Test 1 Flashcards
Focus of URT
how human communication is used to gain knowledge and create understanding
Social penetration theory
(unlike URT) tries to forecast the future of a relationship on the basis of projected rewards and costs
Central to Uncertainty Reduction
is the assumption that when strangers meet, their primary concern is one of uncertainty reduction or increasing predictability about the behavior of both themselves and others in the interaction
Berger believes that our drive to reduce uncertainty comes from 3 prior conditions
- anticipation of future interaction: you know you will see them again
- Incentive value: they have something you want
- deviance: they act in a weird way
Berger believes that the main reason we talk to people is
to make sense of our interpersonal world
Berger focuses on predictability
which is the opposite of uncertainty, “As the ability of persons to predict which alternative or alternatives are likely to occur next decreases, uncertainty increases”
Fritz Heider
father of attribution theory, influenced Berger, viewed people as intuitive psychologists
attribution theory
a systematic explanation of how people draw inferences about the character of others based upon observed behavior, we constantly draw inferences about why people do what they do, we feel the constant need to predict and explain.
Official Uncertainty Reduction defintion (.110)
Increased Knowledge of what kind of person another is, which provides an improved forecast of how a future interaction will turn out
Two kinds of uncertainty
1) Behavioral questions: accepted procedural protocols to ease the stress that behavioral uncertainty can cause
ex: shake hands? who pays for meal? can you pet their dog?
2) Cognitive questions: aimed at discovering who the other person is as a unique individual
ex: What do they like about their job? What makes them happy/sad? Do they have many friends?
Berger’s theory addresses
cognitive rather than behavioral uncertainty, reducing cognitive uncertainty means acquiring information that allows you to eliminate many possibilities you have in mind
Axiom
self-evident truths that requires no additional proof
ex: all people are created equal, the shortest distance between two points is a straight line, what goes up must come down
Berger’s 8 truths (axioms) about initial uncertainty
Axiom 1: Verbal COM Axiom 2: Nonverbal warmth Axiom 3: Information seeking Axiom 4: Self-disclosure Axiom 5: Reciprocity Axiom 6: Similarity Axiom 7: Liking Axiom 8: Shared Networks
Axiom 1: Verbal COM
as the amount of verbal com between strangers increases, the level of uncertainty will decrease-as uncertainty is further and further reduced, verbal communication will continue to increase
Axiom 2: Nonverbal Warmth
In an initial interaction, as nonverbal expressiveness increases, uncertainty levels will decrease-decreases in uncertainty level will cause increases in nonverbal expressiveness
ex: prolonged eye contact, forward body lean, and pleasant tone of voice
Axiom 3: Information Seeking
High levels of uncertainty cause increases in information-seeking behavior-as uncertainty declines, information-seeking will decrease
Axiom 4: Self-disclosure
- high levels of uncertainty in a relationship cause decreases in the intimacy level of communication content-low levels of uncertainty produce high levels of intimacy
- Berger equates intimacy of COM with depth of self-disclosure
- Intimacy: attitudes, values, and feelings
- Most people wait to disclose intimate details until they have an idea of what the listener’s response will be
Axiom 5: Reciprocity
- high levels of uncertainty produce high rates of reciprocity-low levels of uncertainty produce low levels of reciprocity
- When knowledge of each other is minimal, we’re careful not to let the other person one-up us, however, when we already know personal information an even flow of information seems less crucial
- People tend to reveal personal details at the same rate of their partner’s
- Reciprocal vulnerability is most important in the early stages of a relationship, as it seems to be an issue of power
Axiom 6: Similarity
similarities reduce uncertainty-dissimilarities cause increase in uncertainty
Axiom 7: Liking
- Increases in uncertainty cause decreases in liking-decreases in uncertainty cause increases in liking
- the more you find out, the more you’ll appreciate and accept the person
- “to know her is to lover her”
- contradicts the opinion “familiarity breeds contempt”
Axiom 8: Shared Networks
Shared COM networks reduce uncertainty-lack of shared networks increase uncertainty
-This axiom was not part of Berger’s original theory
Parks and Adelman discovered that men and women who communicate more often with their partners, family, and friends have less uncertainty about the person they love than do those whose relationships exist in relative isolation
-Networking couples tend to stay together
Theorem
- a proposition that logically and necessarily follows from two axioms; pairing two axioms together to produce additional insight into relational dynamics
- combined axioms are inserted in the pattern of deductive logic
deductive logic
If a=b
and b=c
then a=c
ex:
If similarity reduces uncertainty (ax.6)
and reduced uncertainty increases liking (ax.7)
Then similarity and liking are positively related (theorem 21)
Theorems of Uncertainty Reduction Theory
-28 theorems
select one axiom on the bottom and side, the intersection shows the number of the theorem and the type of correlation
- (+) sign: two variables rise or fall together
- (-) sign: as one variable increases, the other decreases
Berger believes that most social interaction is
- goal-driven
- we have reasons for saying what we say
“A Plan-Based Theory of Strategic Communication”
- Berger explained how we communication to reduce uncertainty
- was convinced we continually construct cognitive plans to guide our communication
- Berger defined plans as mental representations of action sequences that may be used to achieve goals
- we have a goal and an overall strategy to reach it
Berger uses “Overall” strategy
because he claims that plans are hierarchically organized with abstract action representations at the top of the hierarchy and progressively more concrete representations towards the bottom.
