comm theory exam #1

social penetration theory

"stage theory"

Theoretical Extensions

(Background Information): Since Festinger's original research, a lot of work has examined alternative explanations and conceptual fuzziness. -Most persuasion researchers today subscribe to one of the three extensions described below. 1). SELF-CONSISTENCY / THE RATIONALIZING ANIMAL -Developed by Elliot Aronson -He believed that CDT had some "conceptual fuzziness." -Specifically, he believed that the theory inadequately accounted for when exactly people would experience dissonance. *-Aronson concluded THE ISSUE WAS NOT LOGICAL INCONSISTENCY, BUT RATHER PSYCHOLOGICAL INCONSISTENCY. -In other words, we are not rational animals. Rather, we are rationalizing animals who want to appear reasonable to ourselves. *-Aronson interprets the $1/$20 experiment as SELF-ESTEEM MAINTENANCE. *-"If dissonance exists, it is because an individual's behavior is inconsistent with his or her self-concept." -The Stanford men were in a bind because they considered themselves to be decent, truthful human beings. *-In fact, the higher one's self-esteem, the more dissonance one should feel. -Conversely, if people see themselves as a liar or a cheat, they should experience no inconsistency because their behavior aligns with their self-concept. -Other researchers have found support for Aronson's version of the theory. -For example, University of Oregon marketing professor Lynn Kale measured college students' self-esteem and asked them to write a brief essay advocating cigarette smoking, which they thought would be read to junior high students. -He offered students either $2 or $20 for writing the essay. -He found that students who received the minimal justification of $2 for writing the pro-smoking essay and who also had high self-esteem experienced the most dissonance and changed their attitudes to be the most favorable toward cigarette smoking. *-We therefore need to consider the interaction between self-esteem and pay. 2). PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR BAD OUTCOMES -Princeton psychologist Joel Cooper agreed with Aronson that logical inconsistency does not necessarily create dissonance -In the new look model, Cooper proposed that the KNOWLEDGE THAT ONE'S ACTIONS HAVE UNNECESSARILY HURT ANOTHER PERSON THAT CAUSES DISSONANCE -Example: In the $1/$20 experiment, the Stanford men knew full well that the woman was in for a letdown when she actually completed the boring tasks. *-Dissonance can therefore be a state of arousal when people feel personally responsible for bringing about a bad event on another person. -Example: Some experiments had college students in public speaking classes create impromptu pro-marijuana speeches that would ostensibly be delivered to uninformed and uncommitted junior high students. Many college students reported feeling bad, wondering what their church members would think or wanting their speeches to be destroyed. Yet, they still changed their attitudes in the direction of pro-marijuana. This study supports the new look model. 3). SELF-AFFIRMATION *-BOTH 1 AND 2 ABOVE ADDRESS HOW DISSONANCE IS CREATED IN THE FIRST PLACE. *-IN CONTRAST, #3 (SELF-AFFIRMATION) LOOKS AT HOW DISSONANCE IS REDUCED. -Stanford psychologist Claude Steele created the self-affirmation approach. -Steele believes that PEOPLE WITH HIGH SELF-ESTEEM CAN CALL UP A HOST OF POSITIVE THOUGHTS ABOUT THEMSELVES, AND THESE THOUGHTS WILL BLOT OUT OR ELIMINATE ANY CONCERN FOR RESTORING CONSISTENCY. -High self-esteem might therefore be a resource for dissonance reduction. -Example: For a participant in the $1/$20 experiment with high self-esteem, they might FOCUS ON THEIR GOOD GRADES, ATHLETIC ABILITIES, SOCIAL SKILLS, AND HELPFULNESS TO FRIENDS. -These foci will make any dissonance from lying to the woman only a blip on the radar. -This might only work for people who already have high self-esteem.

Communicator Reward Valence

-Communicator reward valence - the sum of the positive and negative characteristics of a person and the potential for him or her to carry out rewards or punishments -When a person violates expectations, their violation is received differently depending on their communicator reward valence. -1). Possible rewards: Smiles, physical attractiveness, attitude similarity, high SES, credibility, competence, etc. The concept of reward includes a number of potential characteristics that allow a person to be viewed favorably. Different people find different characteristics rewarding. 2). This means that not all violations of behavior result in negative perceptions. -Violations done by a high-reward communicator might be assigned positive meanings. -The VERY SAME violations done by a low-reward communicator might be assigned negative meanings **-Therefore, HIGH-REWARD COMMUNICATORS MIGHT WANT TO VIOLATE EXPECTATIONS TO MAXIMIZE THE OUTCOMES OF A CONVERSATION (E.G., STAND A LITTLE CLOSER THAN EXPECTED). **-ON THE OTHER HAND, LOW-REWARD COMMUNICATORS SHOULD NOT VIOLATE EXPECTATIONS. THEY SHOULD JUST FOLLOW WHATEVER THE NORM/EXPECTATION FOR THE SITUATION IS (E.G., STAND AT THE EXPECTED DISTANCE)

Ways to Reduce Dissonance

-Festinger hypothesized three mental mechanisms that people can use to make sure that their actions and attitudes are in harmony. Selective exposure Postdecision dissonance Minimal justification -These three mental mechanisms can be applied to a variety of addictions: alcohol, smoking, drugs, food, workaholism, online shopping, etc.

Minimal Justification

-Minimal justification - a claim that the best way to stimulate an attitude change in others is to offer just enough incentive to elicit counterattitudinal behavior -Operates under the assumption that behaviors predict attitudes, rather than attitudes predicting behavior -Compliance - public conformity to another's expectation without necessarily having a private conviction that matches the behavior 1). The minimal justification hypothesis REVERSED the traditional sequence of attitudes predicting behavior -Example: You want somebody to say something favorable about your company (e.g., your cigarette company, your insurance company). You give them the minimal amount of money necessary to get them to talk positively about your company. Because you gave them this relatively low amount of money, they cannot easily point to the money as a clear justification for their behavior. They then start to reconsider their attitudes about your company and conclude that they actually do like your company. -In contrast, if you give them a ton of money, they can easily point to the financial compensation as a reason for speaking as they did. Thus, no internal attitude change needs to occur. 2). COMPLIANCE-As Festinger wrote: "If one wanted to obtain private change in addition to mere public compliance, the best way to do this would be to offer just enough reward to elicit overt compliance."

Expectancy Violations Theory

-Nonverbal communication is often more important than verbal communication in understanding interactions. -People hold expectations about the nonverbal behavior of others -1). Importance of HOW we say something -Can be more important than what we actually say -Judee Burgoon developed EVT to focus on the effects of nonverbal communication -Burgoon (1994) noted that "nonverbal cues are an inherent and essential part of message creation and interpretation" (p. 239). -The theory was originally called "NONVERBAL EXPECTANCY VIOLATIONS THEORY," but the "NONVERBAL" part was EVENTUALLY DROPPED because the theory's scope eventually expanded to address issues beyond the realm of nonverbal communication -The theory originated in the late 1970s **-Burgoon's early writing on EVT FOCUSED MOST HEAVILY ON PERSONAL SPACE AND PEOPLE'S EXPECTATIONS OF CONVERSATIONAL DISTANCE -SPACE was a core concept of the theory when it was first conceptualized -In 1990, Burgoon and Walther expanded the theory's scope to encompass other nonverbal behaviors such as touch and posture

Space Relations

-Proxemics - the study of a person's use of space -People have two competing needs: Affiliation Personal space 1). Proxemics-includes how people use space in conversation and how people perceive others' use of space -People's use of space can seriously affect their ability to achieve desired goals -Spatial use can influence the meaning of messages 2a). PERSONAL SPACE-"AN INVISIBLE, VARIABLE VOLUME OF SPACE SURROUNDING AN INDIVIDUAL WHICH DEFINES THAT INDIVIDUAL'S PREFERRED DISTANCE FROM OTHERS" -An individual's variable use of space and distance -This is how close or far away people PREFER or WANT others to be during a conversation -Burgoon and colleagues believe that people simultaneously want to stay in close proximity to others, but also desire some distance

Violation Valence

-Violation valence - the perceived negative or positive assessment of an unexpected behavior. 1). Violation valence-focuses on the deviation from an expectation -How we interpret and evaluate a violation -Communicators try to interpret the meaning of a violation and decide whether or not they like it. -Example: If a professor is standing too close to you, you might interpret that violation as the professor trying to act superior and dominating (negative violation valence) or the professor trying to establish a friendly connection with you (positive violation valence) -A person might stand out from all other people interviewing for the job if the person is able to engage in a violation to which the interviewer assigns a positive violation valence. This person's positive violation might help them stand out and be seen as creative.

Territoriality

-a person's sense of ownership over an area or object 1). TERRITORIALITY-we lay claims of ownership to various spatial areas that we want to protect or defend -"My seat" in lecture or the library-spreading out books so no one sits at your same table -People put up fences around their house 1a). PRIMARY-a persons' exclusive domain or ownership of an area or object -Example: One's own workshop, computer, or bed -Many people put their names on their primary territories to further signal ownership 1b). SECONDARY-signal some sort of personal connection to an area or object -NOT EXCLUSIVE to an individual, BUT the individual feels SOME SORT OF ASSOCIATION OR CONNECTION to the territory -Example: Students feeling like some part of the library or some table in the library is "theirs" because they frequently occupy it 1c). PUBLIC-indicate NO PERSONAL AFFILIATIONS and INCLUDE AREAS THAT ARE OPEN SPACES FOR EVERYONE -Example: Benches in public parks -Example: Beaches -Example: Movie theaters People will often try to PREVENT you from entering their territory or will REACT if you enter their territory -Reactions-include getting PHYSICALLY AND COGNITIVELY AROUSED EVT assumes that people will react to spatial violations-people have a sense of where they want/expect others to place themselves in a conversation

Theorem

-a theoretical statement derived from two axioms -Will NOT be tested on the 21 theorems, but will be tested on the axioms. Theorem: If A is related to B and B is related to C, then A is related to C. Berger and Calabrese combined all possible pairs of the seven axioms to derive 21 theorems. Example: If verbal communication is negatively related to uncertainty, and uncertainty is negatively related to intimacy levels, then verbal communication and intimacy are positively related to one another.

Regulative rules

-guidelines for behavior -REGULATIVE RULES-some sequence of action that an individual undertakes -Example: Regulative rules for meeting a new coworker -These guide behavior

Operationalization

-making an abstract concept measurable and observable -How are we going to measure an abstract concept? -Often refers to the process of creating closed-ended scales -Example: Measuring affectionate communication -Example: Measuring depressive symptoms -Example: Measuring loneliness -Nominal concepts that are more abstract and complex (e.g., love, intimacy) are more difficult to operationalize than real concepts

social penetration occurs through 4 stages

-orientation -exploratory affective exchange -affective exchange -stable exchange stage (very rare)

Unwanted repetitive patterns

-recurring, undesirable conflict episodes in a relationship -URPs-sequential and sustained conflict -People feel powerless to stop URPs -Often ego-bruising -Often occur because two people have different rules systems that obligate them to perform specific behaviors, regardless of their consequences *-PEOPLE MIGHT BELIEVE THEY ARE OBLIGATED TO ACT IN A CERTAIN WAY Reasons people continue to engage in URPs: -People might continue to engage in URPs if they see no other option. -Do not think they have the communication skills to remove themselves from the conflict. -The couple might be comfortable with the recurring conflict. -The couple might fall into this pattern, almost by instinct and by default. -The couple might be too exhausted to work toward conflict resolution.

