Corporal punishment and communication in father‐son dyads

Jeffrey Kassing, Kevin J. Pearce, Dominic A. Infante

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This study was based on a communication‐oriented perspective of corporal punishment of children. The perspective posits that physically aggressive influence tactics would be associated with aggressive communication and a set of communication outcomes. The perceptions of 74 father‐son dyads were solicited to test these relationships. Results indicated that when there was lower argumentativeness and higher verbal aggressiveness in father‐son communication there was more corporal punishment as an influence tactic and that fathers and sons perceived the relationship as less favorable in terms of influence success, communication competence, affirming style, and credibility.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)237-249
Number of pages13
JournalCommunication Research Reports
Volume17
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2000

Fingerprint

dyad
penalty
communication
Communication
tactics
aggressiveness
credibility
father

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Communication

Cite this

Corporal punishment and communication in father‐son dyads. / Kassing, Jeffrey; Pearce, Kevin J.; Infante, Dominic A.

In: Communication Research Reports, Vol. 17, No. 3, 01.01.2000, p. 237-249.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Kassing, Jeffrey ; Pearce, Kevin J. ; Infante, Dominic A. / Corporal punishment and communication in father‐son dyads. In: Communication Research Reports. 2000 ; Vol. 17, No. 3. pp. 237-249.
@article{b1e378cc15294c3d973b04fa4efc78a6,
title = "Corporal punishment and communication in father‐son dyads",
abstract = "This study was based on a communication‐oriented perspective of corporal punishment of children. The perspective posits that physically aggressive influence tactics would be associated with aggressive communication and a set of communication outcomes. The perceptions of 74 father‐son dyads were solicited to test these relationships. Results indicated that when there was lower argumentativeness and higher verbal aggressiveness in father‐son communication there was more corporal punishment as an influence tactic and that fathers and sons perceived the relationship as less favorable in terms of influence success, communication competence, affirming style, and credibility.",
author = "Jeffrey Kassing and Pearce, {Kevin J.} and Infante, {Dominic A.}",
year = "2000",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/08824090009388771",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "17",
pages = "237--249",
journal = "Communication Research Reports",
issn = "0882-4096",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Corporal punishment and communication in father‐son dyads

AU - Kassing, Jeffrey

AU - Pearce, Kevin J.

AU - Infante, Dominic A.

PY - 2000/1/1

Y1 - 2000/1/1

N2 - This study was based on a communication‐oriented perspective of corporal punishment of children. The perspective posits that physically aggressive influence tactics would be associated with aggressive communication and a set of communication outcomes. The perceptions of 74 father‐son dyads were solicited to test these relationships. Results indicated that when there was lower argumentativeness and higher verbal aggressiveness in father‐son communication there was more corporal punishment as an influence tactic and that fathers and sons perceived the relationship as less favorable in terms of influence success, communication competence, affirming style, and credibility.

AB - This study was based on a communication‐oriented perspective of corporal punishment of children. The perspective posits that physically aggressive influence tactics would be associated with aggressive communication and a set of communication outcomes. The perceptions of 74 father‐son dyads were solicited to test these relationships. Results indicated that when there was lower argumentativeness and higher verbal aggressiveness in father‐son communication there was more corporal punishment as an influence tactic and that fathers and sons perceived the relationship as less favorable in terms of influence success, communication competence, affirming style, and credibility.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=72549089160&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=72549089160&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/08824090009388771

DO - 10.1080/08824090009388771

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:72549089160

VL - 17

SP - 237

EP - 249

JO - Communication Research Reports

JF - Communication Research Reports

SN - 0882-4096

IS - 3

ER -