Predicting Affectionate and Aggressive Teasing Motivation on the Basis of Self-Esteem and Imagined Interactions With the Teasing Victim

References

• Alberts, J. K. (1990). The use of humor in managing couples’ conflict interactions. In D. D. Cahn (Ed.), Intimates in conflict: A communication perspective (pp. 105–120). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Alberts, J. K., Kellar-Guenther, Y., & Corman, S. R. (1996). That’s not funny: Understanding recipients’ responses to teasing. Western Journal of Communication, 60, 337–357. doi:10.1080/10570319609374553
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baxter, L. A. (1992). Forms and functions of intimate play in personal relationships. Human Communication Research, 18, 336–363. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.1992.tb00556.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beck, S., Clabaugh, S., Clark, R. A., Kosovski, M., Daar, R., Hefner, V., … Suri, R. (2007). Teasing among college men and women. Communication Studies, 58, 157–172. doi: 10.1080/10510970701341105
   Google Scholar
• Brown, T. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Creedon, M. T., Ray, S., & Harkin, D. A. (2009). Peer teasing, body-image and eating problems among women. American Journal of Psychological Research, 1, 111–130.
   Google Scholar
• DiCioccio, R. L. (2008). The development and validation of the teasing communication scale. Human Communication, 11, 255–272.
   Google Scholar
• Ellis, J. B., & Smith, S. (2004). Memorable messages as guides to self-assessment of behavior: A replication and extension diary study. Communication Monographs, 71, 97–119. doi: 10.1080/03634520410001691456
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gorman, G., & Jordan, C. (2015). “I know you’re kidding”: Relationship closeness enhances positive perceptions of teasing. Personal Relationships, 22, 173–187. doi: 10.1111/pere.12071
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hample, D., Richards, A. S., & Na, L. (2012). A test of the conflict linkage model in the context of serial arguments. Western Journal of Communication 76, 459–479. doi: 10.1080/10570314.2012.703361
   Google Scholar
• Hanish, L. D., & Guerra, N. G. (2004). Aggressive victims, passive victims, and bullies: Developmental continuity or developmental change? Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 50, 17–38. doi:10.1353/mpq.2004.0003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heerey, E. A., Capps, L. M., Keltner, D., & Kring, A. M. (2005). Understanding teasing: Lessons from children with autism. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 33, 55–68. doi: 10.1007/s10802-005-0934z
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Honeycutt, J. M. (2003). Imagined interactions: Daydreaming about communication. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton.
   Google Scholar
• Honeycutt, J. M. (2004). Imagined interaction conflict-linkage theory: Explaining the persistence and resolution of interpersonal conflict in everyday life. Imagination, Cognition, and Personality, 23, 3–25. doi: 10.2190/240J-1VPK-K86D-1JL8
   Google Scholar
• Honeycutt, J. M. (2009). Symbolic interdependence, imagined interaction, and relationship quality. Imagination, Cognition, and Personality, 28, 303–320. doi: 10.2190/IC.28.4.b
   Google Scholar
• Honeycutt, J. M. (2010a). Forgive but don’t forget: Correlates of rumination about conflict. In J. M. Honeycutt (Ed.), Imagine that: Studies in imagined interaction (pp. 17–29). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton.
   Google Scholar
• Honeycutt, J. M. (2010b). Appendix of instruments: Survey of Imagined Interaction (SII). In J. M. Honeycutt (Ed.), Imagine that: Studies in imagined interaction (pp. 205–212). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton.
   Google Scholar
• Honeycutt, J. M. (2012). Imagined interactions: On knowing what to say. In K. Lollar, W. M. Monsour, & J. Barwind (Ed.), The talk within: Its central role in communication (pp. 181–203). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.
   Google Scholar
• Honeycutt, J. M. (2015). Imagined interaction theory: Mental representations of interpersonal communication. In D. O. Braithwaite & P. Schrodt (Eds.), Engaging theories in interpersonal communication (2nd ed., pp. 75–87). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Honeycutt, J. M., Pence, M. E., & Gearhart, C. C. (2012). Associations between imagined interactions and the “big five” personality traits. Imagination, Cognition, and Personality, 32, 273–289. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.2190/IC.32.3.d
   Google Scholar
• Honeycutt, J. M., Pence, M. E., & Gearhart, C. C. (2013). Using imagined interactions to predict covert narcissism. Communication Reports, 26, 26–38. doi: 10.1080/08934215.2013.773051
   Google Scholar
• Honeycutt, J. M., & Sheldon, S. P. (2017). Scripts and communication for relationships (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Honeycutt, J. M., Vickery, A. J., & Hatcher, L. C. (2015). The daily use of imagined interaction features. Communication Monographs, 82(2), 201–223. doi: 10.1080/03637751.2014.953965
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keltner, D., Capps, L., Kring, A. M., Young, R. C., & Heerey, E. A. (2001). Just teasing: A conceptual analysis and empirical review. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 229–248. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.127.2.229
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kennedy, P. (2003). A guide to econometrics (5th ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Knapp, M. L., Vangelisti, A. L., & Caughlin, J. P. (2013). Interpersonal communication and human relationships (7th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
   Google Scholar
• Kowalski, R. M. (2000). “I was only kidding!”: Victims’ and perpetrators’ perceptions of teasing. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 231–241. doi: 10.1177/0146167200264009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kowalski, R. M. (2003). Complaining, teasing, and other annoying behaviors. London, UK: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kowalski, R. M. (2007). Teasing and bullying. In B. H. Spitzberg & W. R. Cupach (Eds.), The dark side of interpersonal communication (pp. 169–197). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Kowalski, R. M., Howerton, E., & McKenzie, M. (2001). Permitted disrespect: Teasing in interpersonal interactions. In R. M. Kowalski (Ed.), Behaving badly: Aversive behaviors in interpersonal relationships (pp. 177–202). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• Kruger, J., Gordon, C. L., & Kuban, J. (2006). Intentions in teasing: When” just kidding” just isn’t good enough. Journal Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 412–425. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.412
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mills, C. B., & Carwile, A. M. (2009). The good, the bad, and the borderline: Separating teasing from bullying. Communication Education, 58, 276–301. doi: 10.1080/03634520902783666
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mottett, T. P., & Thweatt, K. S. (1997). The relationships between peer teasing, self‐esteem, and affect for school. Communication Research Reports, 14, 241–248). doi: 10.1080/08824099709388666
   Google Scholar
• Roloff, M. E., & Reznik, R. M. (2008). Communication during serial arguments: Connections with individuals' mental and physical well-being. In M. Motley (Ed.), Studies in applied interpersonal communication (pp. 97–120). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Roloff, M. E., & Wright, C. N. (2013). Social cognition and conflict. In J. G. Oetzel & S. Ting-Toomey (Eds.), The Sage handbook of conflict communication (2nd ed., pp. 133–160). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Rosenberg, M. (1979). Conceiving the self. New York, NY: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Shapiro, J., Baumeister, R., & Kessler, J. W. (1991). A three-component model of children’s teasing: Aggression, humor, and ambiguity. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 10, 459–472. doi:10.1521/jscp.1991.10.4.459
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wright, C. N., & Roloff, M. E. (2013). The influence of type of teasing and outcome on the negative experiences of teasers. Human Communication, 16, 95–107.
   Google Scholar
• Zagacki, K. S., Edwards, R., & Honeycutt, J. M. (1992). The role of mental imagery and emotion in imagined interaction. Communication Quarterly, 40, 56–68. doi: 10.1080/01463379209369820
   Google Scholar