Self‐monitoring and the cognitive editing of arguments |
| |
| Authors: | Dale Hample Judith M Dallinger |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Professor in the Department of Communication Arts and Sciences , Western Illinois University;2. Associate Professor in the Department of Communication Arts and Sciences , Western Illinois University |
| |
| Abstract: | This report improves upon the authors’ previous investigations of naive actors’ argument standards in two ways: (a) by using a checklist to obtain subjects’ rationales for not using various arguments and (b) by using multiple operationalizations of each compliance gaining strategy. Overall results correspond generally to those of the earlier studies: effectiveness concerns account for 23.5% of rejections, principled objections to specific strategies for 15.7%, person‐centered issues for 26.1%, and discourse competence rules for 34.6%. The self‐monitoring scale has serious psychometric problems and does not strongly predict use of rejection criteria. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
|
|