Applied research

-research undertaken to solve a problem or create a policy Applied research-researchers want to solve specific problems with the knowledge they or other researchers have generated -Example: Organizational communication research designed to improve employee morale Theory and practice can be intertwined. Pure and applied research are not completely unrelated processes.

Pure research

-research undertaken with a goal of generating knowledge -tested or generating theory for its own sake or for the sake of advancing knowledge in an area

charmed loop

-rules of meaning are consistent throughout the hierarchy -CHARMED LOOP-when meanings are consistent throughout the hierarchy -one part of the hierarchy confirms or supports another level -rules of meaning are consistent and agreed-upon throughout the loop -Example: Your life script/sense of self is an assertive person, and you challenge a painter who bills you for wasted hours (the episode). Also, the U.S. culture expects customers to be satisfied. The episode, life script, and cultural patterns are all consistent with one another.

strange loop

-rules of meaning change or are inconsistent throughout the hierarchy -STRANGE LOOP-rules of meaning change within the loop -levels are inconsistent with one another -People cycle through oppositional meanings. -Example: An alcoholic's life script may suggest they should stop drinking because they cannot control their drinking. However, after they stop drinking for a time, they start to believe they can control their drinking and start to drink once again. The process continues. -May or may not drink depending on the particular episode at hand.

Constitutive rules

-rules that help us understand how meaning and behavior should be interpreted -CONSTITUTIVE RULES-refer to how behavior should be interpreted within a given context -We are able to understand another person's intention because of the constitutive rules in place -Example: "I love you" is interpreted differently depending on the relationship (contract) at hand

Deduction

-start with a general theory, derive hypotheses from the theory, and then test the hypotheses with research -moving from the general (the theory) to the specific (the observations) -THEORY FIRST, RESEARCH SECOND -Testing a specific prediction or hypothesis from the theory then suggests modifications or corrections to the theory

induction

-start with specific observations and then create a theory -moving from the specific (the observations) to the general (the theory) -RESEARCH FIRST, THEORY SECOND -Gathering many observations (often through qualitative, open-ended interviews or focus groups), and then creating theory after all the observations have been collected -GROUNDED THEORY-theory induced from data and analysis. Grounded theories are induced from the data collected from research participants.

Postdecision Dissonance

-strong doubts experienced after making an important, close-call decision that is difficult to reverse -When people experience postdecision dissonance, they have a strong need for reassurance. 1). POSTDECISION DISSONANCE-Several conditions heighten postdecision dissonance: -The more important the issue -The longer an individual delays in choosing between two equally attractive options -The greater the difficulty involved in reversing the decision once it has been made If these three conditions are present, the person will agonize over whether or not he or she made the right decision. -When postdecision dissonance is high, we are motivated to seek reassuring information and social support. 2). Example: The mental turmoil a person experiences after SIGNING A CONTRACT TO BUY A NEW CAR. -High costs, many competing, equally attractive alternatives, and the down payment/contract signing lock a person in -Even AFTER making the decision, car buyers will often read Consumer Reports and other sources of information to reassure themselves they made the right decision. Reassurance can also come in the form of feedback/social support from relational partners.

Selective Exposure

-the tendency to avoid information that would create cognitive dissonance because it is incompatible with current beliefs 1). SELECTIVE EXPOSURE-People avoid information likely to cause dissonance. -We tend to listen to opinions and select reading material consistent with our current opinions. -We also tend to surround ourselves with people who believe the same things that we do. -We "stick with our own kind" when making friends. -Example: Republicans watch Fox News, and Democrats watch MSNBC. -This is why media-effects scholars who hold that the media have a limited effect on audiences were quick to embrace Festinger's theory. -Example: Even after the government mandated that every cigarette ad report the Surgeon General's warning, Festinger reported a Minnesota study finding that the more people smoked, the less they believed that smoking caused cancer. *-D'Alessio and Allen reviewed 18 experiments in which people were put in dissonant situations and asked to select certain information. -They found support for the notion of selective exposure. -However, selective exposure explained only 5% of the variance in people's information-seeking habits. -That means 95% of the information-seeking behavior was not explained by selective exposure. -Nevertheless, scholars still take selective exposure and its potential implications seriously.

Axioms

-truisms drawn from previous research and common sense Axioms are consistent with the theory's law-like focus 1). AXIOMS-are thought to require no further proof/support than the axiom itself -TAKEN-FOR-GRANTED ASSUMPTIONS -These are the heart of the theory. -These must be accepted as valid in order to proceed with the theory's logic

Theoretical Assumptions of Expectancy Violation Theory

1). Expectancies drive human interaction: -People carry expectancies in their interactions with others -EXPECTANCIES-THOUGHTS AND BEHAVIORS ANTICIPATED IN CONVERSATIONS -What people think will happen -People do not view others' behaviors as random. Rather, they have various expectations for how others should think and behave. *-Expectancies might be the result of social norms, stereotypes, and idiosyncrasies of communicators. -Example: During interviews, we would expect the interviewee to smile, give a firm handshake, keep a reasonable distance, etc. *-Many INDIVIDUAL, RELATIONAL, AND CONTEXTUAL FACTORS CAN INFLUENCE PEOPLE'S EXPECTANCIES -INDIVIDUAL -Gender -Personality -Age -Appearance -Reputation -RELATIONAL -Prior relational history -Status differences -Levels of attraction and liking -CONTEXTUAL -Formality/informality of the situation -Social/task functions -Environmental restrictions -Cultural norms 2). Expectancies for human behavior are learned. -People learn these expectancies from their culture at large and from individual people within the culture. -Example: Some Middle Eastern cultures involve norms of standing much closer during conversation than some Western cultures. -Example: Think about how we learn expectations of how professors and students should interact. -The family, the media, friends, teachers, etc. can all teach us expectancies. 3). People make predictions based on another's nonverbal communication. -Example: You predict that somebody is attracted to you because they make prolonged eye contact with you and move toward you. -Keep in mind that these predictions can be incorrect because nonverbal communication is often ambiguous and open to multiple interpretations. **-IF A VIOLATION IS AMBIGUOUS OR UNCLEAR, WE APPLY A COMMUNICTOR REWARD VALENCE -The communicator reward valence will then influence how the violation is interpreted and evaluated (more detail on this later). -If the person is someone we like, we will usually evaluate the violation positively. -If the person is someone we dislike, we will usually evaluate the violation negatively.

Exchange Structures

1.) Direct exchange - an exchange in which two people reciprocate costs and rewards -DIRECT EXCHANGE-RECIPROCATION IS CONFINED TO THE TWO ACTORS AT HAND -Example: Brad washes his dad's car, and his dad then lets him use the car on Saturday night. -It is NOT necessary to reciprocate immediately. -Example: One friend does a favor for the other friend (getting mail while the other friend is away on vacation), and the other friend then directly repays that favor at a later date (watching a dog when the one friend is away on vacation). 2.) Generalized exchange - an exchange in which reciprocation involves the social network and is not confined to the two individuals at hand -GENERALIZED EXCHANGE-involves INDIRECT RECIPROCITY -One person gives to another and the recipient responds, but not to the first person -Example: Friends and neighbors help somebody pack up the moving van. The person moving then reciprocates the favor by helping somebody else in their new neighborhood. -These exchanges involve THE COMMUNITY or the SOCIAL NETWORK rather than just the two specific people in the relationship. -"Paying it forward." 3.) Productive exchange - an exchange in which both partners incur costs and benefits simultaneously -PRODUCTIVE EXCHANGE-BOTH ACTORS HAVE TO CONTRIBUTE FOR EITHER ONE OF THEM TO HAVE BENEFIT -In a direct exchange, one person incurs a cost and the other person incurs a reward. -In a productive exchange, both people incur costs and benefits simultaneously -Example: Doing a group project together for a college class. Both people must put effort in, and both people benefit at the end.

The Onion Analogy

1.) Public image - the outer layer of a person, which is available to others to visibly see -PUBLIC IMAGE-the outer layer of the onion-the flaky skin that comes off right away with no effort -Example: A person's ethnicity -Example: A person's age -Example: A person's physical appearance 2.) Reciprocity - the return of openness from one person to another -RECIPROCITY-one person's openness leads to another person's openness -When one person divulges personal information, the other person is likely to reciprocate similar levels of sensitive information. -This is a primary process in SPT. -Reciprocity is significant in both established and new relationships. 3.) Breadth - the number of topics discussed in a relationship -(Optional): Breadth time-the amount of time spent by relational partners discussing various topics 4.) Depth - the degree of intimacy guiding topic discussion -DEPTH-the degree of intimacy guiding topic discussion *-In initial stages, relationships can be thought of as having NARROW BREADTH and SHALLOW DEPTH *-Shifts in deep layers of the onion (e.g., changing your deeply-held religious views) have more powerful of an impact on a relationship than shifts in surface layers of the onion (e.g., changing your hairstyle). *-The greater the depth of self-disclosure, the greater the opportunity for people to FEEL VULNERABLE -Example: A single parent revealing that they were on welfare after their spouse died might make them feel very vulnerable after revealing this information on a date. If the date's response does not give you what you want (e.g., "wow" or "oh"), you might feel even more vulnerable. -Suggests that people should be JUDICIOUS in their use of self-disclosure *-If people disclose too much near the beginning of the relationship, they might actually end the relationship. -Trust and self-disclosure are deeply intertwined. If we desire reciprocity in self-disclosures, we must first gain the other party's trust.

Connection to Social Exchange Theory

1.) Social penetration theory also holds that relationships can be conceptualized in terms of rewards and costs. -SPT incorporates principles from several other theories of relationship development, including SET. -Altman and Taylor based some of their work on social exchange processes REWARDS-those relational events or behaviors that stimulate satisfaction, pleasure, and contentment in a relational partner COSTS-those relational events or behaviors that stimulate negative feelings If a relationship provides more rewards than costs, people are more likely to stay in that relationship -If there are more costs than rewards to being in a relationship, people are likely to dissolve the relationship. 2.) Reward-cost ratio - the balance between positive and negative relationship experiences -REWARD-COST RATIO-People regulate their closeness in a relationship based on this ratio *-Altman and Taylor believed that rewards and costs HAVE A GREATER IMPACT EARLY ON IN THE RELATIONSHIP RATHER THAN LATER IN THE RELATIONSHIP -This might be partly because people have a much smaller bank of rewards and costs to judge early in a relationship-one or two bad characteristics may therefore be weighted very heavily *-Altman and Taylor also believed that relationships WITH A RESERVOIR OF POSITIVE REWARD/COST EXPERIENCES ARE BETTER EQUIPPED TO HANDLE CONFLICT -Over the years, a unique relational culture is created that allows people to work through future issues. -A single conflict is not likely to threaten a relationship's stability because of the couple's stockpile of rewards and experiences in dealing with conflict. Keep in mind that BOTH PARTIES undergo a reward-cost analysis, and these analyses may not match.

