Interpersonal communication - Wikipedia
On the other hand, those high in interpersonal attachment avoidance are more an anxious interpersonal style to also develop an anxious attachment style towards the . Patterns of attachment: A psychological study of the Strange Situation. Interpersonal communication style is the manner in which one communicates. It includes the way one interacts to create expectations for future behavior on the. Our style of attachment affects everything from our partner selection to how well That is why recognizing our attachment pattern can help us understand our Pseudo-independence is an illusion, as every human being needs connection.
In order to understand relational dialectics theory, we must first understand specifically what encompasses the term discourse. Therefore, discourses are "systems of meaning that are uttered whenever we make intelligible utterances aloud with others or in our heads when we hold internal conversations". However, it also shows how the meanings within our conversations may be interpreted, understood, and of course misunderstood.
Numerous examples of this can be seen in the daily communicative acts we participate in. However, dialectical tensions within our discourses can most likely be seen in interpersonal communication due to the close nature of interpersonal relationships. The well known proverb "opposites attract, but birds of a feather flock together" exemplifies these dialectical tensions.
These consist of connectedness and separateness, certainty and uncertainty, and openness and closedness. Connectedness and separateness[ edit ] Most individuals naturally desire to have a close bond in the interpersonal relationships we are a part of. However, it is also assumed that no relationship can be enduring without the individuals involved within it also having their time alone to themselves. Individuals who are only defined by a specific relationship they are a part of can result in the loss of individual identity.
Certainty and uncertainty[ edit ] Individuals desire a sense of assurance and predictability in the interpersonal relationships they are a part of.Build don't break relationships with communication - connect the dots - Amy Scott - TEDxQueenstown
However, they also desire having a variety in their interactions that come from having spontaneity and mystery within their relationships as well. Much research has shown that relationships which become bland and. This assumption can be supported if one looks at the postulations within social penetration theory, which is another theory used often within the study of communication. This tension may also spawn a natural desire to keep an amount of personal privacy from other individuals.
The struggle in this sense, illustrates the essence of relational dialectics. Coordinated management of meaning[ edit ] Main article: Coordinated management of meaning Coordinated management of meaning is a theory assuming that two individuals engaging in an interaction are each constructing their own interpretation and perception behind what a conversation means.
A core assumption within this theory includes the belief that all individuals interact based on rules that are expected to be followed while engaging in communication.
These include constitutive and regulative rules. Constitutive rules "are essentially rules of meaning used by communicators to interpret or understand an event or message". If one individual sends a message to the other, the message receiver must then take that interaction and interpret what it means.
Often, this can be done on an almost instantaneous level because the interpretation rules applied to the situation are immediate and simple. This simply depends on each communicator's previous beliefs and perceptions within a given context and how they can apply these rules to the current communicative interaction. Important to understand within the constructs of this theory is the fact that these "rules" of meaning "are always chosen within a context".
The authors of this theory believe that there are a number of different context an individual can refer to when interpreting a communicative event. These include the relationship context, the episode context, the self-concept context, and the archetype context. Relationship context This context assumes that there are mutual expectations between individuals who are members of a group.
Episode context This context simply refers to a specific event in which the communicative act is taking place. Archetype context This context is essentially one's image of what his or her belief consists of regarding general truths within communicative exchanges.
Furthermore, Pearce and Cronen believe that these specific contexts exist in a hierarchical fashion. This theory assumes that the bottom level of this hierarchy consists of the communicative act. Next, the hierarchy exists within the relationship context, then the episode context, followed by the self-concept context, and finally the archetype context. Social penetration theory[ edit ] Main article: Social penetration theory Developed by Irwin Altman and Dallas Taylor, the social penetration theory was made to provide conceptual framework that describes the development in interpersonal relationships.
This theory refers to the reciprocity of behaviors between two people who are in the process of developing a relationship. The behaviors vary based on the different levels of intimacy that a relationship encounters.
This analogy suggests that like an onion, personalities have "layers" that start from the outside what the public sees all the way to the core one's private self. Often, when a relationship begins to develop, it is customary for the individuals within the relationship to undergo a process of self-disclosure.
