Amy N. VanBuren and Amy K. Rottmann
The purpose of this quantitative research was to determine if there are differences in scores on the Connor- Davidson Resilience Scale among undergraduate students involved in…
Abstract
The purpose of this quantitative research was to determine if there are differences in scores on the Connor- Davidson Resilience Scale among undergraduate students involved in honors leadership programs at a four- year university. The study was an analysis of students’ reported resilience scores in relation to the number of leadership activities in which they participated to examine the potential impact of leadership practices on resilience levels of the students. Results of the dependent variables were the total resilience score, and the five factors of resilience: persistence and tenacity; emotional and cognitive control; adaptability and ability to bounce back; control; and spiritual influences. Independent variables were the number of leadership programs completed, age, gender, and class status. The level of significance used for the statistical test was .05. There was no significant difference in the total resilience scores among the three activity groups. However, a majority of students scored well above the national average score, and male students scored slightly higher than females. Additionally, females scored higher than the national average.
Steve Winer, Leslie Ramos Salazar, Amy M. Anderson and Mike Busch
The purpose of this study is to extend Bippus and Young’s (2005) study and examine the effectiveness of the “I-you,” “I,” “You,” “We,” “But” and Question-based “Why” statements…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this study is to extend Bippus and Young’s (2005) study and examine the effectiveness of the “I-you,” “I,” “You,” “We,” “But” and Question-based “Why” statements from Winer’s (2021) verbal coding program of conflict management using Bandura’s (1977) social learning theory (SLT).
Design/methodology/approach
Mixed methods were used using 175 university students from Texas and New York. A cross-sectional convenience sampling approach was conducted. Survey data was collected using Qualtrics.
Findings
Descriptive results demonstrated that the “We” statement was the most passive, the “I-you” statement was the most assertive and the “But,” “I,” “You” and Question statements were perceived to be aggressive. In addition, assertive “I-You” statements were perceived to be more effective in resolving the conflict and maintaining a relationship, whereas aggressive statements were less likely to resolve the conflict and maintain the relationship. Qualitative themes also support the “I-You” statement as the most assertive, while the “But,” “You” and “I” statements were found to be the most aggressive statements.
Practical implications
Implications and applications are discussed to stimulate future research among researchers and practitioners when addressing conflict. Being aware of the verbal statements that de-escalate conflict may be helpful in solving conflict in interpersonal, family and professional relationships. Future trainings can adopt effective verbal statements to resolve conflict when experiencing anger issues. Future research can continue to investigate verbal communication statements using SLT to help practitioners and managers address conflict in interpersonal relationships.
Originality/value
This study examines verbal statements in relation to communication styles and conflict management.