Uncertainty Reduction Theory's Scope

1.) Uncertainty reduction theory might not apply as well to established relationships. -Tara Emmers and Dan Canary (1996), for example, argue that UNCERTAINTY ACCEPTANCE is often employed in established relationships, in which people simply trust their partners and do not need to reduce uncertainty -Accepting or trusting your partner even when you are not completely certain what is happening is another viable strategy for long-term relationships 2.) Uncertainty might function dialectically in developed relationships. -Uncertainty functioning DIALECTICALLY in developed relationships -There is often a tension between reducing and increasing uncertainty in developed relationships -The ability to completely predict a relational partner's behavior might lead to boredom, Berger admits. -When people feel secure in their long-term relationships, they might desire more uncertainty.

linear model

Allows for various types of noise: (1) semantic, (2) physical/external, (3) psychological, and (4) physiological

Communication Approach and Traditions of coordinated management of meaning

Approach: Interpretive Traditions: Phenomenological Socio-cultural

Communication Approach and Traditions

Approach: Interpretive Traditions: Semiotic Phenomenological Socio-cultural

Communication Approach and Tradition of Uncertainty Reduction Theory

Approach: Positivistic/empirical Tradition: Socio-psychological

Communication Approach and Tradition of expectancy violations theory

Approach: Positivistic/empirical Tradition: Socio-psychological

Theoretical Approach and Tradition for Social Exchange Theory

Approach: Positivistic/empirical Tradition: Socio-psychological

Theoretical Approach and Tradition to Social Penetration Theory

Approach: Positivistic/empirical Tradition: Socio-psychological

Theoretical Approach and Traditions of cognitive dissonance

Approach: Positivistic/empirical Tradition: Socio-psychological

Arousal and Threat Threshold

Arousal - increased interest or attention when deviations from expectations occur 1). AROUSAL-deviations from expectations have consequences -When a person's expectations are violated, the person's interest or attention is aroused -A person then uses a particular mechanism to cope with this arousal. **-When arousal occurs, one's interest and attention to (1) the deviation and (2) the source of the message increase *-Arousal is also termed "MENTAL ALERTNESS" or "AN ORIENTING RESPONSE" 1a). COGNITIVE AROUSAL-MENTAL AWARENESS of deviations from expectations -An alertness or an orientation to a violation -Most EVT studies investigate this through self-report measures 1b). PHYSICAL AROUSAL-BODILY CHANGES as a result of deviations from expectations -Includes those behaviors that a communicator employs during an interaction -Example: Moving out of an uncomfortable speaking distance -This is less frequently studied than cognitive arousal -Can also include changes in heart rate, changes in pulse rate, changes in skin temperature, etc. 2. Threat threshold - an individual's tolerance for distance violations THREAT THRESHOLD-"the distance at which an interactant experiences physical and physiological discomfort by the presence of another" (Burgoon, 1978, p. 130). -When distance is equated with threat, closer distances are generally seen as more threatening than farther distances *-As a matter of individual preference, some people do not mind when people stand close to them. These people therefore have a high threat threshold. *-Other people generally get very uncomfortable when people stand close to them. These people have a low threat threshold. *-Burgoon seems to allow for the threat threshold to be (1) partly an individual preference that varies from person to person and (2) partly based on how you view a specific interaction partner. -The second possibility allows for your threat threshold to change in a single conversation as your view of the other person changes. For example, you change your view of somebody from attractive to creepy. Your threat threshold might move lower than what is was at the beginning of the conversation.

Theoretical Assumptions of Social Exchange Theory

Assumptions about human nature: Humans seek rewards and avoid punishments. Humans are rational beings. The standards that humans use to evaluate costs and rewards vary over time and from person to person. 1a). Humans seek rewards and avoid punishments-Consistent with DRIVE REDUCTION -People's behaviors are motivated by some internal drive mechanism -When they feel this drive, they are motivated to reduce it. The process of REDUCING THIS DRIVE is PLEASURABLE. -"To be rewarded means that a person had undergone drive reduction or need fulfillment" (Roloff, 1981, p. 45). *-EXAMPLE: People might feel a need to be understood and a need for companionship (these are TWO DRIVES), and people reduce these needs by spending time with valued friends. 1b). Humans are RATIONAL-CRITICAL assumption -People calculate costs and rewards within the limits of the information available to them. -If there is no rewarding alternative, people will choose the least costly alternative. -People use rational thinking to make choices. -This is NOT the same as RATIONALIZATION-justifying bad behavior after the fact 1c). Standards used to evaluate costs and rewards VARY OVER TIME AND FROM PERSON-TO-PERSON -No one standard can be applied to all people to determine what is a cost and what is a reward. -Social exchange theory is still a LAW-LIKE THEORY BECAUSE although people may differ in what they see as rewards and costs, it holds that all people are motivated to MAXIMIZE REWARDS AND MINIMIZE COSTS -Assumptions about the nature of relationships: Relationships are interdependent. Relational life is a process. 1a). Relationships are interdependent-PRISONER'S DILEMMA -Each prisoner's outcome depends on whether the other prisoner denies or confesses to the crime, and whether they themselves confess to the crime -If both confess, both receive a life sentence -If both deny, both serve a short jail term -If Party A confesses and Party B denies, Party A goes free and Party B is jailed for life -If Party A denies and Party B confesses, Party A is jailed for life and Party B goes free -This type of interdependence is so central that Thibaut and Kelley named their theory the THEORY OF INTERDEPENDENCE -If one party starts to disengage from a friendship, the other party is inevitably affected (interdependence) -The other party's costs and rewards will also change -When any one member of a relationship acts, both parties are affected 1b). Relational life is a PROCESS-acknowledges the role of time and changes to relationships over time -Past experiences guide judgments about rewards and costs

what questions do theorists ask:

Axiology - a branch of knowledge focused on what is worth knowing (i.e., values) AXIOLOGY-What is the place of values in theory and research? -Empirical: Science must be value-free. -Interpretive: Acknowledge that values influence the entire research process. Ask follow-up questions on points that seem valuable. -Critical: Advocate that values should be closely intertwined with scholarly work. See values as desirable in research as they pursue social change.

axioms

Axiom 1 - As the amount of verbal communication increases, the level of uncertainty decreases. -Talk about how this is an inverse or negative relationship. -If you talk more with somebody else, you will become more certain about each other. Axiom 2 - As nonverbal affiliative expressiveness increases, the level of uncertainty decreases. -Talk about how this is an inverse or negative relationship. -NV affiliative expressiveness-could include facial animation (smiling, nodding), increased eye contact, or touch Axiom 3 - High levels of uncertainty are associated with high levels of information-seeking behavior. -Talk about how this is a positive relationship. -As uncertainty levels decline, information-seeking behavior decreases. -This is one of the more provocative axioms. Axiom 4 - High levels of uncertainty are associated with low levels of intimacy in communication content. -Discuss how this is an inverse or negative relationship. -When uncertainty is relatively high, people engage in nonintimate small talk with no deep self-disclosures (e.g., discussing the weather). Axiom 5 - High levels of uncertainty are associated with high levels of reciprocity -Discuss how this is a positive relationship. -RECIPROCITY-communication that mirrors previous communication behavior -Example: I tell you my major, and you tell me your major -Example: I tell you where I am from, and you tell me where you are from -Immediate reciprocation of this sort is a hallmark of initial encounters. Axiom 6 - High levels of similarity are associated with low levels of uncertainty. -Could be demographic similarities (e.g., gender, age, college attended), attitude similarities (e.g., the same political party), hobby similarities, etc. Axiom 7 - High levels of uncertainty are associated with low levels of liking. -Discuss how this is an inverse or negative relationship. -This axiom has received indirect empirical support. -For example, one study looking at people playing the role of an interviewer liked potential job seekers more when uncertainty was low. Axiom 8 - High levels of uncertainty are associated with low levels of interaction with social networks. - Discuss how this is an inverse or negative relationship. -This axiom was added later than the other seven axioms. -When people interact with a new partner's family members and friends, they become more certain about that new partner. -I am SKEPTICAL OF THIS AXIOM because it was developed with more-established romantic relationships in mind -This axiom goes beyond just the first interaction -Stress that URT is LIMITED when applied beyond initial encounters. Axiom 9 - High levels of uncertainty are associated with low levels of communication satisfaction. Axiom 9 - Discuss how this is an inverse or negative relationship. -This axiom was also added at a later point in time by Neuliep and Grohskopf (2000) -Communication satisfaction was defined as "an affective response to the accomplishment of communication goals and expectations" (p. 69).

Hall's (1992, 1996) Proxemic Zones

Background information: EVT was informed by the anthropologist Hall's discussion of proxemics zones in the Northeast United States -Each zone is used for different reasons 1). INTIMATE DISTANCE-very close spatial zone spanning 0 to 18 inches, usually reserved for those with whom we share personal feelings -Often reserved for romantic partners and infants/small children -This includes touching behaviors and being so close that you can observe a person's facial features -Whispers are extremely powerful in this distance -When you are in the intimate distance with a nonintimate partner, you often try to create more psychological distance -Example: What happens in an elevator-People look at the buttons, the floor, the ceiling, etc. but not at one another. People keep their hands at their side or grasp some object.-Trying to mentally extract yourself from this intimate distance. 2). PERSONAL DISTANCE-spatial zone of 18 inches to 4 feet, reserved for family and friends -This encompasses being close enough to grab somebody's hand to being far enough to keep somebody at arms' length -People usually speak at moderate voice levels with this distance -Body heat and breath are still detectable *-THIS IS AN AFFILIATIVE BUT NOT THREATENING DISTANCE -Typical distance of conversation for people we are in personal relationships with -Features of skin, hair, eyes, and teeth are visible and touch is still possible 3). SOCIAL DISTANCE-spatial zone of 4 to 12 feet, reserved for more formal relationships such as those with COWORKERS AND EMPLOYERS -Hall (1966) contends that the closer social distance is usually reserved for those in a casual social setting, SUCH AS A COCKTAIL PARTY -We are STILL able to perceive SKIN AND HAIR TEXTURE at the close phase of this category -At the far phase of this category, people have to speak louder compared to the close phase of this category -The far phase is more formal than the close phase of this category -At the far phase, people can multitask (e.g., secretaries can greet and monitor incoming strangers while still continuing their other work) -This is ALSO the appropriate conversational distance for STRANGERS -FORMALITY -EYE CONTACT BECOMES INCREASINGLY IMPORTANT TO GUIDE INTERACTION 4). PUBLIC DISTANCE-spatial zone of 12 feet and beyond, reserved for very formal discussions such as between a professor and student in lecture -The zoning of public presentations -The VOICE and GESTURES NEED EXAGGERATION to be conveyed -Some scholars cap the far phase around 25 feet -It is difficult to read facial reactions at this point

The Coordination of Meaning

Coordination - trying to make sense of message sequencing There are three possible outcomes when people interact: People achieve full coordination. People achieve partial coordination. People achieve no coordination. 1). Coordination-Meaning is not achieved in isolation, but rather in coordination with other people 2). Full coordination-feeling like you "are on the same wavelength" with a relational partner -This is rare PARTIAL COORDINATION-THE MOST LIKELY OUTCOME -Often involves compromise

7 communication traditions:

