: 229-259.
14. Christmann, U., Mischo, C., and Flender, J. (2000b). Argumentative integrity: A training program for dealing with unfair argumentative contributions. Argumentation 14: 339-360.
15. Christmann, U., Mischo, C., and Groeben, N. (2000a). Components of the evaluation of integrity violations in argumentative discussions. Relevant factors and their relationships. J. Lang. Soc. Psychol. 19: 315-341.
16. Cody, M. J., and McLaughlin, M. L. (1990). Interpersonal accounting. In Giles, H., and Robinson, W. P. (eds.), Handbook of Language and Social Psychology, Wiley, Chichester, New York, pp. 227-255.
17. Dill, K. E., Anderson, C. A., and Deuser, W. E. (1997). Effects of aggressive personality on social expectations and social perception. J. Res. Pers. 31: 272-292.
18. Eemeren, F. V., Grootendorst, R., and Henkemans, F. S. (1996). Fundamentals of Argumentation Theory, Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.
19. Endler, N. S., and Magnussion, D. (1976). Interactional Psychology and Personality, Hemisphere, Washington, DC.
20. Faul, F., and Erdfelder, E. (1992). GPOWER: A Priori, Post-hoc, and Compromise Power Analyses for MS-Dos [Computer software], Department of Psychology, Bonn University, Bonn.
21. Fereira, F., and Anes, M. (1994). Why study spoken language? In Gernsbacher, M. A. (ed.), Handbook of Psycholinguistics, Academic Press, San Diego, pp. 33-56.
22. Fishbein, M., and Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior. An Introduction to Theory and Research, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
23. Forgas, J. P. (1998). On feeling good and getting your way: Mood effects on negotiator cognition and bargaining strategies. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 74: 565-577.
24. Greenwood, J. D. (1983). Role-playing as an experimental strategy in social psychology. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 13: 235-254.
25. Hewes, D. E. (1995). Cognitive processes of problematic messages: Reinterpreting to "unbias" texts. In Hewes, D. E. (ed.), The Cognitive Bases of Interpersonal Communication, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 113-138.
26. Romans, G. C. (1961). Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, New York.
27. Hoser, K., Schmitt, M., and Schwenkmetzger, P. (1993). Verantwortlichkeit und Ärger [Responsibility and anger]. In Hodapp, V., and Schwenkmetzger, P. (eds.), Ärger und Ärgerausdruck [Anger and Anger Expression], Huber, Bern, pp. 143-168.
28. Jäger, A. O., and Althoff, K. (1984). Der Wilde-Intelligenz-Test (WIT) [Wilde-Intelligence-Scale], Hogrefe, Göttingen.
29. Lupfer, M. B., Weeks, K. P., Doan, K. A., and Houston, D. A. (2000). Folk conceptions of fairness and unfairness. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 30: 405-428.
30. Mikula, G. (1993). On the experience of injustice. In Stroebe, W., and Hewstone, M. (eds.), European Review of Social Psychology, Vol. 4, Wiley, New York, pp. 223-244.
31. Mikula, G., Petri, B., and Tanzer, N. (1990). What people regards as unjust: Types and structures of everyday experiences of injustice. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 20: 133-149.
32. Mischo, C. (2000). Fair oder Unfair? Übergehen oder Ansprechen? Bewertung argumentativer Unintegrität und Reaktionsmöglichkeiten [Fair or unfair? To ignore or to respond? Evaluation of argumentative integrity and possible reactions]. Z. Exp. Psychol. 47: 281-296.
33. Mischo, C., Groeben, N., Christmann, U., and Flender, J. (in press). Konzeption und Evaluation eines Trainings zum Umgang mit unfairem Argumentieren in Organisationen [Concept and evaluation of a training program for dealing with unfair argumentative contributions]. Z. Arbeits Organisationspsychologie.
34. Murray, S.-L., and Holmes, J.-G. (1997). A leap of faith? Positive illusions in romantic relationships. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 23: 586-604.
35. Naess, A. (1966). Communication and Argument. Elements of Applied Semantics, Allen and Unwin, London.
36. Oswald, M. (1989). Schadenshöhe, Strafe und Verantwortungsattribution [Amount of harm, punishment and attribution of responsibility]. Z. Sozialpsychologie 20: 200-210.
37. Schmitt, M., Neumann, R., and Montada, L. (1995). Dispositional sensitivity to befallen injustice. Soc. Just. Res. 8: 386-407.
38. Schreier, M. (1997). Das Erkennen sprachlicher Täuschung. Über Absichtlichkeitsindikatoren beim unintegren Argumentieren [Identification of Verbal Deception. About Indicators of Intentionality in Unfair Argumentative Discourse], Aschendroff, Münster.
39. Schreier, M., and Groeben, N. (1996). Ethical guidelines for the conduct in argumentative discussions: An exploratory study. Hum. Relat. 49: 123-132.
40. Schreier, M., Groeben, N., and Blickle, G. (1995b). The Effects of (un-)iairness and (im-)politeness on the evaluation of argumentative communication. J. Long. Soc. Psychol. 14: 260-288.
41. Schreier, M., Groeben, N., and Christmann, U. (1995a). That's not fair! Argumentative integrity as an ethics of argumentative communication. Argumentation 9: 267-289.
42. Schreier, M., Groeben, N., and Mlynski, G. (1994). Argumentationsintegrität (XV): Der Einfluβ von Valenz, Indikatoren subjektiver Tatbestandsmäβigkeit, (Un-)Höflichkeit auf die Diagnose und Thematisierung argumentativer Unintegrität [Argumentative integrity (XV): Effect of valence, indicators of subjective facts, (im-)politeness on diagnosis and response to unfair argumentative contributions] (Rep. No. 68), Sonderforschungsbereich 245 'Sprache und Situation,' Heidelberg/Mannheim.
43. Selman, R. L., Beardslee, W., Schulte, L. H., Krupa, M., and Podorefsky, D. (1986). Assessing adolescent interpersonal negotiation strategies: Towards the integration of structural and functional models. Dev. Psychol. 22: 450-459.
44. St. Pierre, R. G., and Cook, T. D. (1984). Sampling strategy in the design of programm evaluations. In Conner, R. F., Altman, D. G., and Jackson, C. (eds.), Evaluation Studies Review Annual, 9, Sage, Beverly Hills, CA, pp. 459-484.
45. Thomas, R. M. (1995). Classifying Reactions to Wrongdoing. Taxonomies of Misdeeds, Sanctions, and Aims of Sanctions, Greenwood, Westport, CT.
46. Van de Vliert, E., and Euwema, M. C. (1994). Agreeableness and activeness as components of conflict behaviors. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 66: 674-678.
47. Walster, E. (1966). Assignment of responsibility of an accident. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 3: 73-79.
48. Weiner, B. (1995). Judgments of Responsibility. A Foundation of a Theory of Social Conduct, Guilford, New York.
49. Wildt, A. (1993). Die Moralspezifität von Affekten und der Moralbegriff [Moral specifity of affects and concept of morals]. In Fink-Eitel, H., and Lohmann, G. (eds.), Zur Philosophie der Gefühle [On the Philosophy of Emotions], Suhrkamp, Frankfurt, pp. 188-217.
50. Williams, E. J. (1949). Experimental designs balanced for the estimation of residual effects of treatments. Austr. J. Sci. Res. 2: 149-168.