These stages include the orientation, exploratory affective exchange, affective exchange, and stable exchange. Exploratory affective stage Next, individuals become somewhat more friendly and relaxed with their communication styles.
Affective exchange In the third stage, there is a high amount of open communication between individuals and typically these relationships consist of close friends or even romantic or platonic partners. Stable stage The final stage, simply consists of continued expressions of open and personal types of interaction. Example- Jenny just met Justin because they were sitting at the same table at a wedding. Within minutes of meeting one another, Justin engages in small talk with Jenny.
Jenny decides to tell Justin all about her terrible ex-boyfriend and all of the misery he put her through. This is the kind of information you wait to share until stages three or four, not stage one. Due to the fact that Jenny told Justin much more than he wanted to know, he probably views her in a negative aspect and thinks she is crazy, which will most likely prevent any future relationship from happening. Altman and Taylor believed the social exchange theory principles could accurately predict whether or not people will risk self-disclosure.
The principles included, relational outcome, relational stability, and relational satisfaction. This theory assumes that the possible outcome is the stance that which the decision making process of how much information an individual chooses to self disclose is rooted by weighing out the costs and rewards that an individual may acquire when choosing to share personal information.
Due to ethical egoism, individuals try to maximize their pleasure and minimize their pain; acting from the motive of self-interest. An example of the social penetration theory can be seen when one thinks of a hypothetical situation such as meeting someone for the first time.
The depth of penetration is the degree of intimacy a relationship has accomplished.
When two individuals meet for the first time, it is the cultural expectation that only impersonal information will be exchanged. This could include information such as names, occupations, age of the conversation participants, as well as various other impersonal information. However, if both members participating in the dialogic exchange decide that they would like to continue or further the relationship, with the continuation of message exchanges, the more personal the information exchanged will become.
Altman and Taylor defined these as the depth and breadth of self-disclosure.
- Different Types of Interpersonal Relationships
According to Griffin, the definition of depth is "the degree of disclosure in a specific area of an individuals life" and the definition of breadth is "the range of areas in an individual's life over which disclosure takes place.
Peripheral items are exchanged more frequently and sooner than private information 2. Self-disclosure is reciprocal, especially in the early stages of relationship development 3.
Penetration is rapid at the start but slows down quickly as the tightly wrapped inner layers are reached 4. Depenetration is a gradual process of layer-by-layer withdrawal. Online communication seems to follow a different set of rules.
Rather than slowly disclosing personal thoughts, emotions, and feelings to others, anonymous individuals online are able to disclose personal information immediately and without the consequence of having their identity revealed.
Ledbetter notes that Facebook users self-disclose by posting personal information, pictures, hobbies, and messages. The study finds that the user's level of self-disclosure is directly related to the level of interdependence on others.
This may result in negative psychological and relational outcomes as studies show that people are more likely to disclose more personal information than they would in face to face communication, primarily due to the heightened level of control within the context of the online communication medium. In other words, those with poor social skills may prefer the medium of Facebook to show others who they are because they have more control.
The reason that self disclosure is labeled as risky, is because, individuals often undergo a sense of uncertainty and susceptibility in revealing personal information that has the possibility of being judged in a negative way by the receiver. Hence, the reason that face-to-face communication must evolve in stages when an initial relationship develops.
Interpersonal relationship - Wikipedia
Their theory became the foundation from which scholars in the field of communication approached the study of relationships. Ubiquitous communication[ edit ] The Palo Alto Group maintains that a person's presence alone results in them, consciously or not, expressing things about themselves and their relationships with others i. Mutual trust is important for sustaining the relationship. Deterioration — Not all relationships deteriorate, but those that do tend to show signs of trouble.
Boredom, resentment, and dissatisfaction may occur, and individuals may communicate less and avoid self-disclosure. Loss of trust and betrayals may take place as the downward spiral continues, eventually ending the relationship. Alternately, the participants may find some way to resolve the problems and reestablish trust and belief in others. Ending — The final stage marks the end of the relationship, either by breakups, death, or by spatial separation for quite some time and severing all existing ties of either friendship or romantic love.