Critical - advocating fairness and changing unjust power structures 7). CRITICAL-concerned with injustice, oppression, power, and linguistic dominance -Critiquing the social order -Example: How people from the working class are treated in organizations -CENTRAL PROBLEM OF COMMUNICATION: IDENTIFYING AND OVERCOMING DOMINANCE

7 communication traditions:

Cybernetic - information processing 4). CYBERNETIC-Communication as an information science -Discusses the NOISE involved in communication -Cybernetics looks at problems such as noise in the communication system -Emphasizes that the FEEDBACK we receive can sometimes be UNPREDICTABLE -The cybernetic tradition requires going beyond an individualistic viewpoint and CONSIDERING THE BROADER COMMUNICATION SYSTEM -SYSTEMS THEORIES-suggest that no one individual is completely responsible for outcomes -CENTRAL PROBLEM OF COMMUNICATION: HOW TO OVERCOME NOISE IN THE SYSTEM

goals of theory

Description/understanding Explanation Prediction Social change

what questions do theorists ask:

Epistemology - a branch of knowledge focused on how people know things EPISTEMOLOGY-How do people know what they know? How do researchers go about knowing? -METHODS -An epistemological choice: How do you collect information as a researcher? -Example: When positivists conduct experiments, they institute many controls to try to make sure extraneous variables do not bias the results (e.g., keeping the chairs at a very clear distance from each other during all lab conversations). Positivists often use tightly controlled experiments. -Example: Positivists doing large surveys of the general public use very careful random sampling procedures. -Example: Interpretivists might invite participants to read the transcripts and the drafts of studies to make sure that the researchers' interpretations are in line with the participants' interpretations. "Am I getting this right?" "Is there anything else you would add?"

Evaluating a Relationship

Evaluating a relationship IN ORDER TO DETERMINE WHETHER YOU WILL STAY IN THE RELATIONSHIP OR LEAVE THE RELATIONSHIP -This evaluation rests on two types of comparisons 1.) Comparison level (CL) - a standard for what a person thinks he or she should get in a relationship COMPARISON LEVEL-what people feel like they should receive in terms of rewards and costs in a relationship -People have subjective impressions of what they should give and what they should get (in return) in a relationship -CLs are shaped by past relationships (e.g., by past friendships, by past romantic relationships), family members' advice, and popular culture (e.g., how movies and TV shows represent friendships) *-CLs ARE SUBJECTIVE AND VARY BETWEEN PEOPLE *-PEOPLE LARGELY BASE THEIR CLs ON PAST EXPERIENCES WITH THAT SAME TYPE OF RELATIONSHIP -People have very different past experiences with similar types of relationships (e.g., very different past experiences with friendships). -Example: One person might expect a cost of friendship to be a lot of listening when the friend is having problems, but another person might not have that cost as part of their CL -However, people in the same culture have some overlap in their CLs due to shared experiences (e.g., shared experiences with certain media) **-RELATIONAL SATISFACTION IS DETERMINED BY CALCULATING OUR REWARD-COST RATIO FOR A RELATIONSHIP AND COMPARING THIS RATIO TO OUR CL **-If our current relationship meets or exceeds our CL, the theory predicts we will be satisfied with the relationship. **-If our current relationship falls short of our CL, the theory predicts we will be unsatisfied with the relationship. YET, PEOPLE SOMETIMES LEAVE SATISFYING RELATIONSHIPS OR STAY IN UNSATISFYING RELATIONSHIPS. 2.) Comparison level for alternatives (Clalt) - how people evaluate a relationship based on what their perceived alternatives to the relationship are -Comparison level for alternatives-"the lowest level of relational rewards a person is willing to accept given available rewards from alternative relationships or being alone" (Roloff, 1981, p. 48). -The threshold for evaluating a relationship compared to the realistic alternatives to that relationship **-CLALT PROVIDES A MEASURE OF STABILITY, NOT A MEASURE OF SATISFACTION -This tells you how likely somebody is to leave a relationship -People can leave relationships even if they are satisfactory. -This explains why people remain in ABUSIVE RELATIONSHIPS-Victims see no alternative and fear being alone rather than being in the relationship

evaluating theory:

Heurism - a theory should stimulate new research and thinking HEURISM-Theories are judged to be good to the extent that they stimulate new insights and new research. -A good theory prompts additional research activity.

Coordinated Management of Meaning Theoretical Assumptions

Human beings live in communication. Human beings co-create a social reality. Information transactions depend on personal and interpersonal meaning. 1). Human beings live in communication. -Communication is a way of CREATING AND DOING THINGS -Pearce holds that communication is "THE SUBSTANCE OF HUMAN COMMUNITY" -This REJECTS THE LINEAR MODEL -Social situations are created by interactions. -Family members create realities for themselves based on communication -Example: A stepfamily forming for the first time. The two preexisting families have different rules that they will need to merge together. Each of the preexisting families "lives in" their communication and rules before the merge, and they bring this lived reality with them when trying to form a stepfamily. 2). Humans co-create a social reality. -SOCIAL CONSTRUCTIONISM-the belief that people co-construct their social reality in conversations -Instead of asking, "What did you mean by that?," ask "What are we making together?" and "How are we making it?" -Constantly creating new social realities by our conversations 3). Information transactions depend on personal and interpersonal meaning. -Communication is about meaning -Meanings are constantly changing from interaction to interaction -Donald Cushman and Gordon Whiting (1972) distinguished between personal and interpersonal meaning. -PERSONAL MEANING-THE MEANING ACHIEVED WHEN A PERSON BRINGS HIS OR HER UNIQUE EXPERIENCES TO AN INTERACTION -Personal meanings are often discussed as the IDIOSYNCRATIC INTERPRETATIONS YOU (BUT NOT YOUR INTERACTION PARTNER) HAVE FOR THE CONVERSATION BASED ON YOUR HISTORY -Consistent with personal meanings, Cushman and Whiting (1971) argued it is "improbable" that two people will interpret the same experience in exactly the same manner. -We can discover information about ourselves and other people through personal meaning -Personal meanings are best understood as DISSIMILAR MEANINGS between the two people -INTERPERSONAL MEANING-THE RESULT WHEN TWO PEOPLE AGREE ON EACH OTHER'S INTERPRETATIONS OF AN INTERACTION -This can occur in families, small groups, and organizations -This is the meaning that is CO-CONSTRUCTED by participants -"Being on the same page" as somebody else -Interpersonal meanings are negotiated through conversations with other people

evaluating theory:

Logical consistency - a theory's internal logic should be clear and not contradictory LOGICAL CONSISTENCY-the internal reasoning of a theory should make sense -A theory's assumptions should not contradict its claims -A theory should "hang together" and not contradict itself

mind

Mind - the ability to use symbols with common social meanings This relates heavily to learning language and significant symbols. It also relates to thought, or the inner conversations people have within themselves. Through thought, people also engage in role taking. 1). MIND-the ability to use symbols that have common social meanings -People must develop minds through interactions with others 2). LANGUAGE-A SHARED SYSTEM OF VERBAL AND NONVERBAL SYMBOLS organized to express thoughts and feelings -Infants cannot really interact with others until they learn language -Consider the English language or the Spanish language 2). SIGNIFICANT SYMBOLS-SYMBOLS WHOSE MEANING IS GERNALLY AGREED UPON BY MANY PEOPLE -Example: When I say "a Fourth of July party" -Symbols that evoke basically the same meaning for many people **BY USING LANGUAGE WITH OTHERS, WE CREATE AN INTERIOR SETTING FOR THE SOCIETY WE SEE OPERATING AROUND US -THUS, MIND CAN BE VIEWED AS THE WAY IN WHICH PEOPLE INTERNALIZE SOCIETY -Mind can both reflect and create the social world 3). THOUGHT-how symbolic interactionism is partly an INTRAPERSONAL THEORY -OTHER PARTS OF THE LECTURE SUGGEST IT IS HEAVILY INTERPERSONAL *-We can only hold inner conversations inside us because of our past social stimulations and interactions with others. -Example: First day of a new job: You hold an inner conversation with yourself about how great you will do. In the process, you remember your parents who believed in you, a favorite high school teacher who believed in you, etc. -In other words, you incorporate aspects of past interactions into your current internal thought. -These intrapersonal conversations (i.e., thought) rely on the language we have previously learned from others. 4). ROLE TAKING-the ability to put oneself in another's place -Role taking is one of the most critical activities that people accomplish through thought. -The ability to symbolically place oneself in an imagined self of another person -Also called "PERSPECTIVE TAKING"-imaging how another person feels -Requires that you suspend your own perspective on an experience and instead view it from the perspective of another person. *-Example: Imagining how your parent, sibling, aunt/uncle, best friend would feel after getting laid off from work. -Example: A coworker reflecting on how a new employee must feel being newer and younger than all the other employees. ***-We try to imagine how another person might view something about himself or herself or an outside situation (BUT NOT about us)-WHAT DIFFERENTIATES ROLE TAKING FROM THE SELF AND THE LOOKING-GLASS SELF

what questions do theorists ask:

Ontology - a branch of knowledge about the nature of reality -What is the nature of reality? -Ontology is the study of being and nonbeing -Ontology comes from the Greek language. It means "the science of being." *-This is called "THE FIRST PHILOSOPHY" because it is NOT POSSIBLE TO PHILOSOPHIZE UNTIL THE NATURE OF REALITY IS DETERMINED *-Often questions of ontology CENTER AROUND HOW MUCH FREE WILL PEOPLE HAVE -Empirical researchers: Believe that general laws govern human interactions. Therefore, people do NOT have a lot of free will. People are predictable because they follow the laws of human behavior, which largely determine their actions. -Empirical researchers UNCOVER what is already out there in reality. -Interpretive researchers: Stress that people DO have free choice -Critical researchers: See BOTH FREE CHOICE AND CONSTRAINT in the power structures they wish to change

Relationship States

Outcome > CL > Clalt (Satisfying and stable relationship) Outcome > Clalt > CL (Satisfying and stable relationship) Clalt > CL > Outcome (Unsatisfying and unstable relationship) Clalt > Outcome > CL (Satisfying and unstable relationship) CL > Clalt > Outcome (Unsatisfying and unstable relationship) CL > Outcome > Clalt (Unsatisfying and stable relationship)

evaluating theory:

Parsimony - a theory should provide the simplest explanation possible PARSIMONY-the simplicity of the explanation provided by the theory -Theories should contain only the number of concepts necessary to explain the phenomenon under consideration -If a theory can explain a person's communication behavior satisfactorily by using one concept, that is better than having to use multiple concepts -Can we get a theory to be relatively simple without overly sacrificing completeness?

