Blurting

References

• Ayres, L., Kavanaugh, K., & Knafl, K. A. (2003). Within-case and across-case approaches to qualitative data analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 12, 871–883. doi:10.1177/1049732303013006008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beatty, M. J., Heisel, A. D., Hall, A. E., Levine, T. R., & La France, B. H. (2002). What can we learn from the study of twins about genetic and environmental influences on interpersonal affiliation, aggressiveness, and social anxiety?: A meta-analytic study. Communication Monographs, 69, 1–18. doi:10.1080/03637750216534
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beatty, M. J., Valencic, K. M., Rudd, J. E., & Dobos, J. A. (1999). A ‘dark side’ of communication avoidance: Indirect interpersonal aggressiveness. Communication Research Reports, 16, 103–109. doi:10.1080/08824099909388707
   Google Scholar
• Bem, S. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42, 155–162. doi:10.1037/h0036215
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berger, C. R. (1997). Planning strategic interaction: Attaining goals through communicative action. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Berger, C. R. (2004). Speechlessness: Causal attributions, emotional features and social consequences. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 23, 147–179. doi:10.1177/0261927X04263821
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berger, C. R. (2007). Communication: A goal-directed, plan-guided process. In D. R. Roskos-Ewoldsen & J. L. Monahan (Eds.), Communication and social cognition: Theories and methods (pp. 47–70). Mahwah NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Berger, C. R. (2010). Message production processes. In C. R. Berger, M. E. Roloff, & D. R. Roskos-Ewoldsen (Eds.), Handbook of communication science ( 2d. ed., pp. 111–127). Los Angeles CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Burnham, K. P., & Anderson, D. R. (2004). Multimodel inference: Understanding AIC and BIC in model selection. Sociological Methods & Research, 33, 261–304. doi:10.1177/0049124104268644
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cai, D. A., & Wilson, S. R. (2000). Identity implications of influence goals: A cross-cultural comparison of interaction goals and facework. Communication Studies, 51, 307–328. doi:10.1080/10510970009388529
   Google Scholar
• Cody, M. J., Woelfel, M. L., & Jordan, W. J. (1983). Dimensions of compliance-gaining situations. Human Communication Research, 9, 99–113. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1983.tb00686.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis, M. H. (1980). A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 10, 85.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis, M. H. (1983). Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 113–126. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.44.1.113
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dillard, J. P. (2004). The goals-plans-action model of interpersonal influence. In J. S. Seiter & R. H. Gass (Eds.), Perspective on persuasion, social influence, and compliance gaining (pp. 185–206). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
   Google Scholar
• Dillard, J. P., Segrin, C., & Harden, J. M. (1989). Primary and secondary goals in the production of interpersonal influence messages. Communication Monographs, 56, 19–38. doi:10.1080/03637758909390247
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dillard, J. P., & Solomon, D. H. (2000). Conceptualizing context in message-production research. Communication Theory, 10, 167–175. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2000.tb00186.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dowd, E. T., Milne, C. R., & Wise, S. L. (1991). The therapeutic reactance scale: A measure of psychological reactance. Journal of Counseling and Development, 69, 541–545. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6676.1991.tb02638.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, S. B. G. (1975). Manual of the Eysenck personality questionnaire. London: Hodder and Stoughton.
   Google Scholar
• Eysenck, S. B. G., Eysenck, H. J., & Barrett, P. (1985). A revised version of the psychoticism scale. Personality and Individual Difference, 6, 21–29. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(85)90026-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilbert, M. A. (1995). Coalescent argumentation. Argumentation, 9, 837–852. doi:10.1007/BF00744761
   Google Scholar
• Greene, J. O. (1997). A second generation action assembly theory. In J. O. Greene (Ed.), Message production: Advances in communication theory (pp. 151–170). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Hamilton, M. A., & Mineo, P. J. (2002). Argumentativeness and its effect on verbal aggressiveness: A meta-analytic review. In M. Allen, R. W. Preiss, B. M. Gayle, & N. Burrell (Eds.), Interpersonal communication research: Advances through meta-analysis (pp. 281–314). Mahwah NJ: Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Hample, D. (2003). Arguing skill. In J. O. Greene & B. R. Burleson (Eds.), Handbook of communication and social interaction skills (pp. 439–478). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Hample, D. (2005). Arguing: Exchanging reasons face to face. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Hample, D., & Dallinger, J. M. (1987). Cognitive editing of argument strategies. Human Communication Research, 14, 123–144. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1987.tb00124.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hample, D., & Dallinger, J. M. (1998). On the etiology of the rebuff phenomenon: Why are persuasive messages less polite after rebuffs? Communication Studies, 49, 305–321. doi:10.1080/10510979809368541
   Google Scholar
• Hample, D., & Dallinger, J. M. (2002). The effects of situation on the use or suppression of possible compliance gaining appeals. In M. Allen, R. Preiss, B. Gayle, & N. Burrell (Eds.), Interpersonal communication research: Advances through meta-analysis (pp. 187–209). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Hample, D., Warner, B., & Norton, H. (2006). The effects of arguing expectations and predispositions on perceptions of argument quality and playfulness. Argumentation and Advocacy, 43, 1–13.