Terminating a relationship[ edit ] According to the latest Systematic Review of the Economic Literature on the Factors associated with Life Satisfaction dating fromstable and secure relationships are beneficial, and correspondingly, relationship dissolution is harmful.
Breaking up can actually be a positive experience when the relationship did not expand the self and when the breakup leads to personal growth. They also recommend some ways to cope with the experience: Purposefully focussing on the positive aspects of the breakup "factors leading up to the break-up, the actual break-up, and the time right after the break-up" Minimising the negative emotions Journaling the positive aspects of the breakup e. This exercise works best, although not exclusively, when the breakup is mutual.
Furthermore, rebound relationships don't last any shorter than regular relationships. One reason cited for divorce is infidelity. The determinants of unfaithfulness are debated by dating service providers, feminists, academics and science communicators. Conversely, costs are the negative or unpleasant aspects of the partner or their relationship. Comparison level includes what each partner expects of the relationship.
The comparison level is influenced by past relationships, and general relationship expectations they are taught by family and friends.
Individuals in long-distance relationshipsLDRs, rated their relationships as more satisfying than individuals in proximal relationship, PRs. LDR couples reported the same level of relationship satisfaction as couples in PRs, despite only seeing each other on average once every 23 days. Therefore, the costs and benefits of the relationship are subjective to the individual, and people in LDRs tend to report lower costs and higher rewards in their relationship compared to PRs.
Background[ edit ] While traditional psychologists specializing in close relationships have focused on relationship dysfunction, positive psychology argues that relationship health is not merely the absence of relationship dysfunction.
Additionally, healthy relationships can be made to "flourish. A social skills approach posits that individuals differ in their degree of communication skill, which has implications for their relationships. Relationships in which partners possess and enact relevant communication skills are more satisfying and stable than relationships in which partners lack appropriate communication skills.
Adult attachment models represent an internal set of expectations and preferences regarding relationship intimacy that guide behavior. Within the context of safe, secure attachments, people can pursue optimal human functioning and flourishing.
Secure individuals are comfortable with intimacy and interdependence and are usually optimistic and social in everyday life. Securely attached individuals usually use their partners for emotion regulation so they prefer to have their partners in close proximity.
Preoccupied people are normally uneasy and vigilant towards any threat to the relationship and tend to be needy and jealous. Dismissing individuals are low on anxiety over abandonment and high in avoidance of intimacy. Dismissing people are usually self-reliant and uninterested in intimacy and are independent and indifferent towards acquiring romantic partners. They are very fearful of rejection, mistrustful of others, and tend to be suspicious and shy in everyday life.
Attachment styles are created during childhood but can adapt and evolve to become a different attachment style based on individual experiences. On the contrary, a good romantic relationship can take a person from an avoidant attachment style to more of a secure attachment style.
Romantic love The capacity for love gives depth to human relationships, brings people closer to each other physically and emotionally, and makes people think expansively about themselves and the world. Attraction — Premeditated or automatic, attraction can occur between acquaintances, coworkers, lovers, etc. Studies have shown that attraction can be susceptible to influence based on context and externally induced arousal, with the caveat that participants be unaware of the source of their arousal.
A study by Cantor, J. As supported by a series of studies, Zillman and colleagues showed that a preexisting state of arousal can heighten reactions to affective stimuli.
One commonly studied factor is physical proximity also known as propinquity. The MIT Westgate studies famously showed that greater physical proximity between incoming students in a university residential hall led to greater relationship initiation. Another important factor in the initiation of new relationships is similarity. Put simply, individuals tend to be attracted to and start new relationships with those who are similar to them. These similarities can include beliefs, rules, interests, culture, education, etc.
Individuals seek relationships with like others because like others are most likely to validate shared beliefs and perspectives, thus facilitating interactions that are positive, rewarding and without conflict. Development — Development of interpersonal relationships can be further split into committed versus non-committed romantic relationships, which have different behavioral characteristics.
More committed relationships by both genders were characterized by greater resource display, appearance enhancement, love and care, and verbal signs of possession. In contrast, less committed relationships by both genders were characterized by greater jealousy induction.