COMM 5402
Advanced Interpersonal
Communication
Fall 2010
Ascan F. Koerner
Knowledge
Ways of knowing

Empiricism


Rationalism


Based on experience / senses
Based on reason
Constructivism

Based on convention
Science



One way to generate knowledge
Based on Empiricism & Rationalism (logic)
Assumes objective Truth




Reality independent of observer
Regularity of reality (stability & laws)
Observer capable of observation
Social science assumes this about the
social world (at least to a degree)
Science & Theory



Theories are formal articulations of
knowledge
The scientific method is to gain
knowledge by deriving hypotheses and
testing them (by attempting to disprove
their predictions)
Thus, science is the process of
developing and testing theories
Defining Theory I
Theory differs from
informal everyday
knowledge by being more
explicit, formally
organized, and abstract.
(McGuire, 1989).
Defining Theory II
A theory is a set of interrelated
constructs (concepts), definitions, and
propositions that present a systematic
view of phenomena by specifying
relations among variables, with the
purpose of explaining and predicting
phenomena.
(Kerlinger, 1986).
Human Need for Explanation


Need for theory in human mind
3 ways of experience the world



observer
theorist (observer & explanation)
researcher (theorist & test)
Theoretical Models







Units (Variables)
Laws of Interaction
Boundaries
System States
Propositions
Operationalizations
Hypotheses
Ideas to keep in mind
1) No a priori limits on what theory is about
2) A theoretical model has to be complete
3) Adequacy = internal logic
4) Validity is determined through research
5) Only testing makes a theory scientific
Preferred Theory
Is a matter of
- consensus
- consensus
- consensus
consensus
about boundaries & scope
about the internal logic
about empirical evidence
Questions



What about Truth? Does research lead
to truth?
What exactly is the difference between
adequacy and validity of a theory?
Why is a preferred theory determined
by consensus and not by validity?
Standards of a Scientific
Theory





Explanation
Prediction
Parsimony
Falsefiability
Utility
Two Goals of Science
Prediction



focus on outcomes
focus on variable
values
focus on stability &
transition of system
states
Understanding/
Explanation

focus on
understanding of
causal relationships
among units
Two Paradoxes


Precision: prediction without
understanding
Power: understanding without
prediction
Assignment


In your group, think of an example for
the precision paradox and an example
for the power paradox.
Using your examples, determine
whether they really are paradoxes, and
try to resolve them (i.e., explain how
they are possible)
Explaining the Paradoxes


Precision: deterministic relationships
among units lead to stable associations
between them that can be observed
Power: theoretical models highlight
significant relationships between units
w/o accounting for ALL causal factors or
their interactions
Units defined:
Units are mental
conceptualizations that represent
the parts of a theoretical model
that interact with one another in
specific ways.
Theoretical Models
Unit
Unit
+
Unit
= Laws of Interaction
-
= Boundary
Properties of Units





Units are things or properties of things
Units are plural, at least in principle
Units can be attributes or variables, i.e., are
categorical or continuous
Units can be real or nominal, i.e., represent
actual or hypothetical constructs
Units can be sophisticated or primitive, i.e.,
are defined or undefined
Exercise: Units = things or
properties of things





Relational intimacy in a couple
A person’s religious belief
A group’s ethnicity
Family communication patterns
A person’s height
Laws of Interaction:






link units of a theory
do NOT require causality
may be categorical
may be sequential
may be determinant
may be negative
Types of Interaction:



linear
curvilinear
recursive
Efficiencies of Laws
High Efficiency




Low Efficiency
rate of change
covariance
directionality
presenceabsence
Conditions for Causality



Covariance
Temporal Precedence
Exclusion of Plausible Alternatives
Propositions





A truth statement in regard to the
theoretical model
NOT in regard to reality (i.e., no need for
empirical truth)
Must follow accepted rules of logic
A statement about the relationship among
units
NOT a statement about unit or set
membership.
Propositions & Laws

equivalent to a law of interaction

more limited then a law of interaction

combining two or more laws of
interaction
Empirical Indicators


Operationalization of a theoretical
construct
Good Indicators are reliable and valid
Reliability: consistency of measure
Validity: measuring the right thing.
Reliability and Validity
Validity
low
low
Reliability
high
high
Types of Validity in Social
Science