   Google Scholar
• Hample, D., Warner, B., & Young, D. (2009). Framing and editing interpersonal arguments. Argumentation, 23, 21–37. doi:10.1007/s10503-008-9107-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayes-Roth, B., & Hayes-Roth, F. (1979). A cognitive model of planning. Cognitive Science, 3, 275–310. doi:10.1207/s15516709cog0304_1
   Google Scholar
• Hobbs, J. R., & Evans, D. A. (1980). Conversation as planned behavior. Cognitive Science, 4, 349–377. doi:10.1207/s15516709cog0404_2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Honeycutt, J. M. (2003). Imagined interactions: Daydreaming about communication. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hong, S.-M., & Faedda, S. (1996). Refinement of the Hong psychological reactance scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56, 173–182. doi:10.1177/0013164496056001014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hong, S.-M., & Page, S. (1989). A psychological reactance scale: Development, factor structure and reliability. Psychological Reports, 64, 1323–1326. doi:10.2466/pr0.1989.64.3c.1323
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Infante, D. A., & Rancer, A. S. (1982). A conceptualization and measure of argumentativeness. Journal of Personality Assessment, 46, 72–80. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa4601_13
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Infante, D. A., & Wigley, C. J. (1986). Verbal aggressiveness: An interpersonal model and measure. Communication Monographs, 53, 61–69. doi:10.1080/03637758609376126
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kalichman, S. C., & Rompa, D. (1995). Sexual sensation seeking and sexual compulsivity scales: Reliability, validity, and predicting HIV risk behavior. Journal of Personality Assessment, 65, 586–601. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa6503_16
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levine, T. R., Beatty, M. J., Simon, S., Hamilton, M. A., Buck, R., & Chory-Assad, R. M. (2004). The dimensionality of the verbal aggressiveness scale. Communication Monographs, 71, 245–268. doi:10.1080/0363452042000299911
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCroskey, J. C., Heisel, A. D., & Richmond, V. P. (2001). Eysenck's BIG THREE and communication traits: Three correlational studies. Communication Monographs, 68, 360–366. doi:10.1080/03637750128068
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyer, J. R. (1997). Cognitive influences on the ability to address interaction goals. In J. O. Greene (Ed.), Message production: Advances in communication theory (pp. 71–90). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Meyer, J. R. (2001). Pursuing relational goals in requests: The effects of dispositional factors and type of relationship. Southern Communication Journal, 67, 51–66. doi:10.1080/10417940109373218
   Google Scholar
• Meyer, J. R. (2002). Contextual influences on the pursuit of secondary goals in request messages. Communication Monographs, 69, 189–203. doi:10.1080/03637750216539
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyer, J. R. (2003). Cognitive representations of request situations: The relative importance of goal specificity and situation features. Western Journal of Communication, 67, 292–314. doi:10.1080/10570310309374773
   Google Scholar
• Miller, G. A., Galanter, E., & Pribram, K. H. (1960). Plans and the structure of behavior. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
   Google Scholar
• Morse, J. M., & Field, P. A. (1995). Qualitative research methods for health professionals. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Motley, M. T., Baars, B. J., & Camden, C. T. (1983). Experimental and verbal slip studies: A review and an editing model of language encoding. Communication Monographs, 50, 79–101. doi:10.1080/03637758309390156
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ochs, E. (1979). Planned and unplanned discourse. In T. Givon (Ed.), Syntax and semantics, vol. 12: Discourse and syntax (pp. 51–80). New York, NY: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rancer, A. S., & Avtgis, T. A. (2006). Argumentative and aggressive communication: Theory, research, and application. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Shen, L., & Dillard, J. P. (2005). Psychometric properties of the Hong psychological reactance scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 85, 74–81. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa8501_07
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stanford, M. S., Mathias, C. W., Dougherty, D. M., Lake, S. L., Anderson, N. E., & Patton, J. H. (2009). Fifty years of the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale: An update and review. Personality and Individual Differences, 47, 385–395. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2009.04.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stiff, J. B., Dillard, J. P., Somera, L., Kim, H., & Sleight, C. (1988). Empathy, communication, and prosocial behavior. Communication Monographs, 55, 198–213. doi:10.1080/03637758809376166
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swann, W. B. Jr., & Rentfrow, P. J. (2001). Blirtatiousness: Cognitive, behavioral, and physiological consequences of rapid responding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 1160–1175. doi:10.1037//0022-35I4.81.6.1160
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vohs, K. D., Baumeister, R. F., & Ciarocco, N. J. (2005). Self-regulation and self-presentation: Regulatory resource depletion impairs impression management and effortful self-presentation depletes regulatory resources. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 632–657. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.88.4.632
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• von Hippel, W., & Gonsalkorale, K. (2005). “That is bloody revolting!”: Inhibitory control of thoughts better left unsaid. Psychological Science, 16, 497–500. doi:10.1111/j.09567976.2005.01563.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waldron, V. R. (1997). Toward a theory of interactive conversational planning. In J. O. Greene (Ed.), Message production: Advances in communication theory (pp. 195–220). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar