10
Edwards, Bello, Brandau-Brown, and Hollems (2001) found that individuals high
in verbal aggressiveness perceive ambiguous messages more negatively than their less
verbally aggressive peers. The authors found that “the results reveal that after controlling
for sex, both loneliness and verbal aggressiveness account for a significant portion of the
variance in the negative interpretation [of the ambiguous message]” (p. 146). The
sender’s verbal aggressiveness also plays an important role perceptually. Leets and Giles
(1997) found in a study on ethnic messages that contrary to conventional wisdom,
ambiguous messages were more likely to be considered verbally aggressive than more
explicit messages. Respondents perceived extreme remarks overtly addressed at their
ethnicity as less hurtful than non-ethnic observers did, while the less hurtful remarks
indirectly denigrating their ethnicity were perceived more negatively by the ethnic group
members than by non-ethnic observers.
Aggressive communication and relational satisfaction. A number of studies have
examined aggressive communication (predominantly argumentativeness) and its effects
on relational satisfaction (Anderson & Martin 1999; Martin & Anderson, 1997; Payne &
Sabourin, 1990; Rancer, Baukus, & Amato, 1986). Little research has explored other
relational levels with the exception of immediate family satisfaction (Feldman & Ridley,
2000; Sabourin, Infante & Rudd, 1993). At the acquaintance relational level, Martin and
Anderson (1997) studied argumentativeness on roommate satisfaction, but they found no
correlation between roommate satisfaction and argumentativeness. Nonetheless there is a
dearth of communication literature that addresses the effect of aggressive communication
on relationship formation. The underlying assumption is that argumentativeness is good
and verbal aggressiveness is bad for relational development.
Convention