Chapter 1. 1: Introducing Interpersonal Communication

1

Introducing Interpersonal Communication

3

She is home with the kids, who are alternating between angry and clingy.¹ She’s trying to cook dinner, but the smoke detector keeps blaring, causing the dog to bark. Sure enough, it’s at this moment that the phone rings. Glancing at the caller ID, she sees it is the caller she’d hoped for. She answers, because despite the chaos around her, this could be their last conversation. He says, “I’ve been waiting in line for two hours to talk, and I only have ten minutes. I’ve had a really bad day and miss you all.” What should she say? Choice #1: Lie. Tell him everything’s fine, and mask her frustration with coolness. But he’ll sense her aloofness and leave the conversation worrying about why she is distracted. Is she angry with him? Having an affair? Choice #2: Be honest. Tell him that things are chaotic, and ask whether he can talk to the kids for a minute while she clears her head.

¹All information that follows is adapted from a personal interview with the author, July 2011. Published with permission from Melissa Seligman.

Military wife, author, and New York Times columnist Melissa Seligman has lived this scene many times during her husband’s combat deployments. She has learned to choose the second path because of the inescapable connection between communication choices and relationship outcomes. As she describes, “When a family member is gone for a year at a time, how can you sustain closeness? How do you maintain a three-dimensional marriage in a two-dimensional state? The only way is through open, honest, and loving communication.”

1 / Introducing Interpersonal Communication

4

The Seligmans use multiple media to maintain intimacy, including webcams and exchanging videos, e-mails, phone calls, and letters. Melissa notes, “This way, we have a rounded communication relationship. We even send care packages of leaves, sand, pine needles, or pieces of fabric with cologne or perfume, to awaken the senses and cement the memories we have of each other.” They also journal, then read each other’s writings when they are reunited. The journals “have the dates, circumstances, and what went unsaid in the day-to-day minutiae of our lives. They are our way of staying connected when ripped apart.”

Melissa Seligman uses similarly diverse communication in her professional work with military support groups. “In my working life, I am on Facebook, Skype, and Web conference calls all the time. Texting. Instant-messaging. All of these are essential.” But she also is mindful of the limits of technology, recognizing the importance of tailoring the medium to the task. “Technology cannot sustain a relationship, and relying on it to do so will create chaos. Rather, choosing the technology that best suits an individual’s relationship is the key.”

Through years of experience, Melissa Seligman and her family have learned to cope with intense versions of the challenges we all face in our relationships. How can I better manage my anger and frustration? What can I do to maintain closeness with those I love? How can I communicate in a way that’s both honest and kind? In 2010, she and coauthor Christina Piper released a children’s book, A Heart Apart, which helps young children cope with the absence of military parents. When she is asked to reflect on the importance of communication, Melissa thinks of the next generation: “Children need to know and understand that anger and sadness go along with missing someone. They must be taught the importance of communication, and how to communicate well. This sets them up for success when their emotions begin to flow. Feelings are not right or wrong—it’s what you choose to do with them that counts. Teaching our children to communicate well is the best gift we can give them.”

5

My wife and I are out to dinner with our three grown sons—Kyle, Colin, and Conor—and our best friends, Tim and Hee Sun, whom we haven’t seen since they moved to Korea. The conversation between us flows freely as we drift through discussions of personal events, past stories, politics, world affairs, and even online gaming—a passion Tim shares with my boys. The intimacy of the interaction is enhanced by us going “unplugged”; we’ve all placed our phones off the table. Nevertheless, the boys succumb to technological temptation when their entrées arrive, snapping photos of their food, which they post to Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook so that their friends and girlfriends can share in the festivities. As the evening ends, phones are retrieved from handbags and pockets, selfies are taken to lock down the memory, and texts are sent to absent family and friends to spread our happiness outward. All in all, it’s one of those life events during which you count the minutes as precious yet bittersweet because they pass too quickly.

As I’m driving home, it flashes into my mind that regardless of the particulars, the peak moments of relationship joy that punctuate our lives are created through interpersonal communication. It’s not the dinners, the fireworks, the sunsets, or the concerts that connect us to others. Those things are just, well, things. Instead, it’s our communication. We use interpersonal communication to build, maintain, and even end relationships with romantic partners, family members, friends, coworkers, and acquaintances. We do this through tweeting, texting, instant-messaging, social networking site posts and chats, e-mail, face-to-face interactions, and phone calls. And we switch back and forth between these various forms fluidly, effortlessly.

