Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF VERBAL AGGRESSION WITHIN SIBLING

RELATIONSHIPS

The Effects of Verbal Aggression Within Sibling Relationships

Avery Lamphere, Ashley Lewis,

Hannah Madore, & Lydia Paglierani

Bryant University

Abstract
Verbal Aggression Within Sibling Relationships
1

This study examined the relationship between verbal aggression and closeness. Students

at a small, private, northeastern university took a likert-scale questionnaire with a series of 25

statements and questions. Analyses revealed that if a sibling was verbally aggressive during

childhood, then there is less of a chance of them being close later in life. These results prove that

the null hypothesis- verbal aggression does not affect closeness in sibling relationships from

childhood- was rejected. When verbal aggression is perceived as negative and closeness is

perceived as positive, then as verbal aggression increases, relational closeness decreases.

Keywords: siblings, sibling relationships, verbal aggression, closeness

The Effects of Verbal Aggression Within Sibling Relationships

Verbal Aggression Within Sibling Relationships
2

Sibling relationships are very unique types of relationships. They are “forced” and

involuntary meaning they spend a large portion of their lives together (Fitzpatrick & Badzinski,

1994; Vangelisti, 1994). One reason it is unique is the way siblings grow and develop in the

same familial structure and environment, from childhood to adulthood. Another reason sibling

relationships are unique is because of their biological or legal relation attributes; an inescapable

relationship in which the siblings are bound together for life. This kind of relationship differs

from friendships or intimate relationships because siblings have an extensive understanding of

each other, as well as each other’s experiences.

Not all parts of the sibling relationship are positive. There can be conflict that can occur

for a variety of reasons, and can become a form of aggression as a result. There are several kinds

of aggression that can be examined regarding relational closeness. However, in this study we

look closer into the aspects of verbal aggression with the understanding that this communication

trait plays an important role in sibling relationships, ultimately defining their levels of relational

closeness (Martin, Anderson, Burant, Weber, 1997).

With all of these factors in mind, some may experience more aggression as a child versus

an adult. The purpose of this study is designed to explore the effects of verbal aggression as a

child into adulthood. Because verbal aggression contributes to the decrease of relational

satisfaction, we can predict that relationship closeness between siblings will also decrease.

Literature Review

Relational Closeness
Verbal Aggression Within Sibling Relationships
3

Malcolm R. Parks and Kory Floyd’s (1996) study discussed the various ways that people

perceive their interpersonal relationships with one another as being close. The group that was

surveyed was 270 college students. The survey contained multiple questions on what people

perceive as being in a close relationship. The researchers had four hypotheses. Those hypotheses

were regarding cross sex relationships different from same sex relationships. The four

hypotheses, themselves, do not necessarily pertain to our study, but the scale of the study do.

Their results included multiple traits that the participants identified as being in a close

relationship.

The respondents were asked two open-ended questions about their closest relationships.

Twelve traits stood out amongst the rest that continuously came up in the open responses. Those

twelve traits include the following; self disclosure, help and support, shared interests, relational

expression, comfort and ease, trust, acceptance, frequent interaction, global effect,

understanding, length of relationship, advice and perspective, and respect. However only four

traits were addressed by a substantial number of the participants.

Self disclosure was mentioned by over two-thirds of the participants at 71% (Parks &

Floyd, 1996). Self disclosure is defined in the communication field of study as sharing

information with others to create a closer interpersonal relationship. As one party self discloses

to another, the two parties become closer to one another.

Help and Support was the second highest trait mentioned by participants with 37% (Parks

& Floyd, 1996). This included both emotional support along with instrumental support.

Emotional support is the ability to give empathy within the relationship. Instrumental support is

given in an interpersonal relationship. This form of support helps them make decisions about

their lives.
Verbal Aggression Within Sibling Relationships
4

The next trait mentioned by respondents was shared interests and activities at 30.7%

(Parks & Floyd, 1996). The way this relates to closeness is the fact that if two parties have shared

interests and activities, they will have a larger breadth and depth of topics to discuss. It can also

lead to more time spent within the interpersonal relationship.

The final trait that was substantially mentioned by participants was relational expression.

The number of respondents that defined a close relationship as having relational expression was

30% (Parks & Floyd, 1996). Relational expression is defined as respondents seeing displays of

communication within an interpersonal relationship that demonstrates closeness. These

communication displays can be verbal or nonverbal communication that reflects a positive light.