Patterns of Exchange

Patterns of exchange describe behavioral rules or norms that indicate how people trade resources. Patterns of exchange-rules or norms that indicate how people trade resources IN AN ATTEMPT TO MAXIMIZE REWARDS AND MINIMIZE COSTS THREE DIFFERENT MATRICES can illustrate THE PATTERNS PEOPLE DEVELOP 1). GIVEN MATRIX-the CONSTRAINTS on your choices due to THE ENVIRONMENT and/or your OWN SKILL LEVELS -The behavioral choices and outcomes that are determined by your environment and skill level -Example of environmental constraint: Your families might not support your relationship and make the relationship more difficult. -Example: A scarcity of money -Example: Your partner lacks skills for ballroom dancing -Example: Your partner is shy -In a way, the given matrix represents "THE HAND YOU ARE DEALT" 2). EFFECTIVE MATRIX-the TRANSFORMATION you are ABLE TO MAKE TO YOUR GIVEN MATRIX by LEARNING A NEW SKILL, for example -People are not trapped by the given matrix. -Expanding the range of alternative behaviors -Example: A husband does not know how to tango, but takes dancing lessons for his wife's sake. -Example: Engaging in conflict with your families in order to make your families more supportive of your relationship. 3). DISPOSITIONAL MATRIX-the BELIEFS you have ABOUT HOW RELATIONSHIPS SHOULD/OUGHT TO OPERATE -Example: A belief that "friends ought to stick together no matter how much outside interference they experience" -Example: Some people view exchanges as competition. If we know the kinds of dispositions a person has (dispositional matrix) and the nature of the situation in which he or she is operating (given matrix), we will know how to predict the transformations a person will make to impact the social exchange (effective matrix). **-THE DISPOSITIONAL MATRIX GUIDES THE TRANSFORMATIONS PEOPLE MAKE TO THEIR GIVEN MATRIX. -THESE TRANSFORMATIONS LEAD TO THE EFFECTIVE MATRIX, WHICH DETERMINES THE SOCIAL EXCHANGE. *In their theory, Thibaut and Kelley do not explicitly address communication behaviors such as self-disclosure. However, their discussions of the three matrices implies that self-disclosure plays a role. Self-disclosures might imply: 1). The dispositions one has 2). The transformations (strategies) one is going to attempt in the exchange (in order to reach the effective matrix) Since dispositions affect a person's strategy, we might assume that knowledge of dispositions might allow us to predict the transformations.

Theoretical Assumptions of uncertainty reduction

People experience uncertainty in interpersonal settings, and this uncertainty generates cognitive stress. When strangers meet, their primary concern is to reduce uncertainty and increase predictability. Interpersonal communication is a developmental process that occurs in stages. Entry, personal, and exit phases 1). People experience uncertainty in interpersonal settings, which generates stress. -People are often nervous about meeting others. -Uncertainty is seen as AN AVERSIVE STATE -"When persons are unable to make sense out of their environment, they usually become anxious." -It eats up a lot of emotional and psychological energy to remain uncertain, and people would generally not experience this if they had the choice. 2). Two concerns: reducing uncertainty and increasing predictability -These concerns are often dealt with through INFORMATION SEEKING -Information seeking usually takes the form of ASKING QUESTIONS ("Where are you from?" "What is your major?") 3). Interpersonal communication involves DEVELOPMENTAL STAGES -ENTRY PHASE-the beginning stage of an interaction between strangers -Guided by implicit and explicit rules and norms -Example: Responding in kind when someone asks, "Hi! How are you doing?" -PERSONAL PHASE-People begin to communicate MORE SPONTANEOUSLY AND PERSONALLY -Unique features of the interactants begin to emerge -Example: I am one of five boys. -Unique information about the other party starts to come out. -EXIT PHASE-The stage of an interaction or relationship in which people decide WHETHER TO CONTINUE OR LEAVE -Decide whether or not you want to continue interacting with this partner in the future -Example: At a cocktail party, and somebody else joins your group. Do you stay in the group or veer off to another group? The quantity and nature of information that people share change through time. It is possible to predict people's behavior in a law-like fashion 1). Changes over TIME -Interpersonal communication is developmental. 2). People's behavior can be predicted in a LAW-LIKE FASHION -Chapter 3: Discussed covering law, which assumes that human behavior is regulated by generalizable principles that function in a law-like manner -Note that we cannot be as deterministic in the social sciences as we can in math and the natural sciences-people are more complex than inanimate objects -However, URT is still concerned with creating generalizable laws -Clues us into the EMPIRICAL AND SOCIO-PSYCHOLOGICAL nature of the theory -Want to establish regularities that govern people's behavior

social exchange theory

People think about their interpersonal relationships in economic terms. Costs - elements of relational life with negative value Rewards - elements of relational life with positive value Relationship Worth = Rewards - Costs The worth of a relationship is thought to influence its outcome. Background information: There are technically several different theories of social exchange (not just one theory). -However, all seem to be guided by the idea that people want to advance their self-interest in relationships. -Self-interest is not considered necessarily bad from this theory's perspective. It may be used to enhance relationships. -The most popular social exchange theory is John Thibaut and Harold Kelley's (1959)-THEORY OF INTERDEPENDENCE -This theory is often called SOCIAL EXCHANGE THEORY -The textbook authors use the two theory names interchangeably. 1). Economic terms-People tally up the costs for being in a relationship, and compare these costs to the rewards of being in a relationship 1a). COSTS-Example: Time and effort to maintain a relationship (friends might need something from us at inconvenient times, which is an even bigger cost) -Example: Putting up with the amount of time your romantic partner plays video games -Example: Putting up with the amount of time your romantic partner is on their cell phone -Example: Being in negative conflicts with the relational partner 1b). REWARDS-Example: Having fun together -Example: Showing loyalty for one another -Example: Being able to rely on the person to listen to you when you are upset -Example: Acceptance, support, and companionship 2). Positive relationships have a positive relationship worth (rewards outweigh costs) -Vice versa for negative relationships 3). Worth of a relationship influencing its outcome. -OUTCOME - whether people continue in a relationship or terminate it -Everything else being equal, positive relationships will tend to endure. -Everything else being equal, negative relationships will tend to end. **-As we will see later in lecture, the picture is MORE COMPLICATED THAN THIS SIMPLE EQUATION -Thibaut and Kelley (1959): "every individual voluntarily enters and stays in any relationship only as long as it is adequately satisfactory in terms of rewards and costs" -A MARKETPLACE METAPHOR-every individual is concerned with maximizing their own profit in relationships. -However, Stafford (2008) notes some differences between social relationships and the marketplace: -Social exchanges involve a connection with another person. -Social relationships involve trust, not legal obligations. -Social exchanges are more flexible than market exchanges. -Social exchanges rarely involve explicit bargaining

7 communication traditions:

Phenomenological - experiencing "otherness" 3). PHENOMENOLOGY-comes from philosophy -Involves assigning personal interpretations to everyday life and activities -EXPERIENCING OTHERNESS-involves PEOPLE TRYING TO ATTAIN AUTHENTICITY BY ELIMINATING BIASES IN CONVERSATION -Many phenomenologists believe that a person's system of beliefs should not influence a conversation, but this is a challenging task -Craig calls this a "practical impossibility" -Phenomenological issues are especially applicable to issues pertaining to diversity, identity, ethnicity, and social class -CENTRAL PROBLEM OF COMMUNICATION: HOW CAN PEOPLE FORM AUTHENTIC RELATIONSHIPS?

3 approaches to knowing:

Positivistic/empirical approach-searches for objective truths and law-like statements about human behavior Interpretive approach-views truth as subjective and focuses on the co-creation of reality Critical approach-stresses the researcher's responsibility to change the inequalities in the status quo

Power

Power - the degree of dependence a person has on another for outcomes 1). POWER-If Party A depends more on Party B for rewards than vice versa, Party B is usually seen as the more powerful person Two types of power: 1.) Fate control -FATE CONTROL-THE ABILITY TO AFFECT A PARTNER'S OUTCOMES -Has a lot to do with affecting the partner's internal states rather than behavior -Example: Knowing that if you withhold your friendship from a partner, the partner will be sad -Example: Knowing that your romantic partner will be upset and distressed if you withhold affection from them 2.) Behavior control -BEHAVIOR CONTROL-THE POWER TO CHANGE A PARTNER'S BEHAVIOR -The ability to cause another person's behavior to change by changing your own behavior -Example: Knowing that your dating partner will drop everything to talk with you over the phone -Example: Knowing that your dating partner will do what you want them to do if you ask

7 communication traditions:

Rhetorical - the practical art of discourse 1). RHETORICAL-we are interested in public address and public speaking and their functions in a society -How can people cultivate their public speaking effectiveness? -Often involves elements pertaining to language and the audience -Considers emotional versus logical appeals. -Considers the power of language and word choices to instill emotions and encourage actions in target audience members. -Knowing how to adapt your message to the target audience -CENTRAL PROBLEM OF COMMUNICATION: THE POWER OF WORDS

Theoretical Assumptions of Social Exchange

SPT is called a "STAGE THEORY" -The theory has a STRAIGHTFORWARD APPROACH to relationship development 1). Relationships progress from nonintimate to intimate. -Relational communication begins at a rather superficial level. -Superficial conversations are still important because they allow you to "size up" a potential relational partner. -It then moves along a continuum to a more intimate level. -Many of our relationships fall in the middle of this continuum ("moderately close"). 2). Predictability-Relationships progress fairly systematically and predictably. -Even dynamic relationships follow some acceptable standard and pattern of development. -Example: Usually new dating partners do not introduce each other to their families until they have been dating for quite some time. -Example: People do not declare their love for each other before they get to more intimate levels of the relationship. 3). Relational development includes depenetration and dissolution: -DEPENETRATION-slow deterioration of a relationship -Relationships can also fall apart. -Altman and Taylor (1973) liken the depenetration and dissolution process to a film shown in reverse. -COMMUNICATION could move a relationship back TOWARD NONINTIMACY -Example: Conflictual communication -Like penetration, depenetration is often systematic. -Depenetration does not automatically mean dissolution (i.e., the ending of a relationship). -Relationships often experience TRANSGRESSIONS-a violation of relational rules, practices, and expectations -Transgressions might lead to depenetration but not dissolution. 4). SELF-DISCLOSURE is at the CORE of RELATIONSHIP DEVELOPMENT -SELF-DISCLOSURE-the purposeful process of revealing information about yourself to others -Can reveal intimate or superficial information. -NONINTIMATE RELATIONSHIPS PROGRESS TO INTIMATE RELATIONSHIPS BECAUSE OF SELF-DISCLOSURE -Self-disclosure helps shape the present and future relationship between two people. -Self-disclosures help both parties see where they overlap and do not overlap with the other person. -Self disclosure CAN BE STRATEGIC or NONSTRATEGIC -STRATEGIC-we might plan out in advance what we will say to another person -NONSTRATEGIC-spontaneous self-disclosures -This is widespread in our society. -Example: STRANGER-ON-THE-TRAIN PHENOMENON-the event that occurs when strangers reveal personal information to others in public places. This might include intimate details about ourselves, of which our close friends are not even aware.

