Overview

Winner of the 2019 Gerald R. Miller Outstanding Book Award presented by the Interpersonal Communication Division of the National Communication Association (NCA). Interpersonal Arguing is an accessible review of scholarship on key elements of face-to-face arguing, which is the interpersonal exchange of reasons. Topics include frames for understanding the nature of arguing, argument situations, serial arguments, argument dialogues, and international differences in how people understand interpersonal arguing. This is a thorough survey of the leading issues involved in understanding how people argue with one another.

Full Product Details

9781433134388

Table of Contents

Reviews

Anyone who studies arguing among dyads or in interpersonal relationships needs to have this book for their personal library. Dale Hample's book clearly explains how argument is developed by two people and how it affects the relationship between them. He writes in a conversational tone accessible to those with a wide variety of prior knowledge of the area. This book should be useful to those in argumentation, conflict, and other related areas such as persuasion, intercultural, and relational communication. - Amy Janan Johnson, Professor, Department of Communication, University of Oklahoma I would argue (pun intended) that Dale Hample's Interpersonal Arguing is an outstanding book that discusses an evolutionary view of arguing and the prudent necessity for framing arguments. He presents empirical studies as well as situational examples. The appendix of instruments is worthwhile. I particularly was enthralled with the chapters on serial arguing and arguing as a personality trait (think of the current president's tweets in which conflict is taken personally). The discussion of argument frames is enticing in an age in which some people think that arguments that are not based on scientific research are equally credible (e.g., climate change deniers, believers in conversion therapy). Indeed, as stated in the book: `The belief that everyone is entitled to an opinion does not logically imply that all opinions have the same merit, which is an unfortunate impression that some people have (Kuhn, 1991).' This is a great book with massive applications to everyday relationships, persuasion/marketing appeals, negotiations, campaign consultants, and understanding intergroup conflict. - James Honeycutt, Professor, Communication Studies, Louisiana State University

“Anyone who studies arguing among dyads or in interpersonal relationships needs to have this book for their personal library. Dale Hample’s book clearly explains how argument is developed by two people and how it affects the relationship between them. He writes in a conversational tone accessible to those with a wide variety of prior knowledge of the area. This book should be useful to those in argumentation, conflict, and other related areas such as persuasion, intercultural, and relational communication.” — Amy Janan Johnson, Professor, Department of Communication, University of Oklahoma “I would argue (pun intended) that Dale Hample’s Interpersonal Arguing is an outstanding book that discusses an evolutionary view of arguing and the prudent necessity for framing arguments. He presents empirical studies as well as situational examples. The appendix of instruments is worthwhile. I particularly was enthralled with the chapters on serial arguing and arguing as a personality trait (think of the current president’s tweets in which conflict is taken personally). The discussion of argument frames is enticing in an age in which some people think that arguments that are not based on scientific research are equally credible (e.g., climate change deniers, believers in conversion therapy). Indeed, as stated in the book: ‘The belief that everyone is entitled to an opinion does not logically imply that all opinions have the same merit, which is an unfortunate impression that some people have (Kuhn, 1991).’ This is a great book with massive applications to everyday relationships, persuasion/marketing appeals, negotiations, campaign consultants, and understanding intergroup conflict.” — James Honeycutt, Professor, Communication Studies, Louisiana State University

Anyone who studies arguing among dyads or in interpersonal relationships needs to have this book for their personal library. Dale Hample's book clearly explains how argument is developed by two people and how it affects the relationship between them. He writes in a conversational tone accessible to those with a wide variety of prior knowledge of the area. This book should be useful to those in argumentation, conflict, and other related areas such as persuasion, intercultural, and relational communication. - Amy Janan Johnson, Professor, Department of Communication, University of Oklahoma I would argue (pun intended) that Dale Hample's Interpersonal Arguing is an outstanding book that discusses an evolutionary view of arguing and the prudent necessity for framing arguments. He presents empirical studies as well as situational examples. The appendix of instruments is worthwhile. I particularly was enthralled with the chapters on serial arguing and arguing as a personality trait (think of the current president's tweets in which conflict is taken personally). The discussion of argument frames is enticing in an age in which some people think that arguments that are not based on scientific research are equally credible (e.g., climate change deniers, believers in conversion therapy). Indeed, as stated in the book: 'The belief that everyone is entitled to an opinion does not logically imply that all opinions have the same merit, which is an unfortunate impression that some people have (Kuhn, 1991).' This is a great book with massive applications to everyday relationships, persuasion/marketing appeals, negotiations, campaign consultants, and understanding intergroup conflict. - James Honeycutt, Professor, Communication Studies, Louisiana State University

Author Information

Dale Hample earned his Ph.D. in communication from the University of Illinois in 1975. He has been conducting research in argumentation and related processes (conflict management, persuasion, and interpersonal communication) since that time. His previous books are Readings in Argumentation (1992; co-edited with William and Pamela Benoit) and Arguing: Exchanging Reasons Face to Face (2005). The latter won the 2007 Gerald R. Miller Book Award from the National Communication Association’s Interpersonal Communication Division. He has also won or shared research awards from the American Forensic Association four times. He has keynoted argumentation conferences in the U.S., Canada, Chile, and the Netherlands. He is on the communication faculty at the University of Maryland.

Tab Content 6

Customer Reviews

Recent Reviews

Countries Available