Weaver, Coleman, and Ganong (2003) discuss the relationship between sibling pair type,

sibling functions, perceived sibling functions, and perceived closeness. Their first hypothesis

states that sister and brother pairs will be more likely to perform the sibling functions compared

to opposite-sex siblings. To support this, the researchers took into account how women have

been taught to care and assist those around them. There is then a cultural expectation that they

would provide support for each other more often during young adulthood compared to other

types of sibling pairs (Weaver, Coleman, & Ganong, 2003).

A second hypothesis proposes that sisters will be more likely than brother-brother,

brother-sister, or sister-brother pairs to perform the sibling functions for each other. Branching

off of this, female sibling pairs will be more likely to provide services more-so than male sibling

pairs. Finally, the fourth hypothesis states that closeness and the performance of sibling functions

will be positively related for all siblings (Weaver, Coleman, & Ganong, 2003). Factors of

closeness can be identified as sharing of confidences, listening to problems, and providing help

and services.
Verbal Aggression Within Sibling Relationships
5

Weaver etc. all collected data from 224 college students whose ages ranged from 18-24

and completed the SRQ (The Sibling Relations Questionnaire) and the FRSD (Family Relations

Semantic Differential) measures. Surprisingly, it was discovered that the sex of the sibling dyad

did not have an impact on the performance of sibling functions as it was assumed to be.

However, it was found that sisters are found to consider and listen to each others’ opinions and

input more highly compared to other sibling dyads. Additionally, they are more likely to give

more verbal or non-verbal feedback since they are more socialized to share feelings and be

nurturing towards others (Weaver, Coleman, & Ganong, 2003).

The first hypothesis addressing that same-sex siblings would be more likely than brother-

sister, or sister-brother pairs, to perform the sibling functions was supported by the data for

sisters but not brother. The second hypothesis stating that sister pairs would be more likely to

perform the functions than all other sibling pair types, was supported for in that they provide

direct service. The third hypothesis, that sibling pairs with women (sister-sister, sister-brother,

brother-sister) would provide more services than all male dyads was actually not supported. It

was found that only sister-sister pairs differed consistently from brother-brother sibling pairs

(Weaver, Coleman, & Ganong, 2003).

Overall, young adult siblings (particularly sisters), are providing the roles and services

that fit the sibling functions above. This in turn is positively related to perceptions of closeness in

the relationship. This ties into our study because we discovered that the more verbally aggressive

siblings are during childhood, the less of a chance there is that they will be close later in life. The

opposite is also true. The relationship between teaching behaviors and perceptions of closeness

indicates that verbal communication and exchange is more important to female’s perceptions of
Verbal Aggression Within Sibling Relationships
6

sibling closeness compared to male’s. There is a relationship between perceptions of closeness

and the performance of sibling functions.

Verbal Aggression

Verbal aggression is a factor in perceived closeness and can be defined in many different

ways. A simple way of defining verbal aggression comes from Infante and Rance (1996),

explaining that verbal aggression is a type of message that is intended to hurt or offend another

person. However, Baron and Richardson (1994) argue that verbally aggressive messages are only

harmful to an individual if they decode the message as such. Therefore, it can be seen or

perceived as destructive by the individual who decoded the message.

In regards to sibling relationships, a study by Wiehe (1990) stated that “...this verbal,

emotional abuse between siblings is often difficult to detect”, since it does not leave behind any

physical evidence proving that verbal aggression occurred, while at the same time claims to be

an accepted behavior amongst the individuals. Another study by Stomshak, Bellanti, and

Bierman (1996) has examined the actions of verbal aggression occurring outside of parental

supervision, therefore contributing to the statement of Wiehe and his claim of verbal aggression

being difficult to detect.

