Argumentativeness and verbal aggressiveness: Testing for conceptual and measurement equivalence across cultures

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Research in the United States has identified argumentativeness and verbal aggressiveness as, respectively, constructive and counterproductive forms of communication predispositions. The present study tests the conceptual equivalence of the two constructs and the measurement equivalence of the Argumentativeness Scale (Infante & Rancer, 1982) and the Verbal Aggressiveness Scale (Infante & Wigley, 1986) across cultures. College students from the United States (N = 755) and Japan (N = 716) responded to a questionnaire. The results indicated that: (a) the two—factor solution of the Argumentativeness Scale and the Verbal Aggressiveness Scale was a reasonable overall fit to both samples, with some culture‐specific unreliable items; (b) orthogonality of the two constructs held for both samples; (c) the factor structures (factor loading patterns and factor variance‐covariance structures) of the two scales were partially variant across the samples; and (d) the two scales had satisfactory construct validity for the Japanese sample. Implications for research on aggressive communication in connection with Hall's (1981) theory of cultural variation, cross‐cultural conflict management, and measurement in cross‐cultural communication research are discussed.