Com 110 chapter 7

Understanding Human Communication
Chapter 7
Understanding Interpersonal
Relationships
Com 110
Professor Liz Schroeder

Understanding Interpersonal Relationships
Overview

 Why we form interpersonal relationships

 Characteristics of interpersonal relationships

 Communication over the relational lifespan

 Intimacy in interpersonal relationships

 Self-disclosure in interpersonal relationships

Why We Form Relationships
Influences on our choice of relational partners

 Appearance – we are attracted to people who we judge to be more
physically attractive
 Studies have shown that physical attractiveness is rated as more
important in the earlier stages
 People who are ordinary-looking who have good personalities are
rated as more attractive

 Similarity – we are more attracted to people who are similar to us
 If you have the same interests in career goals, same friends, and
similar beliefs, you are more able to deal with the trivial stuff that
comes up
 If you have similar abilities when it comes to communicating, even if
that means that you both have a difficult time talking about emotions
or communicating at all, you are more apt to like each other

Influences on our choice of relational partners continued…

 Complementarity – even though birds of a feather flock together, the
opposite is also true
 If you have certain skills or characteristics that your partner is
lacking, and they have skills and characteristics that you are
lacking, attraction and relational satisfaction are positive
 Keeps the relationship interesting if you can bring “new” stuff to the
relationship

 Reciprocal Attraction – we typically like people who like us
 This is the self-fulfilling prophecy theory of attraction
 The person likes me and finds me attractive; my self-esteem is
bolstered by this person’s feelings, I want to spend more time with
that person.


 Competence – we like to be with people who are at our level of
competence, for the most part…
 We like to be with those who have talents and skills that are similar to
ours, and we like them to have at least a few noticeable flaws
 However, if you have especially high or low self-esteem, you are more
likely to find “perfect” people more attractive.
 The best way to be liked is to be good at what you do, but also admit
your flaws.

 Disclosure – appropriate self-disclosure can help build liking
 This becomes more important over the course of the relationship
 Not all disclosure leads to liking – has to be appropriate for the setting
and the stage of the relationship
• More on this later (Johari Window)


 Proximity – if we are near people, we are more
likely to develop relationships
 We can become friends with close neighbors
rather than those who are down the road
 People in close proximity may be more
similar to us
 Internet provides a “place” for virtual
proximity
 Familiarity, on the other hand, can breed
contempt (Dog Whisperer)

Why We Stay in Relationships

 Rewards – Costs = Outcome
 Aka, The Social Exchange Theory
 Develop relationships where you get the biggest gain or reward with
the least costs
 Rewards are anything you want, enjoy and you’d be willing to incur
costs to obtain
 Costs are things you normally try to avoid, consider unpleasant or
difficult

What are some examples of rewards and costs
in relationships?

 When looking at the dark side of relationships, the social exchange
theory can be used to explain why people stay in bad relationships.
How would this work?

Why We Stay in Relationships
Equity Theory (Not in Text)

 In the US, relationships are developed and maintained when your ratio to
costs and rewards is approximately equal to your partner’s.
 Both partners should receive rewards proportional to their costs
 If one partner works harder for the relationship than the other, then that
person receives greater rewards than the other
 In collectivist cultures:
 Principle of equality: each person gets equal rewards, regardless of
individual contribution
 Principle of need: each person gets rewards based on need

Interpersonal Relationships
Which Theory?

The Big Bang Theory - Penny's Christmas gift to Sheldon

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlhHTdDqoBc

Which theory is in action here?

Equity Theory

Characteristics of Interpersonal Relationships
What makes communication interpersonal?

 All communication between two people (dyadic) is what is called
contextually interpersonal. Examples?
 The impersonal nature of some dyadic exchanges has led communication
scholars to say that it is the quality of the relationship and the dyadic
exchange that make it interpersonal.
 An interpersonal relationship exists between two people when they treat
each other as unique, regardless of the situation in which interaction takes
place or the number of people who are present.
 Qualitatively interpersonal communication
is relatively scarce. Why?
 Takes time and energy.
 We couldn’t be “close” with everyone.