Strategies to Reduce Uncertainty

STRATEGIES-In attempting to reduce uncertainty, people use tactics from three broad categories. 1.) Passive strategies - involve unobtrusive observation -Passive strategies-you notice how the person of interest interacts with other people (e.g., other coworkers, other students, other strangers, etc.). -REACTIVITY SEARCHING-a particular type of passive strategy that involves watching a person doing something -Example: Watching how a student reacts to jokes that a professor tells -DISINHIBITION SEARCHING-another type of passive strategy that involves watching how a person behaves in more informal settings -The key is that the environment is INFORMAL, such as BARS or OUTSIDE PARKS 2.)Active strategies - involve engaging in some type of activity other than direct interaction with the person of interest -Active strategies-ASKING THIRD PARTIES ABOUT THE PERSON IN QUESTION -Example: Asking a mutual friend -Example: EXTRACTIVE STRATEGIES-one specific type of active strategy that involves ONLINE SEARCHES TO OBTAIN INFORMATION ABOUT A SPECIFIC PERSON. Googling somebody. 3.) Interactive strategies - involve engaging in a direct conversation with the person of interest -Interactive strategies-this often involves engaging in direct FtF interaction with the person of interest -Includes self-disclosures and direct questioning -Asking inappropriately sensitive questions may increase rather than decrease uncertainty

evaluating theory:

Scope - the breadth of communication behaviors covered by the theory SCOPE-SOMEWHAT SIMILAR TO THE LEVEL OF GENERALITY discussed earlier -BOUNDARIES are the limits of a theory's scope -Theories should explain enough of communication to be meaningful, but they should also have clear boundaries for specifying their limits -Example: A theory that only explains initial encounters (URT) has a rather limited scope (might be seen as a weakness)

self

Self - imagining how we look to another person Looking-glass self - our ability to see ourselves as another person sees us Pygmalion effect - living up to or down to others' expectations of us The self integrates the I and the Me. 1). SELF-imagining how WE look to another person (what distinguishes the self from role taking) -The ability to reflect on ourselves from the perspective of others 2). LOOKING-GLASS SELF-Originated from the sociologist Charles Cooley in 1912 **The self and the looking-glass self are SYNONYMS -Three components to the looking-glass self: A). We imagine how we appear to others B). We imagine others' judgments of us C). We feel hurt or pride based on these self-feelings -(Optional): Other researchers see the looking-glass self as "REFLECTED APPRAISALS," or people's perceptions of how others see them 3). PYGMALION EFFECT-others' expectations shape our actions -We behave based on how we think others view us -Different from a self-fulfilling prophecy, which refers to how our own self-expectations guide our behavior -Explain the background of Pygmalion as a novel -Eliza: The difference between a poor flower girl and an upper-class lady is not an inherent difference, but rather a difference in how people treat the two types of people -Explain the classical study by Rosenthal and Jacobson (1968): Told elementary school teachers that 20% of their students were "gifted" (these names were actually chosen at random). Eight months later, these students showed significantly higher gains in IQ than the other students. This was likely the result of teachers' expectations (and behaviors based on those expectations). 4). I - THE SPONTANEOUS, IMPULSIVE, AND CREATIVE SELF -This self acts -Example: Wanting to go out and party all night 5). ME - THE REFLECTIVE, SOCIALLY AWARE SELF -Example: Knowing that you should stay inside on a Friday night and study -We observe ourselves acting in socially appropriate ways

7 communication traditions:

Semiotic - the meaning of signs 2). SEMIOTICS-the study of signs -Signs stand for something else -Children laughing and running around is a sign of play -A ring on the left hand of an adult is the sign of a married individual. -Most common among signs are words or language usage. Meaning is achieved when we share a common language. -Words are arbitrary and have no intrinsic meaning. -Therefore, achieving commonality in meaning can be difficult. -Words change over time. -CENTRAL PROBLEM OF COMMUNICATION: HOW DO SIGNS CREATE MEANING?

Social Penetration Theory

Social penetration - the process of bonding that moves a relationship from superficial to more intimate Relationships follow specific trajectories or pathways to closeness. Candid talk was highly valued in the 1960s and 1970s. Background information: Irwin Altman and Dalmas Taylor (1973) created SPT TO UNDERSTAND RELATIONAL CLOSENESS BETWEEN TWO PEOPLE -They studied social bonding among various types of couples 1). Social penetration -INTIMACY-Includes physical intimacy, intellectual intimacy, emotional intimacy, and the extent to which a couple shares activities -The social penetration process includes verbal behaviors, nonverbal behaviors, and environmentally oriented behaviors (e.g., the space between communicators) -People's relationships vary tremendously in their social penetration -Does not have to be about romantic relationships. Can also study supervisor-employee relationships, friendships, etc. with this theory. 2). Trajectories to closeness-Implication is that RELATIONSHIPS ARE SOMEWHAT ORGANIZED AND PREDICTABLE IN THEIR DEVELOPMENT -The ONLY way for people to understand each other is TO ENGAGE IN PERSONAL CONVERSATIONS-requires each party to share personal bits of information 3). Candid talk valued-think about protests to the Vietnam War -HOWEVER, throughout the years, communication researchers acknowledged that cultures vary tremendously in their value of openness -Scholars have since questioned the theory's initial enthusiasm for openness

society

Society - the web of social relationships humans create and respond to Two specific parts of society affect the mind and self: Particular others Generalized other 1). SOCIETY-exists prior to the individual, but is also created and shaped by the individual acting in concert with others -Society is made up of individuals 2a). PARTICULAR OTHERS-Individuals in society who are significant to us -Examples: family members, friends, coworkers, and supervisors -We look to particular others to get a sense of self -Example: Thinking about your parents' opinion of you to get a sense of self -The expectations of some particular others might conflict with the expectations of some other particular others 2b). GENERALIZED OTHER-the viewpoint or attitude of a social group, the culture as a whole, or the entire community -"What would others think?" -The attitude of the generalized other is the attitude of the whole community -Provides information about rules, roles, and attitudes shared by the community

7 communication traditions:

Socio-cultural - groups of people "co-creating" social order 6). SOCIO-CULTURAL-Our everyday interactions with others depend heavily on PREEXISTING, SHARED CULTURAL PATTERNS AND SOCIAL STRUCTURES -People are PART OF LARGER GROUPS THAT HAVE UNIQUE RULES AND PATTERNS OF INTERACTION -Appeals to the CO-CREATION OF SOCIAL ORDER AND SOCIAL REALITY -CENTRAL PROBLEM OF COMMUNICATION: HOW CULTURE SHAPES PEOPLE

7 communication traditions:

Socio-psychological - causal linking 5). SOCIO-PSYCHOLOGICAL-cause-and-effect models -Someone's behavior is influenced by something else -Experiments are common in this tradition -Providing scientific evidence for reasons underlying human behavior -Continues to pervade much communication theorizing -CENTRAL PROBLEM OF COMMUNICATION: HOW COMMUNICATION REFLECTS PERSONALITY AND HOW PEOPLE AFFECT ONE ANOTHER.

Stages of Social Penetration

Stage theory-relationship development occurs in a RATHER SYSTEMATIC MANNER -Decisions about whether people want to remain in a relationship might not be made immediately 1). ORIENTATION STAGE-the stage of social penetration that includes REVEALING SMALL PARTS ABOUT OURSELVES -This occurs at the public level. -ONLY BITS of ourselves are revealed AT THE CLICHÉ LEVEL -Comments reflect superficial aspects of people -People act in SOCIALLY DESIRABLE WAYS and HESTIATE TO DISRUPT ANY SOCIETAL EXPECTATIONS -People smile pleasantly and react politely. -People do NOT explicitly criticize the partner in this stage. -People AVOID CONFLICT during this stage. -Example: Talking about a sport or a sport team that you both love. -Example: Talking about a fraternity or sorority that you both want to join. 2). EXPLORATORY AFFECTIVE STAGE-the stage of social penetration that RESULTS IN THE EMERGENCE OF OUR PERSONALITY TO OTHERS -Small PIECES OF YOUR PRIVATE LIFE BECOME PUBLIC -The unique self starts to emerge *-This stage is comparable to the relationships we have with CASUAL ACQUAINTANCES and FRIENDLY NEIGHBORS -This stage is characterized by MORE CANDOR, ENGAGEMENT, AND EASE -Both verbal and nonverbal behaviors occur in this stage. -VERBAL-CATCHPHRASES BEGIN TO BE COMMONLY USED IN YOUR RELATIONSHIP (E.G., "WHATEVER," "CHILL," ETC.) -MORE SPONTANEITY as people begin to feel relaxed with one another, and they are not as cautious about blurting out something that they might later regret (Example: two friends pledging for a sorority. One friend might spontaneously blurt out her reservations about not having any fun and worried about being expected to conform). -NONVERBAL-more touch behavior and MORE AFFECTIVE FACIAL EXPRESSIONS (e.g., an expression of disgust when the partner says something that you do not agree with). -MANY relationships DO NOT GO BEYOND THIS STAGE 3). AFFECTIVE STAGE-the stage of social penetration that is SPONTANEOUS and QUITE COMFORTABLE for relational partners -Characterized by COMMITMENT and COMFORTABILITY *-CHARACTERIZES MANY CLOSE FRIENDSHIPS AND INTIMATE ROMANTIC PARTNERSHIPS -More "free-wheeling" and casual -Individuals MAKE QUICK DECISIONS, OFTEN WITH LITTLE REGARD FOR THE RELATIONSHIP AS A WHOLE -The UNIQUE FEATURES OF A RELATIONSHIP ARE COMMONLY MANIFESTED -Example: A smile substituting for the words "I understand" *-Example: PERSONAL IDIOMS-PRIVATE, INTIMATE EXPRESSIONS STATED IN A RELATIONSHIP -Private ways of expressing the intimacy of a relationship through words or phrases -Example: Unique nicknames that each person gives the other person *-Different from the catchprases in the exploratory affective stage. Catchprases like "whatever" develop earlier in a relationship than do idioms. -People may engage in CRITICISMS OR HOSTILITIES WITHOUT WORRYING ABOUT A THREAT TO THE RELATIONSHIP AS A WHOLE -Both people are comfortable sharing their personal thoughts about the other person. 4). STABLE EXCHANGE-the stage of social penetration that results in COMPLETE OPENNESS AND SPONTANEITY FOR RELATIONAL PARTNERS -Characterized by RAW HONESTY AND INTIMACY -High degree of relational uniqueness -Partners are HIGHLY INTIMATE AND SYNCHRONIZED *-VERY RARE TO GET TO THIS STAGE -Partners can PREDICT EACH OTHER'S BEHAVIORS -Friendly teasing -THE FEWEST MISINTERPETATIONS IN MEANING AT THIS STAGE because things have already been clarified in the past, and partners have their own unique ways of communicating with one another. Communication is therefore THE MOST EFFICIENT. -The relational partners see themselves as part of AN INTEGRATED UNIT. -Characterized by DYADIC UNIQUENESS-DISTINCTIVE RELATIONSHIP QUALITIES SUCH AS HUMOR OR SARCASM

Strength and Weakness of Uncertainty Reduction Theory

Strength: 1a). HEURISTIC-the theory has generated many new studies -Example: Has been used to examine CMC Weakness: 2a). UTILITY-Michael SUNNAFRANK argues that some of the major assumptions of the theory are flawed -Sunnafrank argues that reducing uncertainty about the self and another person in an initial interaction is NOT the primary concern. -Rather, he argues that a more primary concern is "THE MAXIMIZATION OF RELATIONAL OUTCOMES." -Sunnafrank calls for a reformulation of URT that accounts for the importance of predicted outcomes during initial interactions. This has come to be known as PREDICTED OUTCOME VALUE. -Holds that people are concerned with MAXIMIZING REWARDS IN A POTENTIAL RELATIONSHIP -Berger responds by saying that outcomes cannot be predicted if you do not first know information about yourself, the partner, and the relationship. Berger holds that uncertainty reduction is independent of and necessary to predicted outcome values. A SECOND PROBLEM WITH UTILITY: CONCERNS OVER VALIDITY -Berger has admitted some validity problems. -Kellermann and Reynolds (1990) pointed to Axiom 3 (high uncertainty is associated with high levels of information seeking) might not be valid. -If one or some of the axioms are not valid, much of the theory falls apart. -They found that WANTING KNOWLEDGE, NOT LACKING KNOWLEDGE, PROMOTES INFORMATION-SEEKING -Other scholars have found some empirical support for Axiom 3, so the debate is not over.