Face Validity


Content Validity


Is the entire concept represented?
Criterion Validity


Does it make sense?
Does it correlate with other known measures?
Construct Validity

Does it behave like the construct outside the
model?
Hypothesis:

A hypothesis is a prediction about the
values of units of a theory (where
empirical indicators are employed for
the units in each proposition) that allow
researchers to assess the validity of the
theoretical model.
Three condition of a good test
of a scientific theory

A) deducible


B) improbable


from the theoretical model
unless theoretical model is “true”
C) verifiable (testable)
Hypotheses Testing and
Theory Development

Extensive Tests: test all strategic
hypotheses

Intensive Tests: test only key
hypotheses

Inductive Tests: build theory from
empirical data
Assignment

Define Communication: In 1 paragraph,
write a definition of interpersonal
communication that captures the
concept (unit). Base the definition on
knowledge you have from a prior
course, experience, or a theoretical
approach you are familiar with.
Group Assignment





Read each definition aloud
Compare and contrast the definitions
Discuss strengths and weaknesses of
each definition
Synthesize a final definition of IPC
Think about operationalizations of you
definition
Defining
Interpersonal Communication

Interpersonal Communication is any
interaction between two or more persons
who are aware of each other and:





exchange information
create meaning
exert influence
establish social reality
Create & maintain relationships
History of IPC

Explorations in Interpersonal
Communication, 1976



Created a vision for the field
Emphasized dyadic relationships and
symbiosis of IPC and relationship
development
Interpersonal Processes, 1987

Interdisciplinary & focusing on processes
beyond relationship development
Evolving Trends






Proliferations of Identifications
Globalization
The Dark Side
Dominant & Alternate Metatheoretical
Views
Focus on Applied & Funded Research
Technology
Class Discussion Rules



Discussion may start with a brief review
of core assumptions / theoretical model
Each student prepares at least one
question to ask in class
Each question is answered by at least
two students before I get a turn
Homework Assignment
Think of a phenomenon in interpersonal
communication that is in need of a
theoretical explanation (i.e., a topic for
your term paper). Write a one
paragraph research proposal answering
the what & why questions.
Due Tuesday, Oct., 12th!
The Theory of Evolution
Life evolves through the dual process of
random mutation and selection, such that
those changes that increase a gene’s (i.e.,
usually its carrier) reproductive success are
passed on to future generations and spread
through the gene pool, whereas changes that
decrease a gene’s (i.e., usually its carrier)
reproductive success are not passed on and
disappear from the gene pool.
Theory of Evolution (Darwin)



Variation (random change of traits)
Inheritance (passing on of traits to
offspring)
Selection (of advantageous traits)
- Survival
- Reproduction
Inclusive Fitness (Hamilton)

Evolution understood from the gene’s
perspective(I.e., Selfish Gene)

Essentially, genes evolve

Solves “problem” of altruism
Evolved Psychological
Mechanisms




solve specific recurring problems of
survival or reproduction
takes in limited information
uses decision rules to obtain output
output can be psychological,
physiological, or behavioral
Environment of Evolutionary
Adaptedness (EEA)



Those factors that determine fitness
and selection of an adaptation
Factors might be environmental and
social
Many of the social factors might not be
temporally stable
Relational Dialectics
Dialogic theoretical paradigm, not
unsimilar to interpretive stance
Evaluative criterion is heuristic value
Based on Hegel’s Dialectics






Meaning arises out or dialectic tension
Thesis, antithesis, synthesis
However, unlike Hegel, no synthetical
resolution but continuous struggle
Process of Dialectics


Located in langue use that make
reference to divergent discourses
Communication is intertextual