Interpersonal Communication in Mediated Relationships

 Can mediated interactions be interpersonal?
 Basically, there are a couple of rules of thought:
1. Internet/CMC makes our interactions less
personal, less qualitatively interpersonal.
IE. Collecting “friends” on Facebook.
2. CMC enhances the quantity and the quality
of interpersonal communication.
• Women seem to use CMC more and
have more satisfaction in terms of
staying in touch with friends and family.
• 72% of internet users had
communicated with a relative or family
member in the past day as compared to
61% of nonusers.

Content and Relational Messages

 Content messages:
 Focus on the subject being discussed

 Relational messages:
 Make statements about how the
parties feel toward one another:
• Affinity – Do you like me?
• Respect – Do you admire me?
• Immediacy – Are you interested
and/or attracted to me?
• Control – Do I have the control
here or do you? Are we equals?

Take out the trash example…

Activity: Content and Relational Messages

 Content message: “Can you help me for a minute?”

 Relational messages:
 Superiority
 Helplessness
 Aloofness
 Sexual desire
 Friendliness
 Irritation

The Point?
 Most relational messages are conveyed via nonverbal messages.
 Nonverbal messages are ambiguous, so before jumping to a conclusion
about the “real” meaning of a message, do a perception check.

Metacommunication

 Metacommunication is the term used to describe messages about other
messages
 When we talk about our relationship with each other, we are
metacommunicating.
• “It sounds like you are angry at me.”
• “We need to talk.”
• “I really appreciate it when you take out the trash.”
 Do you remember John Gottman’s research on interpersonal
relationships that we watched in The Human Face?
• Successful marriages and long-term relationships “do”
metacommunication.
• They deal with relationship issues as if they were “a soccer ball
being kicked back and forth”rather than kicking the relationship
partner when he or she is down…

Let’s review a little information about John Gottman and then take
a listen to some of his findings…

John Gottman Studies the Masters and the Disasters

 John Gottman is one of the top 10 most influential therapists over the
last 30 years. His work in looking at why couples stay together is
groundbreaking.

 Basically, he stuck couples in a video lab and recorded them having
arguments. He looked at their nonverbal and verbal messages and their
argument strategies.

What he found was pretty interesting:

 It’s not how MUCH you argue, but HOW you argue that predicts a couple’s
chances for staying together.

Let’s take a listen… from minute 2…

Interpersonal Conflict Management
John Gottman’s Study of HOW We Argue

John Gottman’s Study Results

 Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse

 Criticism – this is when you rip someone down, are critical of them as a
person, and bring up past grievances by gunnysacking

 Defensiveness – perhaps you know that the criticism is valid, but you
don’t want to admit it. You may say it’s not your fault
or you may want to tell the other person how it is his or
her fault.

 Stonewalling – withdrawing from the conversation, shutting down –
often do this to try to calm down, but it is interpreted as
a self- removal from the discussion.

 Contempt – sarcasm or mockery, calling names, degrading the other

Interpersonal Conflict Management
John Gottman’s Study of HOW We Argue

 Out of the 4 horsemen, Contempt is the number 1 indicator of
marital disaster and divorce. It actually is an indicator of physical
health – if you are the recipient of contempt, your
health, statistically, is in jeopardy!

 Even people who didn’t engage the four horsemen got
divorced. Why?
They had nothing at all!
No emotional display, no teasing, no fun, no play, no fighting.
They didn’t support the relationship in any way.

 If you remember nothing else about his research, remember this: The
difference between divorce and a positive long-term relationship is very
simple – satisfied couples maintain a five-to-one ratio of positive to
negative interactions in their relationship.

Communication over the Relational Life Span
Trying to explain how relationships work

The Big Bang Theory - The Friendship Algorithm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k0xgjUhEG3U&feature=related

Do you use a friendship algorithm in your relationships with others?

Mark Knapp’s Ten Stage Relationship Model

 This is a developmental model used to look at intimate and close friendship
relationships (model on page 205).