Many studies relating to verbal aggression have found that this communication attribute

is not only related to closeness, but also related to relational satisfaction, having ‘negative’

effects on the two. In one study by Teven, Martin, and Neupauer (1998), they focused on sibling

relationships and how verbally aggressive messages affect relationship satisfaction. In their

study, they state that “...verbally aggressive messages degrade individuals and negatively affect

individuals’ feelings about their relationships…” Based on their study and previously stated

information, there is an understanding of how relational satisfaction has an impact on relational

closeness, how the two are intertwined and affected by verbal aggression.
Verbal Aggression Within Sibling Relationships
7

Martin et. al’s (1997) study focuses on verbal aggression in sibling relationships, verbal

aggression with satisfaction, interpersonal trust, whether receiving verbal aggression is hurtful

personally, and whether sibling sex had an influence on any of the above. Results revealed that

there was a positive relationship between sibling satisfaction and being personally hurt from

receiving verbally aggressive messages (Martin et al., 1997). Relationship satisfaction is

associated with relational closeness, but at the same time, it is expected that individuals tease

each other more than those “non-close” individuals (Gorman & Jordan, 2015).

Infante, Riddle, Horvath, & Tumlin (1992) found that there are primarily four causes or

reasons for verbal aggression. They include psychopathology, “attacking someone who reminds

one of an unresolved source of hurt”disdain, “expressing extreme dislike for another

person”social learning, “modeling aggressive behavior after an esteemed person”, and

argumentative skill deficiency, “attacking a person’s self-concept because one is unable to think

of counterarguments”. In their study, they explain how each cause of verbal aggression

contributes to the impact on relationships and relational satisfaction.

While verbal aggression is considered to be a destructive form of communication, up to

90% of men and women acknowledge engaging in verbal aggression, (Malik, Sorenson, &

Aneshensel, 1997). It has also been seen that aggressive communication can cause harm to the

emotional well-being of those receiving it. This can lead to aggression, anger, anxiety,

depression, and distress (Block, Block, & Morrison, 1981). This anger can also act as a catalyst

to cause an escalation in the conflict (Infante & Rancer, 1996).

Evidence suggests that people’s emotional reactions are highly variable when it comes to

expressing and suppressing verbal aggression. Both theory and research show that the expression

of verbal aggression can be positive and cathartic, (e.g., Bushman, 2002). This same situation

can also cause feelings of guilt and anxiety (Eagly & Steffen, 1986). Because these feelings
Verbal Aggression Within Sibling Relationships
8

affect interpersonal conflict and future encounters with aggression, we usually try to clarify these

messages.

In regards to both positive and negative outcomes, most studies have shown that the

expression of verbal aggression leaves the individual interpreting it as negative. An example of

this is in Koh, Kim, Kim, and Park (2005) study found that the anger expressed is directly

correlated with a feeling of depression. Eagly and Steffen (1986) found that those who express

verbal aggression often feel guilt and anxiety after. Some research has also been conducted that

shows the negative reaction is due to the individual’s personal qualities. One particular study that

examined this was Frodi, Macauley, and Thome (1977). This study argued that the relationship

between guilt and the expression of verbal aggression is mediated by empathy. It was concluded

that women are more likely to regret acting in a verbally aggressive way than men.

There is also research that looks at the positive side of venting through verbal aggression.

Based on the hydraulic model of anger, the Catharsis Theory states that the suppression of

frustration causes anger to increase in the individual. This anger must eventually be released in

order to restore the individual’s well-being. This aggressive release leads to an emotional release

that reduces tension between the two members involved and enables people to control negative

emotions (Baron & Richardson, 2004). Along with this idea, a study by Bushman et al. (2001)

found that individuals report feeling better after using verbal aggression to vent anger. Martin et

al. (2010) found that a sender might feel relieved and satisfied after venting their anger.

Since all verbally aggressive messages are hurtful, it makes sense that an aggressive

message would be considered a type of hurtful messages (Martin, Anderson, & Horvath, 1996).

A hurtful message is defined as something said or done by an individual that emotionally

wounds the person receiving the message (Vangelisti & Young, 2000). The three characteristics
Verbal Aggression Within Sibling Relationships
9

of a hurtful messages are the perceived hurtfulness of the message, the perceived intensity of the

message, and the perceived intent of the message (Young, 2004). Perceived hurtfulness is the

degree of ‘hurt’ associated with the message itself. Perceived intensity is the strength the

message is brought with. Perceived intent is the reason for which the message is sent. While

hurtful messages often result in negative relational outcomes, including devaluation, emotional

insecurity, and dislike (Leary, Springe, Negal, Ansell, & Evans, 1998), not all messages have the

same rate as others in their perceived hurtfulness, intensity, and intent.

