Naive Theories of Argument: Avoiding Interpersonal Arguments or Cutting Them Short

Participants kept diaries of arguments that were avoided or cut short, and what tactics were used. We determined if the diarist thought the argument was explicit, if it was destructive, and how the diarist felt about it. We explored whether certain tactics are mostly used for avoidance or for cutting short. Explicitness and destructiveness of arguments are highly correlated (r = 80). This is problematic for an academic speciality that is committed to the idea that argumentation is an alternative to violence.