 “Rules” for moving through the stages in Mark Knapp’s Relationship Model:
 You can exit at any stage
 Some exit at the same stage every time
 You can go backwards!
 There is no defined amount of time people stay within a certain stage. It
differs for each relationship
 You can skip stages

Mark Knapp’s Ten Stage Relationship Model – Coming Together

 5 Stages of coming together:
1. Initiating –
 Brief, small talk to get to know one another and decide whether you
want to get to know him/her
 Your schemata are activated
 You are managing your identities
 Your Presenting Self is Shown
 You use social distance – What is this?
• 4 to 12 feet distance

This stage is very short, sometimes as short as 10-15 seconds. In this
stage, interactants are concerned with making favorable impressions on
each other. They may use standard greetings or observe each other's
appearance or mannerisms. This is often where we use the short,

Fresh Prince: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NH4BJ9B1lrw

2. Experimenting–
 We decide whether we want
to pursue the relationship
 Small talk takes place in order to do 4 things:
• Uncover topics and opening for future conversations
• Act as an audition for a future relationship
• Safe act of revealing who you are (Uncertainty Reduction)
• Maintain a sense of community
 Butterfly Stage
 Personal Distance
• 1-1/2 – 4 ft.
In this next stage, individuals ask questions of each other in order to
gain information about them and decide if they wish to continue the
relationship. Many relationships progress no further than this point.


3. Intensifying–
 Increase the amount of contact, expressing how they feel about one
another
 Social Penetration Theory – Depth/Breadth (pg. 217 or slides 40-42)
 Disclosure Increases
 Start to meet the other’s friends and family
 Intimacy becomes part of the relationship – Intimate Distance
 Stage Doesn’t Last Long – one either exits because euphoria is
subsiding or they quickly move onto the next stage

Self-disclosure becomes more common
in the intensifying stage. The relationship
becomes less formal, the interactants
begin to see each other as individuals,
and statements are made about the level
of commitment each has to the relationship.


4. Integrating–
 They become a “couple” in everyone else’s eyes
 Develop their own language
 Deeper sense of obligation (we expect more of each other)
 Both people want to do everything right at this stage, however the
perceived self has emerged.
 Social obligations are made on behalf of both
 Deeper disclosure

The individuals become a pair in the integrating stage. They begin to do
things together and, importantly, others come to see them as a pair. A
shared relational identity starts to form in this stage.


5. Bonding–
 Make a public declaration of their
relationship either through
engagement, marriage or moving in
together, resulting in (hopefully) social
support for the relationship
 This is a critical period in a relationship
 Show that spiritually and officially they are
bonded.
 This form of bonding can be used to
describe a business relationship such a
business partnership or fraternity initiation

During the bonding stage, a formal, sometimes legal, announcement of the
relationship is made. Examples include a marriage, "best friend" ritual, or
business partnership agreement. Few relationships reach this level.

Mark Knapp’s Ten Stage Relationship Model – Coming Apart

 5 Stages of Coming Apart:
6. Differentiating–
 You are an established couple, but feel the need to establish “me”
distinctions.
 Some “you” language emerges.
 You might need some time away to establish your individualism.
 You may “The Honeymoon is Over,” “Welcome to Reality”
 Realistic stage, but both people must remain committed.
 In families, when children become adults and need to establish their
own identities.

In this stage, partners begin to stress the "me" instead of the "we." In other
words, the individuals begin to assert their independence. They may develop
different hobbies or activities. The relationship may continue to dissolve, or
this stage may be a warning sign that the couple needs to address their
relationship status.


 5 Stages of coming apart:
7. Circumscribing–
 The first in a series of declining stages
 Debilitative emotions
 Social Penetration Theory reverses
 Arguing takes too much effort, so one
or both separates themselves from the
conflict
 Sarcasm kicks in

Communication between the couple diminishes during this stage. They
tend to avoid certain topics of discussion. Outwardly, the couple appears
normal. At this stage, attempts can be made to discuss the relationship
and return it to a positive state.


8. Stagnating–
 There is no continual growth and the two people become bored and
frustrated with one another
 Selective and Defensive Listening Occurs
 Doing the same things – going to the same places – or going nowhere.
 Start to spend time apart to create your own excitement

During the stagnating stage, the individuals avoid discussing the relationship
because they think they know what the other will say. Others begin to take
notice that something is wrong.


9. Avoiding–
 Creating physical distance between each
other
 Attribution takes place – both people attach meaning to the
other’s behavior
 Impersonal communication
 Insensitive listening
 Still does not have to end! However, at this
point, counseling would most likely be necessary.

The pair begins to physically separate themselves during the
avoiding stage. The individuals try to reduce the opportunities
for discussion.


