This article addresses controversy over the validity of two popular scales used to measure trait argumentativeness and verbal aggressiveness. The first half of the article offers a rejoinder to the Infante, Rancer, and Wigley article. It is argued that original conceptualizations of the scales are logically incoherent and lack empirical correspondence with research findings. The second part of the article offers a meta-analysis of scale-behavior and -nonbehavioral associations. The results show that research testing scale-behavior convergence is sparse and that the little research that currently exists is inconsistent with convergent and predictive validity. The Infante scales correlate consistently and to a greater extent with self-reported communication than with actual behavior, suggesting that the scales assess cognitive-affective rather than communication behavior tendencies. © 2012 SAGE Publications.