Argument and verbal aggression in constructive and destructive family and organizational disagreements

Abstract

This study explored the extent to which argumentative and verbally aggressive behavior is perceived in family and organizational disagreement situations which are either constructive or destructive. The comparison of participants’ and observers’ perceptions was of interest. Three hypotheses were derived from a recently developed model of aggressive forms of communication. Participants (N = 137) described in writing an experienced family or organizational disagreement which was either constructive or destructive. Later, 137 persons (observers) read the descriptions. Both participants and observers rated the communication described in terms of argumentative and verbally aggressive conduct. Considerable support was observed for two of the three hypotheses. More argument and less verbal aggression were observed in constructive as compared to destructive disagreements regardless of context. More verbal aggression was reported in family as compared to organizational disagreements. Finally, participants, when compared to observers, perceived the most argument and verbal aggression.