Strength and Weaknesses: cognitive dissonance

Strength: Heurism Weakness: 2a). FALSIFIABILTY-Counterattitudinal advocacy researchers often assume dissonance is built up after counterattitudinal advocacy, but they do not test to determine whether or not dissonance actually arises and dissipates. -Festinger never specified a reliable way to measure the degree of dissonance a person experiences. -DISSONANCE THERMOMETER-a hypothetical, reliable gauge of the dissonance a person feels as a result of inconsistency -This term was created by psychologist Patricia Devine and her University of Wisconsin-Madison colleagues. -Considering galvanic skin response to measure physiological arousal and self-report scales to measure psychological arousal, but a lot of work still needs to be done on this point. *-Until some kind of dissonance thermometer is a standard part of dissonance research, we will never know for sure whether or not the distressing mental state of dissonance is for real. 2b). PARSIMONY-Some say the theory is overly complex. -A more parsimonious alternative: Bem's self-perception theory-holds that people determine their attitudes the same way that outside observers do—by simply observing their behavior. -Bem reran the $1/$20 experiment, and outside observers were able to correctly infer the speakers' attitudes after being told how much the speakers were compensated. There may therefore be no need to invoke dissonance.

Strength and Weakness of Social Penetration Theory

Strength: 1-HEURISM-SPT and self-disclosure have yielded thousands of studies -The effects of self-disclosure on families, romantic couples, teachers/students, physicians/patients, etc. Weakness: -SCOPE-The scope of the theory makes it difficult to adequately test as a whole -Mark Knapp and Anita Vangelisti (2009) argued that SPT does not adequately account for how relationships are embedded in other relationships. in turn, these other relationships influence the communication between partners. -Third parties may influence the direction of a relationship in ways not accounted for by the theory. -The theory also does not pay much attention to other communication practices in relationships, outside of self-disclosure.

Strengths and Weaknesses of Social Exchange

Strengths: 1). HEURISM-Studies in corporations, foster care, romantic relationships, and online interactions Weaknesses: 1). SCOPE-some say the scope of the theory is too narrow because it only considers rationality and self-interest-it considers the "separative self" -It does NOT consider THE CONNECTED SELF that values GROUP SOLIDARITY -SET only focuses on the individual as a unique entity rather than an individual as a member of groups -SET might not be easily applied to cultures that value group connections over individuality 2). UTILITY-SET has been criticized for the conceptualization of human beings that it advances -People are seen as rational calculators-Many people object to this understanding of humans. -SET assumes a great deal of cognitive awareness and activity. -Critics wonder IF PEOPLE ARE REALLY AS SELF-INTERESTED AS THE THEORY ASSUMES. -Steve Duck (1994) argued that applying a marketplace mentality to relational life VASTLY MISREPRESENTS what goes on in relationships. He suggests it is wrong to think about human relationships the same way we think about a car transaction or other type of financial exchange. -However, scholars of organizational communication and marketing find SET useful. Salespeople might develop organizational loyalty using a SET approach. -The theory might be more useful for organizational communication than interpersonal/relational communication. 3). TESTABILITY-People criticize the theory for not being testable. *-COSTS AND REWARDS ARE NOT CLEARLY DEFINED. *-Seems almost impossible to make operational distinctions between what people value, what people perceive as rewarding, and how people behave. -The theory argues that people do what they can do to maximize rewards. It also argues that people engage in rewarding behavior. -The circular definitions may make the theory untestable and unfalsifiable.

Strengths and Weaknesses of coordinated management of meaning

Strengths: 1a). PARSIMONY-some would say that the hierarchy of meaning is parsimonious -The hierarchy of meaning is visual and succinct 1b). UTILITY-the theory is very practical and can be applied to conflict resolution -One of the few theories identified by scholars as "a practical theory" 1c). HEURISM-the theory has spawned studies in many contexts including international adoption, child and adolescent health, electronic chat rooms, etc. -The theory is like a Swiss army knife, useful in many situations Weaknesses: 2a). SCOPE-the theory might be overly broad in scope -The theory might be too abstract with imprecise definitions -However, advocates of the theory say that critics need to understand the time period in which the theory was created (a time of more strict social science)—the theory has gotten better since its creation

Strengths and Weaknesses of expectancy violations theory

Strengths: 1a). SCOPE-Even though Burgoon has expanded her theory to include other verbal and nonverbal behaviors, the original theory had a clear and well-defined scope (proxemic behaviors) 1b). UTILITY-the theory is useful in that it gives us practical advice on how to maximize a conversations' outcomes 1c). HEURISM-EVT scholarship has proliferated over the decades Studies on swearing in the workplace, clothing and teacher credibility, attractiveness, forgiveness in dating relationships Weaknesses: 2a). TESTABILITY-difficult to measure arousal, for example -Some scholars have argued that self-report measures of arousal are not adequate -However, as a whole, EVT is arguably testable

Strengths and Weaknesses

Strengths: Test of time Heurism Weaknesses: Scope Utility Testability 1a). TEST OF TIME-the theory has been around for over 80 years 1b). HEURISM-the theory has generated a lot of research over the decades 2a). SCOPE-Some critics claim that the theory is too broad to be useful. -The theory covers too much ground to fully explain specific meaning-making processes and communication behaviors -When a theory purports to explain everything, it will be vague and difficult to apply. -Proponents respond by claiming that symbolic interactionism is not a single theory, but rather an overarching framework that can inform multiple theories. 2b). UTILITY-Some critics argue that the theory is not useful because it ignores important concepts such as EMOTIONS and SELF-ESTEEM -The theory might ignore the emotional dimension of human interaction. -The theory speaks a lot about how we develop a self-concept, but does not directly address self-esteem as often/does not directly address how we evaluate ourselves as often. Perhaps the role of self-esteem and self-evaluations needs to be made more explicit. 2c). TESTABILITY-Some critics argue that the theory's overly broad scope renders the concepts vague and not able to be tested -So many of the core concepts are NOMINAL, so it is difficult to test the theory. -Proponents, again, respond that symbolic interactionism is a general framework, and that more specific theories stemming from it (e.g., role theory) are falsifiable

evaluating theory:

Test of time - a theory should be durable and last over time TEST OF TIME-Does the theory become outdated over time? -Consider a theory about MySpace or an outdated social media platform -Media scholars need to theorize based on attributes/affordances of the media platform rather than just based off the name of a media platform.

evaluating theory:

Testability - a theory's claims should be able to be tested for accuracy TESTABILITY-ALSO CALLED FALSIFIABILITY -Refers to our ability to test the accuracy of a theory's claims -Our ability to investigate a theory's accuracy -Example: Social exchange theory might fall short on testability. -The theory claims that people will engage in behaviors that they find rewarding and avoid behaviors that they find costly. The theory then defines rewards as involving behaviors that people repeatedly engage in, and costs as involving behaviors that people avoid. -The theory would benefit from a clearer definition of costs and rewards so that predictions can be more easily tested.

The Hierarchy of Organized Meaning

The essence of communication is meaning. -We live our lives full of meaning. -One of our challenges is to MANAGE THOSE MEANINGS. -We manage meanings by organizing them in a HIERARCHICAL MANNER. -One of the core features of CMM. Hierarchy of Meaning -CMM recognizes that people are CONSTANTLY BOMBARDED WITH MESSAGES AND MEANINGS, and that they therefore need a way to organize these meanings **-Higher levels of meaning (e.g., cultural patterns) help people interpret lower levels of meaning (e.g., content) -In other words, the meaning types are embedded in each other -(Optional): Strictly speaking, though, Pearce and Cronen do not believe that a rigid ordering is appropriate -Communication can occur at more than one level of meaning at a time 1). CONTENT-the conversion of RAW SENSORY DATA INTO MEANING -can be thought of as A MESSAGE WITHOUT A CONTEXT 2). SPEECH ACTS-an action we perform by speaking -Example: Questioning -Example: Complimenting -Example: Threatening -Example: Promising -Example: Insulting -Example: Speculating -Example: Guessing -Speech acts COMMUNICATE THE INTENTION OF THE SPEAKER and indicate how the behavior should be taken -Two people CO-CREATE THE MEANING OF SPEECH ACTS. For example, usually a threat is characterized by a victimizer and a victim. -Speech acts don't always involve language. They can also involve nonverbal communication. 3). *EPISODES-communication routines that have recognized BEGINNINGS, MIDDLES, AND ENDINGS -These describe CONTEXTS IN WHICH PEOPLE ACT -Episodes can be discrete parts of a conversation or AN ENTIRE DISCUSSION BETWEEN PEOPLE -Multiple speech acts can be in an episode -Example: Talking with your doctor about a cancer diagnosis during a doctor's appointment -Example: Engaging in a fight with a coworker or a sibling *-Episodes are SEQUENCES OF SPEECH ACTS "LINKED TOGETHER AS A STORY" People may differ in how they punctuate an episode *-PUNCTUATION-process of identifying when an episode begins or ends -Who started an episode? -Pearce (2007) argues that episodes are fairly imprecise, whereas others argue that episodes can be highly structured (e.g., family rituals) 4). Relationship-AN AGREEMENT AND UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN TWO PEOPLE -Pearce (2007) expands our understanding of what a relationship can be. -Can be between friends, spouses, and family members. -Can also be between people and corporations, cities, clubs, etc. -Like contracts that have SET GUIDELINES AND OFTEN PRESCRIBE BEHAVIOR -Relationships also SUGGEST A FUTURE -People hold relational boundaries and expectations for each other. *-ENMESHMENT-THE EXTENT TO WHICH PARTNERS IDENTIFY THEMSELVES AS PART OF A RELATIONAL SYSTEM -The extent to which people get "caught up" in their relationship 5). LIFE SCRIPTS-clusters of past or present episodes that create a system of manageable meanings with others -Autobiographies that communicate your sense of self -How you view yourself over your lifetime affects how you communicate with others. -Example: Different life scripts for people who have previously had secure romantic and family relationships versus people who have previously had abusive romantic and family relationships-affects how the people communicate -When people form a relationship, they begin to co-create their life scripts 6). CULTURAL PATTERNS-images of the world and a person's relationship to it -People identify with particular groups in particular cultures -Our society gives us values with respect to sex, race, class, etc. -CULTURAL PATTERNS-refer to very broad images of world order and a person's relationship to that order -U.S. CULTURE EMPHASIZES INDIVIDUALISM -prioritizing personal needs or values over the needs or values of a group (I-identity). A focus on independence and initiative. -LATINO AND ASIAN CULTURES OFTEN EMPHASIZE COLLECTIVISM -a cultural value that prioritizes group needs or values over the needs or values of an individual (We-identity). -Difficulty may arise when two people representing two different orientations interpret meaning from their particular vantage point. Communication can occur at more than one level at the same time *The hierarchy of meaning is an important framework in helping us understand how meaning is coordinated and managed.