Distal already spokens
Proximal already spokens
Proximal not yet spokens
Distal not yet spokens
Fundamental to Dialectics
POWER?
Uncertainty Reduction Theory

Persons are motivated to explain &
predict social interactions

Thus, in early stages of relationships,
persons are motivated to reduce
uncertainty
Uncertainty Reduction Strategies



Passive: observing other
Active: asking 3rd parties
Interactive: communicating with other




Asking
Disclosing
Relaxing
Strategy determined by:


Effectiveness
Social Appropriateness
Axioms of URT








Verbal Communication – Uncertainty
Nonverbal Affect – Uncertainty
Information Seeking + Uncertainty
Intimacy – Uncertainty
Reciprocity + Uncertainty
Similarities – Uncertainty
Liking – Uncertainty
Shared Networks – Uncertainty
Relational Uncertainty

Sources


Levels


Self, other, relationship
Episodic & global
Themes


Relationship dependent
Context dependent
Uncertainty Management Theory



Uncertainty Discrepancy
 UD = Ud – Ua
Outcomes
 Process
 Results
Efficacies
 Communication
 Coping
 Target
Uncertainty Management
Relational Turbulence Model

Transition


Change in circumstance that create
potential for relationship change
Turbulence



Tumultuous experience in response to
transition
Relational uncertainty
Partner interference
Relational Turbulence Model
Cognition
Relationship
Uncertainty
Relationship
Change
Partner
Interference
Emotion
Behavior
Workplace relationships

Membership negotiation:



the process of transforming individuals to
organizational members
Ongoing communication and evaluation
resulting in acceptance or marginalization
Assimilation vs. socialization
Organizations



Context of workplace relationships
Comm. practices constitute structure
and culture of organization
S&C guide and constrain workplace
communication
Workplace relationship and friendship

Similarities


Progression & continuity, role expectations,
multidimensionality
Differences




Formed & dissolved involuntarily
Affect financial livelihood
Affect professional growth & advancement
Expectation of task performance
Membership Negotiation






Familiarizing with others
Acculturation & adaptation
Increasing involvement
Receiving recognition
Acquiring job skills
Role negotiation
IPC theory and the workplace




Expectancy violation
Social exchange
Attraction research
Relational framing
Comforting Messages


Messages alleviating or lessening
emotional distress of others
Type of supportive communication, i.e.,
comm. designed to aid others
Person Centered Comm.


HPC: acknowledges, elaborates,
legitimizes, & contextualizes feelings
and perspective of distressed person
LPC: deny feelings and perspective of
other, criticize, make illegitimate,
prescribe how to feel and act
Theory of conversationally
induced reappraisals


Based on appraisal theory of emotion
Is limited to explain function of HPC
messages only
Dual Process Model of
Supportive Communication
Ability to
process
Message
Content
Context
Cues
Cognitive
Processing
Motivation
to process
Psychological
Response
Demand / Withdraw



Pattern of Communication where one
partner makes demands and the other
withdraws
D/W associated with dissatisfaction
Historical Explanations



Gender difference
Social structure (men more powerful)
Conflict structure (one desiring change
demands)
Caughlin’s research



HDWW & WDHW correlated within
couples
Power in parent/adolescent relationship
NOT correlated to withdrawal
Attempts at influence associated with
demand
Multiple Goals perspective

Primary Goal




Goal at content level of conversation
Goal used to label interaction
Goals that motivate comm behavior
Secondary Goals



Other relevant goals that are pursued
simultaneously in interaction
Self & relationship goals (primarely)
Constrain communication behavior
Types of demand/withdraw




Discuss/exit
Socratic question/perfunctory response
Complain/deny
Critisize/defend
Deception detection

Consistent findings

Just above chance of accuracy (54%)



Deception detection only 47%
People overestimate their detection ability,
unrelated to actual performance
Consistent truth bias
Why poor detection?





