Argumentative style of parent-child interactions: A case study

Parent-child argumentation is a unique form of communication, as it combines persuasion, emotional exchange, and instructional dynamics shaped by contextual factors and cultural norms. To fully understand how a parent balances dialectical reasonableness with rhetorical adaptability to resolve conflicts and foster cooperation with the child within specific context, this study investigates the argumentative style of parent-child interaction within the Chinese context, focusing on the interplay of cultural values, educational goals, and argumentative practices in family interaction. Within a corpus of 20 hours of recordings of parent-child conversations concerning educational topics from 5 Chinese families, a conversation between a mother and a son during homework was selected and qualitatively analyzed, based on the framework of Argumentative Style developed from the standard model of pragma-dialectics. The findings highlight the predominant use of an engaged argumentative style in the case, which features the parent's radiating commitment in topical selection, communality in adaptation to audience demand and inclusiveness in presentational devices. An occasional shift to a detached style was also identified, particularly when the authority figure of the teacher was invoked. The subtle balance between nurturing parental involvement and reinforcing respect for established norms is reflective of the broad Chinese cultural values that parents bear significant responsibilities for children's academic success, and act as guides and enforcers in family education. By investigating the roles different argumentative styles play in real-life parent-child interaction, this study provides implications for developing effective communication strategies in family education and highlights the significance of culturally informed argumentative practices.