In addition, a study conducted by Martin, Anderson, and Rocca (2005) have also argued

that verbal aggression is more commonly found in family relationships, since they have “less

pressure to communicate in socially desirable ways.” As previously stated in other studies and

including Martin, Anderson, and Rocca’s 2005 article, verbally aggressive messages come off as

the most offensive when the source and receiver are involved in close relationships, therefore

would lower the closeness levels within sibling relationships.

Rationale

Perceived verbal aggression has a big impact on the closeness of the relationship and the

type of relationship. In this case, we are discussing sibling relationships and how concepts such

as closeness and verbal aggression impact this involuntary relationship. We know that

individuals who grow up in a verbally aggressive environment or close relationship will more

likely be less satisfied in their relationships, and in return negatively affecting the closeness

levels with one another (Beatty & Dobos, 1992a, 1992b, 1993a, 1993b, 1993c; Beatty, Zelley,

Dobos, & Rudd, 1994; Martin & Anderson, 1995a). The biggest impact will be felt as a child
Verbal Aggression Within Sibling Relationships
10

when the shaping of an individual’s values are vital. Therefore, our hypothesis proposes a

negative relationship in which the perceivability of certain factors may change overtime:

H1: The more perceived verbal aggression a person experienced as a child from a

sibling, the lower their perceived closeness will be as an adult.

Methods

Procedure and Sample

The participants chosen to complete the questionnaire were undergraduate students from

a small, private university in the Northeastern region. Each participant in the study were required

to have at least one sibling in order for the research to be valid and reliable. The reasoning for

this requirement is to ensure that our data is congruent to the information we are specifically

researching; we are solely seeking information about sibling relationships and not those whom

are a single child. The questionnaire was administered to the participants just a few short days

after being reviewed and approved by the IRB. The questionnaire was administered to 126

students over an online distribution (Facebook). All subjects were of various ages and class

rankings at the university.

The type of research our group has chosen is a likert scale questionnaire. This form of

research data collecting is the most appropriate for this particular study, because it will reach our

targeted group- university students of ages 18 and above. Included in the survey are a series of

25 statements and questions that the participants will address, particularly thinking about one

sibling when they were at the age of 10-12 years old and now.

Measurement and Analytics.

Verbal Aggression. Verbal aggression is defined as an assault on another’s self-concept,

rather than his or her position. The scale used to measure verbal aggression was the Infante and
Verbal Aggression Within Sibling Relationships
11

Wigley’s (1986) Verbal Aggression Scale (VAS). This measure was the most thoroughly found

scale which our group believes will work the best for our research. This is a 20-item Likert scale

that asked students to think back to when they were under the age of 12 and how they interacted

with one sibling. They classified different ways they treated or were treated by their sibling

(0 = Almost Never True, 5 = Almost Always True). Scores ranged from 31 to 94 (M = 61.70,

SD = 11.195). Cronbach’s alpha for the measure was 0.877.

Closeness. Closeness can be defined as the degree of interdependence between partners

in a relationship. The scale used to measure this was Gorman and Jordan’s Closeness Scale. This

is a 5-item Likert scale asking students to think about the relationship they have with their sibling

now (1-Almost Never True, 5-Almost Always True). Scores ranged from 8 to 25 (M=16.43,

SD=3.890). Cronbach’s alpha was 0.760.

Everyone will be administered the questionnaire online so that the researchers will not

have influenced the answers given. This will increase validity because there will not be any

external factors affecting the participants. To increase the reliability of the survey has detailed

instructions and the questions are straightforward. A potentially confounding effect would be if

the students have a sibling or not. To try and circumvent this problem we have included a “yes”

or “no” question that asks if the participant has a sibling. If they answer “no” they are then taken

to the end of the questionnaire and their participation will not be recorded. If they answer “yes”,

they may continue on to complete the rest of the questionnaire.

The two characteristics that are being measured in the study are verbal aggression and

closeness between siblings. The variables will be measured on a Likert scale. The scale consists

of six different points of measurement ranging from “almost never true” to “almost always true”.

The participants completing the questionnaire will be Bryant University students. The unit of
Verbal Aggression Within Sibling Relationships
12

analysis is measured online because the questionnaire is administered via the web. The sample is

from one university in the northeast and is representative of that region of the country. The age

of respondents are college students. Therefore, they will be the representative sample observed.