No consistent cross situational cues for
deception
People pay attention to wrong cues
People rely on wrong heuristics
Small effect of familiarity
Research ignores contextual cues
Interpersonal Deception Theory



Deception is goal directed, intentional,
& interactive (dynamic & interdependent)!
Focus on both sender & receiver
Focus on cognition, emotion, and
behavior
IDT & detection accuracy

Result of actor, relationship, &
interactional factors





Skills & performance
Medium
Suspicion
Situational constraints
More heavily influence by late
judgments than earlier judgments
Levine’s research


Veracity effect: truth bias makes truth
accuracy higher than lie accuracy
Park-Levine probability model

AT = at*pt + al*pl
Hurtful Communication

Hurt





Complex emotion
Negative & painful (adverse)
Relational transgression & devaluation
Vulnerability
Future loss
Hurtful behavior




Types
Intensity
Frequency
All are related to experience of hurt
Moderating Variables

Cognitive




Perceived intent
Perceived causes
Habituation & Sensitization
Individual Differences



Attachment orientation
Self-esteem
Rejection sensitivity
Moderating Variables (cont.)

Relational




Relationship Type (voluntariness)
Satisfaction
Structural Commitment
Emotional Context
Functions of hurtful comm.


How can HC be used?
What effects does it have?



On individuals?
On relationships?
How strategic are people when using it?
Culture & Relationships


Relationships situated within cultures,
i.e., speech communities
Contradictory to defining interpersonal
relationships as based on knowledge of
individual psychology (Miller, 1978)
IP Communication




Norms = expectations
Premises = unstated (i.e., shared)
assumptions about meaning of behavior
Contingent = open to
interpretation/influence
Coeribles = behaviors not usually open
to influence
Methods for studying IPC





Emphasis on interact (sequence) rather
than act
Interpretation vs. coding
“Theory” internal to case vs. universal
“Experience near” vs. “experiencedistant” concepts
Writing as part of the method
Hmm?

“The conceptual objective of
ethnographies of speaking is to show
what is truly universal about
interpersonal communication by
showing what is specific to particular
groups of people.” (p. 259)
Tips for Papers

Follow Assignment



Literature Review




Label all parts of the theory
Have a clearly defined theoretical model
Should be holistic (unifying & recurring
themes, commonalities and differences)
Do NOT summarize individual articles
Should inform theoretical model
Follow APA guidlines
APA Styles

Is a formal, scientific style of writing


Consistent appearance



No contractions, slang, directly addressing
the reader, etc.
Everything double spaced, all same font
size, all same font except italics
Headings organize paper
Facts matter, not opinions

Support claims with evidence
In text references




According to Smith and Miller (2001),
families with two or more children...
Families with two or more children are
more conflicted (Smith & Miller, 2001).
Paraphrase, do not quote unless it
cannot be paraphrased
If quote, then p# (Miller, 2001, p.13)
References



Ritchie, D.L. (1991). Family communication patterns:
An epistemic analysis and conceptual reinterpretation.
Communication Research, 18, 548-565.
Ryss, D. (1981). The family's construction of reality.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Steod, J. M., & Chaffee, S. H. (1972). The
construction of social reality. In J. Tedeschi (Ed.), The
social influence process (pp. 50-59). Chicago, IL:
Aldine-Atherton.
IPC on TV

Three areas of interest



Aggression/Violence
Gender Roles
Sex & Romance
Aggression / Violence

Content:



TV is violent medium, esp. Children
Programming
Relational aggression often verbal
Effects



Aggressive tendencies
Fear
Desensitization
Gender Roles

Content




Males overrepresented
Communication styles sex-stereotyped
Relationship roles stereotypical
Effects


May contributed to sexist beliefs
Parents may moderate such effects
Sex & Romance

Content




Increasingly sexual
Sex is recreational
Sexuality stereotypical
Effects

Some evidence for greater sexual activity
Theoretical Models





Priming
Social Development Perspective
Social Learning Theory
Cultivation Theory
Social Cognitive/Schema Theories