RESEARCHREVIEW

CURRENT RESEARCH FOR FAMILY ADVOCACY PROGRAMS • VOL. 1, NO. 4 • WINTER 2023

PREVENTING INEFFECTIVE ARGUING, VERBAL ALTERCATIONS,AND VERBAL AGGRESSION
Aggressive verbal interactions between partners areamong the triggers of domestic violence (DV) incidents.
While mild arguments are generally common in relationships, heated and emotionally-charged arguments canresult in serious physical violence, which in their mostsevere form can result in homicide and suicide. In addition, such arguments can also result in serious psychological abuse. As a result, efforts to minimize aggressive
and unproductive verbal arguments can promote militaryfamily well-being.
Ineffective arguing. Arguments that fail to resolve
issues are ineffective and may result in potential harmto the involved parties. In this Research Review (RR) we
define ineffective arguing and present some common
topics that are often the basis for argumentative exchanges
that can become dangerous. As a means of preventing
abuse and violence, we suggest methods to defuse sucharguments and to introduce possible avenues to theirresolution. Ineffective arguing has been defined as “dysfunctional couple conflict resolution patterns, including
ending an argument without achieving a resolution, notfeeling heard, and repeatedly arguing about the same issue" (Lowery, Novak, McWey, & Ketring, 2023).
Arguments and relationship breakup. Arguments
leading to angry exchanges can lead to escalation ofphysical violence perpetration and the breakup of relationships. A national study of 15,162 people between theages 16-74 years in 2010-2012, reported the reasons forlive-in partnership breakup in the past five years varied
by gender and type of relationship (married vs. cohabita-tion). A greater percentage of women (14.1%) than men(10.9%) reported a breakup of a marriage or cohabiting
relationship (Gravningen et al., 2017). The duration of
the marriages was similar for men and women (14%), but
was much shorter for cohabitations, 3.5 years for menand 4.6 years for women. Although growing apart was themain reason reported for the breakups, arguments were
the reported cause for 27% of men and 30% of women.
Other sex-related differences in reasons for breakup were
unfaithfulness/adultery (18% vs 24% for men and women,respectively), and lack of respect/appreciation (17% vs25%), irrespective of partnership type. The most striking difference was the occurrence of reports of domestic
violence, reported by 16% of women and 4% of men.
Emotionally-charged topics of conflict. Many common topics result in domestic arguments, but among
the most serious include those about finances and othereconomic hardships, suspected or confirmed infidelity,
parenting practices involving child rearing and otherchild-related issues (such as custody and visiting practices
when parents are separated or divorced), involvement ofrelatives, control issues such as phone monitoring, questioning the whereabouts of the partner, failure to sharehousehold responsibilities and chores, and plans for thefuture.
Contempt. Triggers for aggressive arguments canbe verbal as well as non-verbal. Showing contempt for
one’s partner has elements of both. Demonstrations ofcontempt include anger, insults, perceived discourtesy,
refusal to respond (silent treatment), eye rolling, com-mands, hostile humor, sarcasm, mockery, name calling,facial displays of disgust and dislike, criticism, stonewalling, defensiveness, belligerence, and other antagonistic
actions particular to the relationship (Sommer, Iyican, &Babcock, 2016).
Strategies to Defuse Arguments. There are many
possible strategies to stop hostile arguments. Self-help
tools are readily available on the Internet. Please visit theCenter for the Study of Traumatic Stress (CSTS) Safe isStrong website (https://www.cstsonline.org/safe/welcome)and click the “Healthy Parenting Relationships” tab forresources on conflict resolution skills, anger management,problem solving, effective communication, and others.
We suggest that those who wish to learn more effective
ways to stop arguing consider three domains: physiological, behavioral, and cognitive. Some examples based onthese strategies follow.
• Physiological strategies aim to calm oneself and tocalm others. Recognize characteristics of emotionalarousal, including rapid heartbeat, sweating, musculartension, and shortness of breath. Strategies that may
be used to defuse these physiological reactions include
those aimed at lowering emotional reactivity andarousal, such as taking deep breaths and relaxing tensemuscles.
• Behavioral strategies are intended to stop the argument or to decrease its intensity. Among these arepausing before speaking, speaking slower, lowering
voice volume, keeping a normal voice tone and not
speaking harshly or sarcastically, walking back a few
steps if contact could lead to aggression, and leaving
the scene if there is no resolution in sight.
For over 20 years, the Center’s Family Violence
and Trauma Project has published thenewsletters Joining Forces Joining Families(JFJF) and Research Review: Family Violence(RR) on child maltreatment and domestic
violence. The publications provide criticalinformation to professionals working in family
services, primary care, and mental healthas well as those in positions of community
leadership or policy development. Please
visit https://www.cstsonline.org/resources/
newsletters/ for links to these newsletters, andshare this information with your colleagues.