Results

Our hypothesis predicted that higher verbal aggression during childhood would result in

lower levels of perceived closeness in adulthood. A correlation was used to test how related these

two variables were. Results showed that the correlation was significant at the .05 level (r = -.273,

n = 76, p = .01). The coefficient of the correlation was a value of 7%. This means that verbal

aggression is only 7% of how close siblings are later in life (r^2 = .07). If a sibling was verbally

aggressive during childhood, then there is less of a chance of them being close later in life. These

results prove that the null hypothesis- verbal aggression does not affect closeness in sibling

relationships from childhood- was rejected.

Discussion

All of our results showed a minimal correlation amongst verbal aggression and closeness

within sibling relationships. The p-value fell below the respected .05 level (p < .05), with a

correlation of 7%. Therefore, we rejected our null hypothesis. The data that was collected from

our survey and questionnaire greatly relates to the information provided from the literature

review. Verbal aggression is highly considered to be a form of destructive communication

(Malik, Sorenson, & Aneshensel, 1997). In regards to this, the article by Weaver, Coleman, &

Ganong (2003) discussed within their study that their fourth hypothesis stated that closeness

functions positively to siblings. Our data supports both these claims; if verbal aggression is

perceived as degrading and closeness is perceived as positive, then it makes sense that as verbal

aggression increases, then closeness decreases.

Verbal Aggression Within Sibling Relationships
13

There were multiple limitations to the study. One was the reliability of the Closeness

scale that was used. After running statistics on the scale, the cronbach alpha score was 0.76. This

level is not optimal and should have a higher value. One question on the scale was the root of the

problem. Question Number five “I attack the character of my sibling when attempting to

influence him/her.” This question was worded poorly and may have confused the participants of

the survey. If the study were to be replicated again, this question should be reworded so the

cronbach alpha number would be better correlated to the rest of the data.

Secondly, after distributing our survey to students of the university, we received just over

120 respondents. However, only 76 of our respondents could be used in our research due to the

fact that a majority of the remaining participants were a single child; others simply did not finish

completing the survey. This limited the amount of data we could use for our research. As a

group, we did not expect so many participants to have been a single child after the distribution of

our survey. It would have been important for our group to check more periodically with our

survey in order to keep better monitoring of our participants.

The third limitation to the study was the memory of the respondents. Respondents were

asked to think back to when they were young children. While thinking back respondents could

have a different memory than what is actual fact. Perceived memory can be far from the true

events that occured. Memory limits the amount of information the respondents are able to recall,

also limiting the validity of the data collected for our research.

Due to the fact that our research was confined to a small college campus in the northeast,

which has a 72.7% white population, this study would qualify to be ran again within a different

geographical location. If more responses came from other racial backgrounds where family

norms differ from those of our participants, the results may be different. It would be interesting
Verbal Aggression Within Sibling Relationships
14

to compare it to the results we found; if family norms associated with racial backgrounds affects

how siblings treat each other growing up and how close they stay as they become older.

Another future study that should be conducted is to explore if there is a difference in the

relationships between full siblings, half siblings, and stepsiblings. Step siblings are not born into

the relationship, they are forced. Half siblings only share one parent and may not be around each

other at all times. Because both of these situations include a forced relationship, they differ from

full siblings. Most step siblings and half siblings feel as though they are obligated to become

close with each other. This relationship will be different than that of siblings that have spent their

entire lives together. A study should be conducted in which these three groups are compared on

verbal aggression in childhood and their closeness later in life.

Verbal Aggression Within Sibling Relationships
15

References

Baron, R. A., & Richardson, D. R. (2004). Human aggression (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Plenum

Press.

Block, J. H., Block, J., & Morrison, A. (1981). Parental agreement-disagreement on child-rearing

orientations and gender-related personality correlates in children. Child Development, 52,

965–974.

Bushman, B. J. (2002). Does venting anger feed or extinguish the flame? Catharsis, rumination,

distraction, anger, and aggressive responding. Personality and Social Psychology

Bulletin, 28(6), 724–731.

Bushman, B. J., Baumeister, R. F., & Phillips, C. M. (2001). Do people aggress to improve their

mood? Catharsis beliefs, affect regulation opportunity, and aggressive responding.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 17–32.

Eagly, A. H., & Steffen, V. J. (1986). Gender and aggressive behavior: A meta-analytic review

of

the social psychological literature. Psychological Bulletin, 100(3), 309–330.

