TY - JOUR
AU - SPARKS, LENN G.
AB -  nalysis of the article by Burgoon, Kelley, Newton, and Keeley-Dyreson (1989) and Burgoon and Le Poire's comments reveals a convenient alternation between two distinct approaches to the relation of arousal and nonverbal behavior. By shifting between these positions, this group of researchers is able to maintain the appearance of a deeper explanatory foundation based on physiological mechanisms by invoking claims about "arousal" while simultaneously denying that physiological assessment is necessary to establish the validity of these claims. Our aim here is not simply to expose this alternation but to demonstrate that both positions are problematic. Indeed, in retreating from the unsubstantiated claims advanced in Burgoon et al., Burgoon and Le Poire have been forced to clearly articulate a position that is even more precarious. Central to Burgoon and Le Poire's position is their claim that we have incorrectly characterized the purposes and conclusions advanced by Burgoon d al. Contrary to their charge, however, examination of the experimental rationale, statement of purposes, and conclusions advanced by Burgoon et al. shows that our characterization is quite wellfounded. The essence of the rationale given by Burgoon et al. is that although arousal has emerged as a central construct in numerous theories 
TI - Intellectual Scrutiny as an Alternative to Replies From the Heart
JF - Human Communication Research
DO - 10.1111/j.1468-2958.1992.tb00562.x
DA - 1992-03-01
UR - https://www.deepdyve.com/lp/oxford-university-press/intellectual-scrutiny-as-an-alternative-to-replies-from-the-heart-Ki1YZhHk6B
SP - 483
VL - 18
IS - 3
DP - DeepDyve
ER -