money? Especially, let you eat lobster? Huh? Letting you enjoy that." (Mom is invoking guilt by characterizing herself as generous which weakens the teen’s argument that she should get more money). OR M: "I'm just not sure how well I can handle what you're proposing...we might have to try it and see how it goes." OR 16 year old: since I’m still a child I should be able to act like a child in this.” (in “But part because it’s a teenager saying it not a child). 2 - Explicit suggestion that resolution of argument depends upon a characteristic of the person (rather than upon behavior). HOWEVER, statement is not critical of the person. Example #1 of 2-level statement: M: "If you were I think you'd understand better." (Note that age is not necessarily linked to ability to understand). OR An introduction of the speaker’s character in which guilt-invoking is stronger/more explicit or it is implied (but not explicitly stated) that the speaker’s limits should determine the outcome. Further examples of 2-level statements: M: I thought that you were to help me with the housework, with the at least few things you knew had to be done. I really expected that you were going to do those chores It was unfair to me when it wasn’t done. for me! totally OR M: really can’t stand to hear you and your sister fighting - it just drives me over the “I edge.” (implied limits) A: really can’t stand cleaning the cat’s litter box—it just drives me over the edge.” “I 3 - An ad hominem argument made in a critical way. Examples of 3-level statements: "You're just saying that because you're a ..." "You're thinking too much like a lawyer/parent/adolescent, etc.". OR An introduction of the speaker’s character that suggests that the limits of the speaker should determine the outcome of the discussion/dictate the other’s behavior, and that is highly guilt-invoking (these statements imply that the speaker will apart” if Os “fall behavior does not change).
money? Especially, let you eat lobster? Huh? Letting you enjoy that." (Mom is invoking guilt by characterizing herself as generous which weakens the teen’s argument that she should get more money). OR M: "I'm just not sure how well I can handle what you're proposing...we might have to try it and see how it goes." OR 16 year old: “But since I’m still a child I should be able to act like a child in this.” (in part because it’s a teenager saying it not a child). 2 - Explicit suggestion that resolution of argument depends upon a characteristic of the person (rather than upon behavior). HOWEVER, statement is not critical of the person. Example #1 of 2-level statement: M: "If you were I think you'd understand better." (Note that age is not necessarily linked to ability to understand). OR An introduction of the speaker’s character in which guilt-invoking is stronger/more explicit or it is implied (but not explicitly stated) that the speaker’s limits should determine the outcome. Further examples of 2-level statements: M: I thought that you were to help me with the housework, at least with the few things you knew had to be done. I really expected that you were going to do those chores for me! It was totally unfair to me when it wasn’t done. OR M: “I really can’t stand to hear you and your sister fighting - it just drives me over the edge.” (implied limits) A: “I really can’t stand cleaning the cat’s litter box—it just drives me over the edge.” 3 - An ad hominem argument made in a critical way. Examples of 3-level statements: "You're just saying that because you're a ..." "You're thinking too much like a lawyer/parent/adolescent, etc.". OR An introduction of the speaker’s character that suggests that the limits of the speaker should determine the outcome of the discussion/dictate the other’s behavior, and that is highly guilt-invoking (these statements imply that the speaker will “fall apart” if Os behavior does not change).
VIO-Niolon20120307-RRR-F1.docx