126 Ss' responses to obscene language from the evaluative dimension of meaning were investigated. Results indicated that Ss respond most favorably to religious profanities and that sexual words generally received the most negative evaluative response of those words surveyed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BaudhuinE.Obscene language and source credibility: An experimental study. Paper delivered at International Communication Association convention, Phoenix, Arizona, 1971.
2.
BittermanM.KniffinC.Manifest anxiety and “perceptual defense.”Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1953, 48, 248–252.
3.
BostromR.RossiterC.The effects of three types of profane language on persuasive messages. Paper delivered at Speech Association of America convention, New York, 1969. (a)
4.
BostromR.RossiterC.Profanity, justification, and source credibility. Paper delivered at International Communication Association convention, Cleveland, Ohio, 1969. (b)
5.
BrunerJ.GoodmanC.Value and need as organized factors in perception. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1947, 42, 33–44.
6.
CameronP.Frequency and kinds of words in various social settings, or what the hell's going on?Pacific Sociological Review, 1969, 12, 101–104.
7.
CrowneD.MarloweD.The approval motive: Studies in evaluative dependence, New York: Wiley, 1967.
8.
EdwardsA.Experimental design in psychological research. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, 1968.
9.
LacyO.LewingerN.AdamsonJ.Foreknowledge as a factor affecting perceptual defense and alertness. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1953, 45, 169–174.
10.
McGinniesE.Emotionality and perceptual defense. Psychological Review, 1949, 56, 244–251.
11.
McGinniesE.ShermanH.Generalization of perceptual defense. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1952, 47, 81–85.
12.
MontagueA.The anatomy of swearing. New York: Macmillan, 1967.
13.
RossH.Patterns of swearing. Discovery, 1961, 1, 40.
14.
WorthingtonA.Differential rates of dark adaptation to “taboo” and “neutral” stimuli. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 1964, 18, 257–265.
