A “Dark Side” of Communication Avoidance: Indirect Interpersonal Aggressiveness

Although our understanding of direct forms of verbal aggressiveness has been greatly advanced over the past decade, indirect interpersonal aggressiveness has remained relatively understudied. In the present study, items designed to tap indirect forms of interpersonal aggressiveness were written, administered to participants, factor analyzed along with verbal aggressiveness items, and correlated with a criterion measure. Results produced an internally consistent set of item which: (1) loaded on a separate factor from verbal aggressiveness items, (2) contributed unique variance over that accounted for by verbal aggressiveness in the prediction of psychoticism, a theoretically appropriate criterion variable for validating aggression measures, and (3) loaded on the same factor with verbal aggressiveness and psychoticism when second‐order factor analysis was conducted

A “Dark Side” of Communication Avoidance: Indirect Interpersonal Aggressiveness

Although our understanding of direct forms of verbal aggressiveness has been greatly advanced over the past decade, indirect interpersonal aggressiveness has remained relatively understudied. In the present study, items designed to tap indirect forms of interpersonal aggressiveness were written, administered to participants, factor analyzed along with verbal aggressiveness items, and correlated with a criterion measure. Results produced an internally consistent set of item which: (1) loaded on a separate factor from verbal aggressiveness items, (2) contributed unique variance over that accounted for by verbal aggressiveness in the prediction of psychoticism, a theoretically appropriate criterion variable for validating aggression measures, and (3) loaded on the same factor with verbal aggressiveness and psychoticism when second‐order factor analysis was conducted

Interactive Effects of Parents’ Trait Verbal Aggressiveness and Situational Frustration on Parents’ Self‐Reported Anger

Examines the relationship between anger experienced by parents\u27 trait verbal aggressiveness and the frustrations, caused by the interaction with children. What was cited as an ordinary interaction between parents\u27 trait verbal aggressiveness and situational frustration; Process in which the examination was conducted; Exploration of a measure of trait verbal aggressiveness to parents; Discussion based on the results

Interactive Effects of Parents’ Trait Verbal Aggressiveness and Situational Frustration on Parents’ Self‐Reported Anger

Examines the relationship between anger experienced by parents\u27 trait verbal aggressiveness and the frustrations, caused by the interaction with children. What was cited as an ordinary interaction between parents\u27 trait verbal aggressiveness and situational frustration; Process in which the examination was conducted; Exploration of a measure of trait verbal aggressiveness to parents; Discussion based on the results

An Empirical Test of a Communibiological Model of Trait Verbal Aggressiveness

The purpose of this study was to test Beatty and McCroskey\u27s communibiological model of trait verbal aggressiveness. In general, this model views trait verbal aggressiveness as an expression of temperament; specifically, that trait verbal aggressiveness represents low thresholds for the fight or flight (FFS) neurobiological system. This model further contends that behavioral inhibition circuitry (BIS) moderates FFS activation by tempering aggressive impulses, otherwise FFS activation would manifest itself in the form of physical rather than verbal attacks. Beatty and McCroskey (1997) propose that low thresholds for stimulating the behavioral activation system (BAS) should be related to trait verbal aggressiveness to the extent that the construct involves a proactive rather than a purely reactive interpersonal function. Because previous research indicated that psychoticism (P), neuroticism (N) and extroversion (E) represent psychological manifestations of the FFS, BIS, and BAS systems, respectively, hypotheses linking P, N, and E to trait verbal aggressiveness (VAS) were tested. A multiple regression equation based on disattenuated correlations explained approximately 46% of the variance in VAS scores. Specifically, (1) the results for P and N were consistent with predictions derived from Beatty and McCroskey\u27s model, and (2) the results for E were indicative of a purely reactive function of trait verbal aggressiveness. Implications for theory and research are discussed

An Empirical Test of a Communibiological Model of Trait Verbal Aggressiveness

The purpose of this study was to test Beatty and McCroskey\u27s communibiological model of trait verbal aggressiveness. In general, this model views trait verbal aggressiveness as an expression of temperament; specifically, that trait verbal aggressiveness represents low thresholds for the fight or flight (FFS) neurobiological system. This model further contends that behavioral inhibition circuitry (BIS) moderates FFS activation by tempering aggressive impulses, otherwise FFS activation would manifest itself in the form of physical rather than verbal attacks. Beatty and McCroskey (1997) propose that low thresholds for stimulating the behavioral activation system (BAS) should be related to trait verbal aggressiveness to the extent that the construct involves a proactive rather than a purely reactive interpersonal function. Because previous research indicated that psychoticism (P), neuroticism (N) and extroversion (E) represent psychological manifestations of the FFS, BIS, and BAS systems, respectively, hypotheses linking P, N, and E to trait verbal aggressiveness (VAS) were tested. A multiple regression equation based on disattenuated correlations explained approximately 46% of the variance in VAS scores. Specifically, (1) the results for P and N were consistent with predictions derived from Beatty and McCroskey\u27s model, and (2) the results for E were indicative of a purely reactive function of trait verbal aggressiveness. Implications for theory and research are discussed