2 • RESEARCH REVIEW• Cognitive strategies focus on intent (cognitions)rather than internal states (physiology). What is yourintent? Can you compromise? Consider the otherperson’s feelings and intent. Postpone the discussion if
no resolution is in sight or if conflict escalates. Listen
to the other person until s/he is finished talking before
shouting or interrupting.
Risk factors that lead to ineffective arguments.
Recent alcohol use by either partner is a risk for lack ofemotional and behavioral control. In addition to the riskof homicide and suicide, brandishing or threatening witha weapon, especially firearms, can result in the partner’s
fear and can destroy the opportunity to discuss the issues.
Other risk factors include personality styles such as rigidity in holding an opinion, the need to always be right, andlack of empathy for the partner’s feelings and position.
Barriers to stopping an argument. The presence ofrecent alcohol use by either partner is a risk for lack ofemotional and behavioral control. Brandish or threatening with a weapon, especially firearms, can result in fear
and an inability. Other barriers can be identified in personality style such as rigidity in holding an opinion andthe need to always be right.
Summary. Arguments can escalate resulting in harmful or even tragic consequences. To avoid such outcomes,individuals will benefit from strategies to defuse argu-RESEARCH REVIEW
EditorTasanee R. Walsh, PhD, MPH, MSW
Senior Scientist; Research Assistant Professor
Department of Psychiatry, USU
e-mail to tasanee.walsh.ctr@usuhs.edu
Research Review is a publication of the CSTS Family Violence
and Trauma Project and and the Army Deputy Chief of Staff,
G-9, Family Advocacy Program, Washington, DC
Editorial Consultants
Stephen J. Cozza, MD, COL, U.S. Army Retired
Professor of Psychiatry and Pediatrics, USU
James E. McCarroll, PhD, MPH, COL, US. Army Retired
Research Professor, Department of Psychiatry, USU

Winter 2023

ments and resolve issues without distress or harm. Thesestrategies include:• recognizing when an argument is ineffective and stopping the argument or changing strategy• being aware of topics that are emotionally charged andtaking steps to minimize an emotional response rather
than responding to the emotions• being aware of physiological, behavioral, and cognitive
strategies that can defuse an argument• not arguing when there has been recent alcohol consumption by either party• never threatening or having a weapon, particularly afirearm, near the scene of an argument

REFERENCES
Gravningen, K., Mitchell, K. R., Wellings, K., Johnson, A.
M., Geary, R., Jones, K. G., … Mercer, C. H. (2017).
Reported reasons for breakdown of marriage andcohabitation in Britain: Findings from the third National
Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles (Natsal-3). PLoS
One, 12(3), e0174129. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0174129
Lowery, D. F., Novak, J. R., McWey, L. M., & Ketring, S.
A. (2023). A test of the dyadic associations between
ineffective arguing, emotional distress, and violence
perpetration and victimization among couples seeking
therapy. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 1-19.
doi:10.1111/jmft.12654
Sommer, J., Iyican, S., & Babcock, J. (2016). The relation
between contempt, anger, and intimate partner violence:
A dyadic approach. Journal of Interpersonal Violence,
886260516665107. doi:10.1177/0886260516665107

http://www.CSTSonline.org

RESEARCH REVIEW • 3