But regardless of how we’re communicating, where, or with whom, one fact inescapably binds us: the communication choices we make determine the personal, interpersonal, and relationship outcomes that follow. When we communicate well, we create desirable outcomes, such as positive emotions, satisfying relationships, and encounters that linger as happy memories. When we communicate poorly, we generate negative outcomes, such as interpersonal conflict, dissatisfaction with a relationship, and bitter lament over things that shouldn’t have been said. By studying interpersonal communication, you can acquire knowledge and skills to boost your interpersonal competence. This will help you build and maintain satisfying relationships and, ultimately, improve your quality of life.

In this chapter, we begin our study of interpersonal communication. You’ll learn:

6

It was the first minute of the first day of the very first communication class I ever taught. I had just finished defining communication, when a student raised her hand with a puzzled look on her face. “I understand your definition,” she said, “but isn’t this all just common sense?” Her question has stuck with me all these years because it highlights an important starting point for learning about communication. We all come to communication classes with a lifetime of hands-on experience communicating. This leads some to think that they have little new to learn. But personal experience isn’t the same as systematic training. When you’re formally educated about communication, you gain knowledge that goes far beyond your intuition, allowing you to broaden and deepen your skills as a communicator. It’s like any form of expertise. You know how to kick a ball, and you’ve likely done so hundreds, maybe thousands, of times since you were little. But does that mean you have the knowledge and skills to play in the World Cup? Of course not.

My goal for this text is to provide you with the knowledge and skills to make you a World Cup interpersonal communicator. This process begins by answering a basic question: what is communication?

The National Communication Association (n.d.), a professional organization representing communication teachers and scholars in the United States, defines communication as the process through which “people use messages to generate meanings within and across contexts, cultures, channels, and media.” This definition highlights the five features that characterize communication.

7

First, communication is a process that unfolds over time through a series of interconnected actions carried out by the participants. For example, your friend tweets that she is going out to a movie, you text her back to see if she wants you to join her, and so forth. Because communication is a process, everything you say and do affects what is said and done in the present and in the future.

Second, those engaged in communication (communicators) use messages to convey meaning. A message is the “package” of information that is transported during communication. When people exchange a series of messages, the result is called an interaction (Watzlawick, Beavin, & Jackson, 1967).

Third, communication occurs in a seemingly endless variety of contexts, or situations. We communicate with others at sporting events, while at work, and in our homes. In each context, a host of factors influences how we communicate, such as how much time we have, how many people are in the vicinity, and whether the setting is personal or professional. Think about it: you probably communicate with your romantic partner differently when you’re in class than when you’re watching a movie at home and snuggling on the couch.

Fourth, people communicate through various channels. A channel is the sensory dimension along which communicators transmit information. Channels can be auditory (sound), visual (sight), tactile (touch), olfactory (scent), or oral (taste). For example, your manager at work smiles while complimenting your job performance (visual and auditory channels). A visually impaired friend reads a message you left her, touching the Braille letters with her fingertips (tactile). Your romantic partner shows up at your house exuding an alluring scent and carrying delicious takeout, which you then share together (olfactory and oral).

Fifth, to transmit information, communicators use a broad range of media—tools for exchanging messages. Consider the various media used by Melissa Seligman and her husband, described in our chapter opener. Webcams, cell phones, texting, e-mail, letters, face-to-face interaction—all of these media and more can be used to communicate. And we often use multiple media channels simultaneously—for example, texting while checking our Facebook page. (See Figure 1.1 for common media forms.)

8

Think about all the different ways you communicate each day. You text your sister to check in. You give a speech in your communication class to an engaged audience. You exchange a knowing glance with your best friend at the arrival of someone you mutually dislike. Now reflect on how these forms of communication differ from one another. Sometimes (like when texting) you create messages and send them to receivers, the messages flowing in a single direction, from origin to destination. In other instances (like when speaking in front of your class) you present messages to recipients, and the recipients signal to you that they’ve received and understood them. Still other times (like when you and your best friend exchange a glance) you mutually construct meanings with others, with no one serving as “sender” or “receiver.” These different ways of experiencing communication are reflected in three models that have evolved to describe the communication process: the linear model, the interactive model, and the transactional model. As you will see, each of these models has both strengths and weaknesses. Yet each also captures something unique and useful about the ways you communicate in your daily life.

Linear Communication Model According to the linear communication model, communication is an activity in which information flows in one direction, from a starting point to an end point (see Figure 1.2). The linear model contains several components (Lasswell, 1948; Shannon & Weaver, 1949). In addition to a message and a channel, there must be a sender (or senders) of the message—the individual(s) who generates the information to be communicated, packages it into a message, and chooses the channel(s) for sending it. There also is noise—factors in the environment that impede messages from reaching their destination. Noise includes anything that causes our attention to drift from messages—such as poor reception during a cell-phone call or the smell of fresh coffee nearby. Last, there must be a receiver—the person for whom a message is intended and to whom the message is delivered.