10. Terminating–
 Ending the relationship
 It can happen quickly or over a period
of time
 More disclosure – summary dialogues
 Mixed emotions
 Can be reached in a back and forth
manner

This is the final stage of the relationship.
Termination may come naturally, such as at the end
of the semester when roommates move out, or
arbitrarily, through divorce. Termination of the
relationship can occur positively or negatively.

Relationship Dialectics Theory (Push Me, Pull You)


 Relationship Dialectics Theory - dynamic tensions exist in each stage of
relationships and are defined by a pair of opposite desires or motivations:

 Autonomy vs. Connection – Do you want to be connected at the hip or
be your own person? How are you defined? As a couple or as an
individual that has a relationship with someone?

 Novelty vs. Predictability – You have a need for adventure and newness
vs. you want to know what will happen at every turn and twist in the
relationship.

 Privacy vs. Openness – Do you want to reveal yourself to the other? Or
do you want to remain closed? (Graphs on page 211)


 What do you do with these opposing tensions?
 You can accept the imbalance as part of dating or relating.
 You can exit the relationship.
 You can rebalance your life. Stir things up, take time off, talking about
the imbalance and the inherent conflicts and problem solving with your
partner.

Intimacy in Interpersonal Relationships
Dimensions of Intimacy

 What is intimacy?
Definition: “Close union, contact, association, or acquaintance” with the
following possible KINDS of closeness:
 Physical – everything from a pat on the back to hugs to intense sexual
contact
 Intellectual sharing – exchange of important ideas
 Emotion – exchanging important feelings
 Shared activities – everything from playing basketball together, to
gossiping, to teasing and joking around

Male and Female Intimacy Styles

 History of Research
 Women are more intimate with their self-disclosures than men
 Men, if they could just open up about their feelings, would be close
 The Truth:
 Men and women in same sex interactions, get to know and trust each
other in different ways:
• Emotional expression is not the only way to get “close”
• Male intimacy is based on shared activities, not talking
• Female intimacy is based on sharing feelings, talking
 Men do things to express their love whereas women do things as an
expression of intimacy that has already been created
 How might this “complicate” physical interactions between men and
women?

Cultural Influences on Intimacy

 In more collectivist cultures, there is a greater distinction between in-group
members and strangers
 They go to extremes to hide personal information about in-group
members.

 By contrast, more individualistic cultures have less of a distinction between
personal relationships and casual ones
 They will air their “dirty laundry” with just about anyone.
 Engage in airplane “intimacy”
 Engage in “cocktail party” conversations

 The willingness to engage in disclosure (intimacy) is dependent on
socioeconomic class. Who do you think discloses more? Working-class
black males or upwardly mobile black males?
 Working-class black males

Self-Disclosure in Interpersonal Relationships
Self Disclosure

Definition?

The process of sharing personal information, opinions, and emotions with
others that would not normally be known to them.

 Self-disclosure is multi-dimensional.
 A type of communication in which we deliberately reveal new
information about ourselves.
 Information is significant – something that is truly a “part” of who you
are.
 This information would typically not be known by others – if the
receiving party already knew the information, it is not considered, by
this definition, self-disclosure.

Self Disclosure in Interpersonal Relationships
How Should We Self-Disclose?

CHEERS!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PxgwB_mDWWk

Why do we do it?

 Catharsis – the need to get something off your chest
 Self-clarification – revealing something so that the other person can help you figure
it out
 Self-validation – “I think I did the right thing. Let me tell you why I did it…”
 Reciprocity – “I think I like you…” (Hoping for the same from the other person)
 Impression management – “I don’t typically accept late work, but” (Professor to
student so a trust relationship will be forged / created)
 Relationship maintenance and enhancement – “I think we need to talk about our
relationship…”
 Control – “I just wanted you to know that one of our competitors just offered me a
great position…” (employee to boss – employee is hoping to get a raise and be
praised in current position)

Social Penetration Theory (Onion Theory)

 Describes the process of relationship bonding in which individuals move
from superficial communication to deeper, more intimate communication
 Relationships are closest when communication is deep, broad, and
frequent

 The Onion Metaphor
 The onion’s outer skin represents superficial information about your self
 The inner layers close to the core represent intimate information

Social Penetration Theory (Onion Theory) Described

 This is a theory of what happens when relationships develop (doesn’t seek
to explain WHY relationships start).
 The breadth of the relationship has to do with the number of topics you
and your partner talk about.
 The depth of a relationship involves the degree to which you penetrate the
inner personality – the core – of the other individual.
 When a relationship begins to deteriorate, the breadth and depth will, in
many ways, reverse themselves. This is a process referred to as
depenetration.
 After depenetration, there may occur something a little interesting – a
discussion between the break-upees…then, they can talk about the past
garbage and feelings and may actually end up becoming closer friends.