Fitzpatrick, M. A.. & Badzinski, D. M. (1994). All in the family: Interpersonal communication in

kin relationships. In M. L Knapp & G. R. Miller (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal

Verbal Aggression Within Sibling Relationships
16

communication. (2nd ed.,pp. 726-771). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Frodi, A., Macauley, J., & Thome, P. R. (1977). Are women always less aggressive than men? A

review of the experimental literature. Psychological Bulletin, 84, 634–660.

Gorman, G., & Jordan, C. H. (2015). 'I know you're kidding': Relationship closeness enhances

positive perceptions of teasing. Personal Relationships, 22(2), 173-187.infante

doi:10.1111/pere.12071

Infante, D. A., Bruning, S. D., & Martin, M. M. (Nov.,1994). The verbally aggressive individual:

Experience with verbal aggression and reasons for us. Paper presented at the meeting of

the Speech Communication Association, New Orleans.

Infante, D. A., & Rancer, A. S. (1996). Argumentativeness and verbal aggressiveness: A review

of recent theory and research. Communication Yearbook, 19, 319–351.

Infante, D. A., Riddle, B. L., Horvath, C. L., Tumlin, S.A. (1992). Verbal Aggressiveness:

Messages and Reasons. Communication Quarterly. 40(2), 116-126.

Koh, K. B., Kim, D. K., Kim, S. Y., & Park, J. K. (2005). The relation between anger expression,

depression, and somatic symptoms in depressive disorders and somatoform disorders.

Psychiatry, 66(4), 485–491.

Leary, M. R., Springer, C., Negel, L., Ansell, E., & Evans, K. (1998). The causes,

phenomenology, and consequences of hurt feelings. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 74, 1225–1237.

Malik, S., Sorenson, S. B., & Aneshensel, C. S. (1997). Community and dating violence among

adolescents: Perpetration and victimization. Journal of Adolescent Health, 21(5),

291–302.
Verbal Aggression Within Sibling Relationships
17

Martin, M. M., Anderson, C. M., Burant, P. A., & Weber, K. (1997). Verbal aggression in

sibling

relationships. Communication Quarterly, 45(3), 304-317.

Martin, M. M., Anderson, C. M., & Horvath, C. L. (1996). Feelings about verbal aggression:

Justifications for sending and hurt from receiving verbally aggressive messages.

Communication Research Reports, 13, 19–26.

Martin, M. M., Dunleavy, K. N., & Kennedy-Lightsey, C. D. (2010). The instrumental use of

verbally aggressive messages. In T. A. Avtgis & A. S. Rancer (Eds.), Arguments,

aggression, and conflict: New directions in theory and research (pp. 400–415). New

York, NY: Routledge.

Martin, M. M., Anderson, C. M., & Rocca, K. A. (2005). Perceptions of the adult sibling

relationship. North American Journal of Psychology, 7(1), 107-116.

Parks, Malcolm R., and Kory Floyd. (1996). Meanings for closeness and intimacy in friendship.

Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, vol. 13, no. 1, 1996, pp. 85–107.,

doi:10.1177/0265407596131005.

Stormshak, E. A., Bellanti, C. J., & Bierman, K. L. (1996). The quality of sibling relationships

and the development of social competence and behavioral control in aggressive children.

Developmental Psychology, 32, 79-89

Teven, J. J., Martin, M. M., & Neupauer, N. C. (1998). Sibling relationships: Verbally aggressive

messages and their effect on relational satisfaction. Communication Reports, 11(2),

179-186.

Vangelisti, A.. L. (1994). Messages that hurt. In W. O. Cupach & B. H. Spitzberg (Eds.), The

dark side of interpersonal communication (pp. 53-82). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Vangelisti, A. L., & Young, S. L. (2000). When words hurt: The effects of perceived
Verbal Aggression Within Sibling Relationships
18

intentionality on interpersonal relationships. Journal of Social and Personal

Relationships, 17, 393–424.

Weaver, S. E., Coleman, M., & Ganong, L. H. (2003). The sibling relationship in young

adulthood. Journal of Family Issues, 24(2), 245-263. doi:10.1177/0192513X02250098

Young, S. L. (2004). Factors that influence recipients’ appraisals of hurtful communication.

Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 21, 291–303.