Coordinated Management of Meaning

The theory addresses how people co-create meaning in a conversation. Coordinated management of meaning - how people establish rules for creating and interpreting meaning and how those rules become enmeshed in a conversation This theory treats communication as highly transactional.

Uncertainty Reduction Theory

The theory's goal is to explain how communication can reduce uncertainties between strangers interacting for the first time. Prediction - the ability to forecast one's own and other people's behavioral choices Explanation - the ability to interpret the meaning of behavioral choices

Antecedent Conditions

Three antecedent conditions heighten people's motivation to reduce uncertainty: 1.) The interaction partner has the potential to reward or punish you. - These are prior conditions -Reward value often involves the other person being physically attractive or socially attractive (e.g., popular). 2.) The interaction partner is odd or strange in some way. -The other person behaves contrary to expectations. -Example: Social norms suggest that staring is impolite. When somebody stares at you, your expectations might be violated, and you might be further motivated to reduce uncertainty. 3.) You expect future interactions with the interaction partner. -Example: Knowing you will continue to see the student for the remainder of the semester.

Minimal Justification: $1/$20 Experiment

Undergraduate men were assigned the boring and repetitive tasks of sorting spools into sets of 12 and turning square pegs a quarter turn to the right. Counterattitudinal advocacy - publicly urging others to believe or do something that is opposite to what the advocate actually believes (Background Information): This experiment has been replicated many times. *-Have repeatedly found that minimal incentives for behavior cause an attitude change, whereas large incentives do not. -Festinger and Carlson recruited Stanford University undergraduate men to participate in a study ostensibly about industrial relations. 1). This procedure was intentionally designed to be monotonous and tiring. -At the end of the hour, the experimenter approached the participant and made a request. He claimed that the student assistant failed to show up and that he needed help telling a potential female subject waiting in the waiting room how fun the experiment was. 2). AKA LYING -Some participants were paid $20 for their counterattitudinal advocacy; other participants were paid $1 for their counterattitudinal advocacy. -What differed were privately expressed attitudes after the study was over. -After talking with the female student in the waiting room, participants paid $20 privately confessed that they thought the study was dull. Participants paid only $1 privately confessed that they thought the study was fun. 1). Festinger noted that $20 was a large sum of money. This would be worth more than $100 in today's economy. -If a student felt doubts about telling a white lie, the large amount of money was a ready justification. -Thus, the student felt little or no tension between his action and attitude. -In contrast, the man who lied for only $1 had a lot of cognitive work to do. The logical inconsistency of saying a boring task was fun had to be resolved through internal dialogue such as, "I'm a Stanford man. Am I the kind of guy who would lie for a dollar? No way. Actually, what I told the girl was true. The experiment actually was a lot of fun." -Festinger said the $1 was just barely enough to induce compliance to the experimenter's request, so the students had to create another justification. They changed their attitude about the task to bring it in line with their behavior.

Evaluating theory:

Utility - a theory should have practical value or usefulness UTILITY-the usefulness or practical value of a theory -Theories with utility tell a great deal about communication and human behavior. -Allows us to understand some element of communication that was previously unclear. -Allows us to weave together pieces of information for us to see a pattern that was previously not seen.

linear model

a one-way view of communication that assumes a message is sent by a source to a receiver through a channel

Communication

a social process in which people employ symbols to establish and interpret meaning in their environment.

interactional model

a view of communication as the sharing of meaning with feedback that links source and receiver The interactional model allows for each party to have a field of experience.

transactional model

a view of communication as the simultaneous sending and receiving of messages The transactional model also allows for fields of experience, but there is greater overlap between the parties' fields of experience.

theory

an abstract system of concepts and their interrelationships that helps people understand a phenomenon Several components are key to defining theory: Concepts (nominal versus real concepts) Relationships

depth

degree of intimacy guiding topic discussion

symbolic interactionism-theme three:

individual and society This theme examines the relationship between individual freedoms and social constraints. Assumptions of this theme: People and groups are influenced by cultural and social processes. Social structure is worked out through social interaction. 1). Mead and Blumer took A MIDDLE POSITION on the question of the relationship between individual freedoms and social constraints -They tried to account for both order and change in social processes. -SYMBOLIC INTERACTIONISM RECOGNIZES THAT BOTH SOCIAL STRUCTURAL AND PERSONAL FACTORS INFLUENCE BEHAVIOR -Individuals are influenced in their thoughts and actions by social forces and processes, shared meanings and symbols, and by individual agency and self-motives -The theory allows for some free choice/free will -Ask for CLASS EXAMPLES of this middle position. -One example from the textbook: HOW PEOPLE QUIT SMOKING 2a). People and groups are influenced by cultural and social processes: -Recognizes that social norms constrain individual behavior -Example: Might wear a suit and tie to work because it is expected. -Culture influences the behaviors and attitudes that we value in our self-concepts. -Example: In the United States, people who see themselves as assertive are likely to be proud of this attribute because the United States is an individualistic and low-context culture. In some Asian cultures, people might feel ashamed or embarrassed to see themselves as assertive because many Eastern Asian cultures are collectivistic and high-context. Cooperation and community are highly valued. 2b). Social structure is worked out through social interaction: -SI challenges the view that social structure is unchanging. -Acknowledges that people can change social situations. -Example: Employers starting to implement "casual Fridays" and noticing how the workplace culture changes. Employees can modify the organization's structure by wearing casual clothing. -Acknowledges that HUMANS ARE CHOICE-MAKERS

breadth

number of topics talked about in relationship (first meeting, name, age, job.... etc)

Retroactive uncertainty reduction

people attempt to explain behavior after the initial interaction ends -People go through interior monologues with themselves

Proactive uncertainty reduction

people map out communication strategies and try to reduce their uncertainty before actually engaging in the interaction -Example: Trying to avoid somebody before ever speaking with them -Example: Preplanning interesting stories you want to share with a conversation partner

Cognitive dissonance

the distressing mental state caused by inconsistency between a person's two beliefs or a belief and an action -Cognitive dissonance is an aversive state people want to avoid. Thus, people strive for consistency in their daily lives. 1). COGNITIVE DISSONANCE-created by Stanford social psychologist Leon Festinger -People do things that do not align with what they know. -People hold contradictory opinions. -Example: The fox's retreat from the grapes clashed with his knowledge that the grapes are tasty. -By changing his attitude about the grapes, he provided an acceptable explanation for abandoning his efforts to reach them. *-Festinger considered the need to avoid dissonance to be JUST AS BASIC AS the need for safety or the need to satisfy hunger. 2). An AVERSIVE STATE-Thus, we are MOTIVATED TO CHANGE EITHER OUR BEHAVIOR OR OUR BELIEF in an effort to avoid that distressing feeling. -The more important the issue, the greater the magnitude of dissonance. -The greater the discrepancy between the belief and behavior, the greater the magnitude of dissonance.

symbolic interactionism- theme one:

the importance of meaning -People construct meaning through the communication process. Assumptions of this theme: People act toward others based on the meanings these others have for them. Meaning is created in interactions between people. Meaning is modified through an interpretive process. -1). CONSTRUCTING MEANING THROUGH COMMUNICATION: -Meaning is NOT INTRINSIC to a thing or an idea -It takes people to create meaning -ACCORDING TO SYMBOLIC INTERACTIONISM, THE GOAL OF INTERACTION IS TO CREATE MEANING. 2a). People act toward others on the basis of meanings those others have for them: -What is the meaning behind behavior? -Example: In the United States, we often believe that older coworkers (in their 40s and 50s) have more experience than us because we assign certain meanings to their age that we have learned in our past interactions (e.g., "You will get more knowledge and get promoted as you get older"). In the United States, we are often trained to equate age with experience, and we then act toward people based on these meanings. 2b). Meaning is created in interactions between people: -Mead stressed the INTERSUBJECTIVE BASIS OF MEANING-MEANING CAN EXIST ONLY WHEN PEOPLE SHARE COMMON INTERPRETATIONS OF THE SYMBOLS THEY EXCHANGE IN INTERACTION -Rather than seeing meaning as (1) intrinsic to an object or an idea or (2) embedded in the psychological composition of a single person, Mead instead argued that meaning (3) OCCURS BETWEEN PEOPLE -Meanings are 'SOCIAL PRODUCTS' CREATED THROUGH INTERACTIONS 2c). Meaning is modified through an interpretive process. According to Blumer, this process involves two steps: -Step One: Communicators point out the things that have meaning-this involves people engaging in communication with themselves -Example: As somebody gets ready for work in the morning, they communicate with themselves about the areas that are meaningful to them (e.g., their physical appearance). -Step Two: Communicators SELECT, CHECK, AND TRANSFORM the meanings in the context in which they find themselves -This involves INTERACTION-People listen for relational partners' comments in whatever areas of life people have decided are meaningful (e.g., their physical appearance).

symbolic interactionism- theme two:

the importance of self concept -Self-concept - the relatively stable set of perceptions that people hold about themselves Assumptions of this theme: Individuals develop self-concepts through interaction with others. Self-concepts provide an important motive for behavior. -1). Self-concept: Ask yourself, "Who am I?" -Whatever comes to mind is your self-concept -Can involve physical features, roles, talents, emotional states, values, social skills and limits, intellect, etc. -People ACTIVELY DEVELOP THEIR SELF-CONCEPTS THROUGH INTERACTIONS WITH OTHERS 2a). Individuals develop self-concepts through interactions with others: -It is ONLY THROUGH CONTACT WITH OTHERS THAT WE DEVELOP A SENSE OF SELF -People are NOT born with self-concepts -According to SI, infants have no sense of an individuated self -EARLIEST DEVELOPMENT OF SELF-CONCEPT: -During the first few years of life, infants begin to differentiate themselves from their surroundings -The process continues with the child's ACQUISITION OF LANGUAGE, and the ability to respond to others and internalize the feedback he or she receives -Contact with parents, teachers, friends, etc. influences your self-concept -Example: IDENTITY CHANGE FOLLOWING WEIGHT LOSS: not enough to just lose weight and sustain that weight loss over time. The IDENTITY CHANGE IS NOT EFFECTED UNTIL INTERACTIONS WITH OTHERS VALIDATE YOUR NEW IDENTITY. 2b). Self-concepts provide an important motive for behavior: -Beliefs, values, feelings, and assessments about the self affect behavior -Mead sees THE SELF AS A PROCESS, NOT AS A STRUCTURE -Having a self forces people to CONSTRUCT their actions and responses, rather than simply expressing them -SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECY-A PREDICTION ABOUT YOURSELF CAUSING YOU TO BEHAVE IN SUCH A WAY THAT IT COMES TRUE -Example: If you feel confident in your ability to learn communication theory, you will likely study harder than people who do not feel confident. This harder studying will then likely cause you to get a better grade at the end of the semester. -People's self-expectations are realized because they act in ways consistent with those self-expectations.