Chapter Ten

1. Chapter Ten Theories of Communication in Developing Relationships “Hello, I love you. Won’t you tell me your name?”

2. Social Penetration Theory • Social Penetration Theory (SPT) Altman and Taylor • SPT has been developed further by communication scholars • SPT is a post-positivist theory of the broad scope of relational development

3. Social Penetration Theory: Stages • Orientation Stage: Interaction ruled by social convention and formulas • Exploratory Affective Stage: Interactants begin to share more information and are more relaxed and friendly • Affective Stage: Close friendships and romantic relationships in which a great deal of open exchange occurs • Stable Exchange Stage: Continuing openness and richness in interaction http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-bsf2x-aeE&feature=related

4. Social Penetration Theory: Breadth and Depth of Exchange • As people move through these stages, both the breadth and depth of information exchange increase (“onion model” of SPT) • Self-disclosure: Any communication shared about one’s self—intimate or not • SD changes through relational development: • Norm of reciprocity • Peripheral before private • Rate of disclosure begins to slow at deeper levels

5. A different view of the “onion” Breadth Depth

6. Metts add • (1) The onion model not used much anymore; self-disclosure is more cyclical than continuously wider and deeper

7. Social Exchange Processes • The motivation to move in and out of relationships is explained by Social Exchange Theory • Social Exchange Theory--“economic” model: outcomes, comparison level and comparison level of alternatives • People motivated to be in relationships that provide them with high levels of rewards and low levels of costs.

8. Rewards • positive consequences of being in a relationship • Emotional:positive affect when with partner (love, warmth, etc.) • Social: activities, events, other people • Instrumental:partner helps accomplish tasks • Opportunity: relationship allows you to do something you couldn’t do otherwise

9. Costs • negative consequences of being in a relationship • Emotional:negative affect with partner • Social: having to do socially undesired activities/interact with partner’s friends • Instrumental:partner prevents tasks from being accomplished or creates more work • Opportunity: life experiences given up for the sake of the relationship

10. Outcomes • Theoutcome refers to the overall level of “profit” or “deficit” in relationships • rewards – costs = outcome • Relationships are generally rewarding when outcomes are positive, and generally costly when outcomes are negative

11. Comparison Level • Comparison level (CL): “standard” by which people evaluate their relationships • how rewarding or costly you expect your relationship to be • based on prior experience, family model, friends, media, etc. • Outcome - CL= Satisfaction • When outcome meets or exceeds the CL, people are satisfied. • When the outcome falls under the CL, people are dissatisfied.

12. Comparison Level for Alternatives • Comparison Level for Alternatives (CLAlt) • perceptions that an alternative to the relationship exists (another partner, being single, etc.) • Poor alternatives are related to more commitment • Good alternatives are related to less commitment

13. Combined Effect of CL and CLAlt CL Alt Poor Good The Relationship: Meets or Exceeds CL Fails to Meet CL Satisfied and Committed Satisfied but Uncommitted Dissatisfied but Committed Dissatisfied and Uncommitted

14. Original Investment Model Rewards Satisfaction Costs Commit- ment Stability CL Investment CLAlt

15. Current Investment Model Rewards Costs CL Satisfaction Benign Attribs. & Emots. Stabl. Accomm. Behavior Commit. Investments Decision to remain Accommodate partner Not retaliate Derogation of alternatives Willingness to sacrifice Perc. rel. superiority CL-Alt

16. Metts add: Equity Theory • Equity theorycompares the ratio of contributions (costs) versus benefits (rewards) for each relational partner • This ratio does not have to be equal for equity to exist; rather it has to be equivalent. Ex: Christy has a cost/reward ratio of 5/10 Steve has a cost/reward ratio of 3/6. In an equitable relationship, both partners are getting a “fair deal” based on their benefits vs. contributions.

17. The Concept of Inequity • When one partner is getting a “worse deal” in comparison to the other partner, there is inequity. • A person can feel under-benefited or over-benefited. • A person can have more rewards than costs and still be under-benefited by comparison. • Example: Ted has a r/c ratio of 12/8 while his partner, Emily, has a r/c ratio of 12/3.

18. SPT: Development and Tests of Theory • Support for many predictions of SPT • Esp. role of self-disclosure • But difficult to test full range of theory over development of “real-life” relationships • SPT has also been criticized for being an overly rational and economic model of rel. development (where is emotion? Planalp) • Metts add: Is it really the sum of costs and rewards or the salient/magnitude?

19. SPT, cont. • Paradoxically, it has also been critiqued for the ideology of total openness as an ideal • Knapp’s stage model is contemporary (1978) but more communication focused (includes social network, ritualized bonding, and coming apart stages—next slide) • More recent approaches are dialectical theory (covered in ch. 11) and turning points

21. Turning Points analysis Turning Points Meeting Parents • CFirst Sex Reunion • O • M • M • I First Fight Time apart • T • M • E • N • T Time

22. Uncertainty Reduction Theory • Uncertainty Reduction Theory (URT): Berger & Calabrese (1975) • URT originally designed to explain processes of initial interaction • URT considers ways in which interactants attempt to reduce cognitive uncertainty when we first interact with someone • predictive and explanatory uncertainty • cognitive and behavioral uncertainty

23. Form of URT • URT is an axiomatic theory • URT begins with 7 basic axioms (e.g., High levels of uncertainty cause increases in information seeking. As uncertainty levels decline, information seeking decreases, p. 177, Table 10.1). • Axioms are not unquestioned truths, but are the untestable building blocks of the theory • URT then logically combines these axioms to derive 21 testable theorems

25. Uncertainty Reduction Theory:Developments • URT has been extended to consider strategies for reducing uncertainty. • active (asking others, manipulating environ.), • passive (observing) • interactive(self-disclosure & questions) • URT has been extended to consider motivations for reducing uncertainty. These include incentives, deviation, and possibility of future interaction

26. Uncertainty Reduction Theory: Tests and Critiques • URT has received some evidence for both basic predictions and extensions regarding information search and motivations • URT has been critiqued in terms of the motivational force that drives information seeking. • Critics contend that anticipating future interaction (anticipating positive and negative relational outcomes) is more important than uncertainty reduction (Sunnafrank—Predicted Outcome Value)

27. Uncertainty Reduction Theory: Expansions • URT has been expanded to consider relationships beyond initial interaction • Events that increase uncertainty in established rels. • Levels of uncertainty—self, partner, relationship • URT has been expanded to uncertainty in intercultural relationships—Gudykunst’s Anxiety Uncertainty Management theory (includes social and cultural identity; anxiety as emotion + uncertainty as cognitive, and intercultural adaptation as outcome) • The uncertainty concept has also been applied to research in organizational socialization and social support