Berger believes that uncertainty is central to
- all social interaction: the probability of perfect communication is zero
- developed strategies that explain how people cope with inevitable uncertainties
Four approaches we can use to reduce uncertainty with information seeking
passive strategy
active strategy
interactive strategy
extractive strategy
passive strategy
- unobtrusively observe others from a distance
- fly-on-the-wall tactic works best when we spot others reacting to people in informal, or “backstage” settings
- *Impression formation by observing a person interacting with others**
active strategy
- ask a third party for information
- mutual acquaintance will probably be biased, but we can filter that out and gain valuable information
- *Impression formation by asking a third party about a person**
interactive strategy
- face-to-face and ask specific questions
- quickest route to reducing uncertainty
- can end up feeling like a cross-examination or the third degree
- self-disclosure can help elicit information from others without seeming to pry
- *Impression formation through face-to-face discussion with a person**
extractive strategy
- search for information online
- not part of Berger’s original three strategies
- unobtrusive process that allows us to conduct our own personalized background check
- *Impression formation by searching the internet for information about a person**
Plan complexity
- a characteristic of a message plan based on the level of detail it provides and the number of contingencies it covers
- measured in two ways: level of detail and number of contingency plans in case the original doesn’t work
- high uncertainty argues for less complex plan that you can adjust in the moment, once you become more comfortable
- simpler approach is also preferred because a complex plan takes so much cognitive effort that there may be a deterioration in verbal and nonverbal fluency, which results in loss of credibility
Hedging
-Use of strategic ambiguity and humor to provide a way for both parties to save face when a message fails to achieve its goal
Hierarchy hypothesis
- the prediction that when people are thwarted in their attempts to achieve goals, their first tendency is to alter lower-level elements of their message
- when a person has failed to grasp what we are saying, our inclination is to repeat the message louder
- additional hedge against failure is to practice in front of a friend who will critique your action plan before you put it into effect
Berger describes people as “cognitive misers”
people who would rather try to a quick fix than expend the effort to repair faulty plans
Relational Uncertainty (Leanne Knobloch)
- doubts about our own thoughts, the thoughts of the other person, or the future of the relationship
- ongoing relationships have uncertainty
partner interference
-occurs when a relational partner hinders goals, plans, and activities
Knobloch believes uncertainty leads close partners to experience
- relational turbulence: negative emotions arising from perceived problems in a close relationship
- makes us more reactive or sensitive to our partner’s actions
- Knobloch has focused more on diagnosing the causes and symptoms of relational uncertainty rather than finding a cure
- Interactive strategy may help resolve issue
- more likely to talk directily when intimacy and power are equal, this provides stability in relational turbulence
Critics often point to theorem 17
- predicts the more you like people, the less you’ll seek information about them
- more reasonable to suggest that you will seek more information from those you like as opposed to those you dislike
- dictated by axioms 3 and 7, if the theorem is wrong, one of the axioms is wrong
Kellerman targets axiom 3 (critque of th.17)
- axiom 3 assumes that lack of information triggers a search for knowledge
- wanting knowledge rather than lacking knowledge is what motivates information-seeking
Kellerman and Reynolds
- failed to find that anticipated future interaction, incentive value, or deviance gave any motivation to seek information
- Berger’s suggestion of a universal drive to reduce uncertainty during initial interaction is questionable
Sunnafrank (critique)
- insists that the early course of a relationship is guided by its predicted outcome value (POV: future benefits and costs)
- primary goal of our initial interaction is maximizing our relational outcomes rather than finding out who they are
Berger v. Sunnafrank
Walid afifi
- believes all theories are too narrow
- motivated information management: we are motivated to reduce anxiety rather than uncertainty, when uncertainty doesn’t make us anxious, we won’t seek to reduce it.
Baxter and Montgomery’s Relational dialectics
social life is a dynamic knot of contradictions, a ceaseless interplay between contrary or opposing tendencies.
Relational dialectics
- highlight the tension, struggle, and general messiness of close personal ties.
- best way we can grasp relational dialectics is to look at a narrative in which competing discourses are etched in bold relief
Baxter and Montgomery caution us
not to look at demographics or personal traits when we want to understand close relationships
contradiction
- the dynamic interplay between unified oppositions
- formed whenever two tendencies or forces are interdependent yet mutually negate one another
- a core concept of relational dialectics
From a relational dialectics perspective
bonding occurs in both interdependence with the other and independence from the other, one without the other diminishes the relationship.
Mikhail Bakhtin
- Baxter and Mont. draw heavily from him
- saw dialectical tension as the deep structure of all human experience
- forces pull you together and apart
Relationships are
always in flux, the only certainty is certain change