Social Penetration Theory (Onion Theory) Model

Public
image

Relationship development
occurs here

Self Awareness and the Johari Window

 Self Awareness
 You control your thoughts and behaviors largely to the extent that you
understand who you are.
 How well do you know yourself? Your physical
self, personality, thoughts, feelings, behaviors?

 Johari Window: A tool for examining what you know and don’t know
about yourself.
 Open self: what you and others know about you
 Blind self: things about yourself that others know but you don’t know
 Hidden self: your secrets; things you know that you do not let others
know about you
 Unknown self: truths about you that neither you nor others know

Johari Window

Source: From Group Processes: An Introduction to Group
Dynamics, 3rd ed., by Joseph Luft. Copyright © 1984 by Mayfield Publishing. Reprinted with permission of The McGraw-Hill Companies.

Johari Window
Example

My best friend, Sue (who also knows John)

Known to Me Not Known to Me

Open Self I am 24 years Blind Self Whether John likes
old, like to party, business me, my nervous habits, when
Known major in college. I know who I’ve talked too much, when
to Sue my best friends are and my I’ve offended someone Sue
weakness for Baskin Robbins knows better than I do
ice cream.
Hidden Self My secret desire Unknown Self Subconscious
fears, unconscious fight
Not to win an Olympic
medal, selfish motives in strategies, unrecognized
Known needs, potential as a
helping a rich
to Sue neighbor, fantasies of being pianist, how I would react to
rich and famous the loss of my mother

Johari Window
Personas

Open Personality:
Blind Self  Very self-aware (small
Open Self blind self)
 Happy to self- disclose to
others (small hidden self)
Unknown
 Understand
Self themselves, but may not
Hidden Self understand others (and
share too personal or
embarrassing
information)

Johari Window
Personas

Naive Personality:
 Large blind self that
Open Self Blind Self others can see
 They hide little of
themselves
 May make significant
social gaffes and not
Hidden Self Unknown Self even realize what they
have done

Johari Window
Personas

Open Self Blind Self Secret Personality:
 With a large hidden
self, may appear distant
or secretive to others
Unknown  May spend a significant
Hidden Self amount of time
Self
ensconced in their own
private world

Johari Window
Personas

Open Self Blind Self Mysterious Personality:
 Knows relatively little
about themselves
 Prefer to live in the
moment, taking each day
Hidden Unknown Self as it comes and not
Self seeking self-awareness
 They may deliberately
enter states of non-
thinking and revel in such
intuitive paradoxes as
knowing through not
knowing

Characteristics of Effective Self-Disclosure

 Cultural influence – be aware of cultural differences when disclosing or
when “judging” others about their disclosures or lack of disclosures
 Americans disclose more

 Dyadic – limiting your disclosure to one person at a time limits your
personal, relational, and professional risks

 Symmetrical – typically reciprocal in nature. If one person does all the
disclosing, what problem might this indicate?

 Incremental – amount of info increases over time. We “test” our
disclosure partner to see how he/she takes care of the info.

 Relatively scarce – moderation is best. Not too much and not too little.

Guidelines for Appropriate Self-Disclosure

 Is the other person important to you?

 Is the risk of disclosing reasonable?

 Are both amount and type of disclosure appropriate?

 Is the disclosure relevant to the situation at hand?

 Is the disclosure reciprocated?

 Will the effect be constructive?

 Is the self-disclosure clear and understandable?

Alternatives to Self-Disclosure

 Lies  Equivocation
 Altruistic lies  Equivocal language
 To acquire resources  Hinting
 To protect resources  Face-saving hint versus direct
 To initiate and continue statement
interaction
 To avoid conflict
 To avoid interaction or take
leave
 To present a competent image
 To increase social desirability

Com 110 chapter 7

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

En vedette

En vedette (9)

Similaire à Com 110 chapter 7

Similaire à Com 110 chapter 7 (19)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

Com 110 chapter 7