Interactive Communication Model The interactive communication model also views communication as a process involving senders and receivers (see Figure 1.3). However, according to this model, transmission is influenced by two additional factors: feedback and fields of experience (Schramm, 1954). Feedback is composed of the verbal and nonverbal messages (such as eye contact, utterances such as “Uh-huh,” and nodding) that recipients convey to indicate their reaction to communication. Fields of experience consist of the beliefs, attitudes, values, and experiences that each participant brings to a communication event. People with similar fields of experience are more likely to understand each other while communicating than are individuals with dissimilar fields of experience.

9

Transactional Communication Model The transactional communication model (see Figure 1.4) suggests that communication is fundamentally multidirectional. That is, each participant equally influences the communication behavior of the other participants (Miller & Steinberg, 1975). From the transactional perspective, there are no “senders” or “receivers.” Instead, all the parties constantly exchange verbal and nonverbal messages and feedback, collaboratively creating meanings (Streek, 1980). This may be something as simple as a shared look between friends, or it may be an animated conversation among close family members in which the people involved seem to know what the others are going to say before it’s said.

10

These three models represent an evolution of thought regarding the nature of communication, from a relatively simplistic depiction of communication as a linear process to one that views communication as a complicated process that is mutually crafted. However, these models don’t necessarily represent “good” or “bad” ways of thinking about communication. Instead, each of them is useful for thinking about different forms of communication. See Table 1.1 for more on each model.

My students frequently comment that they can’t believe how relevant interpersonal communication scholarship is to their everyday lives. After all, we cover (and this book will discuss) self-esteem, jealousy, anger, conflict, betrayal, love, friendship, and healthy close relationships, to name just a few topics. Students often find themselves using this material to analyze everyone they know—driving roommates, lovers, family, and friends crazy in the process!

Of course, interest in interpersonal communication has existed since the dawn of recorded history. In fact, one of the earliest texts ever written—the maxims of the Egyptian sage Ptah Hotep (2200 B.C.E.)—was essentially a guidebook for enhancing interpersonal skills (Horne, 1917). Ptah Hotep encouraged people to be truthful, kind, and tolerant in their communication. He urged active listening, especially for situations in which people lack experience, because “to not do so is to embrace ignorance.” He also emphasized mindfulness in word choice, noting that “good words are more difficult to find than emeralds.”

11

Why has learning about interpersonal communication always been considered so valuable? Because knowledge of interpersonal skills is essential for maintaining healthy interpersonal relationships. For most people, having happy relationships with romantic partners, friends, family members, and coworkers is of the utmost importance (Myers, 2002).

The link that exists between relationships and interpersonal communication is clearly illustrated by our definition: interpersonal communication is a dynamic form of communication between two (or more) people in which the messages exchanged significantly influence their thoughts, emotions, behaviors, and relationships. This definition has four important implications. First, interpersonal communication differs from some other forms of communication—such as office memos, e-mail spam, and formal lectures or speeches—because it’s dynamic. That is, communication is constantly in motion and changing over time, unlike the carefully planned messages that dominate advertisements, professional journalism, and formal public speeches. For example, consider a Skype interaction you have with a sibling who lives overseas. The first few moments may be awkward or tense as you strive to reconnect with each other. This tension is reflected in long pauses between short sentences. Then one of you cracks a joke, and the whole exchange suddenly feels warmer. Just a few minutes later, as you realize you have to end the encounter, the conversation slows, and the mood shifts yet again to sadness and regret, as each of you tries to delay the inevitable disconnection.

Second, most interpersonal communication is transactional; both parties contribute to the meaning. For example, you and a romantic partner share an intimate dinner, jointly reminiscing about past times together and exchanging expressions of affection fluidly back and forth. But some interpersonal communication isn’t transactional. You know that your sister is feeling depressed over a breakup, so you send her a consoling text message in the middle of her workday. You don’t expect her to respond, and she doesn’t because she’s busy. There’s no feedback and no interplay between you and your sister. Instead, there is a sender (you), a message (your expression of support), and a receiver (your sister), making it a linear encounter, albeit an interpersonal one.

Third, interpersonal communication is primarily dyadic—it involves pairs of people, or dyads. You chat with your daughter while driving her to school, or you exchange a series of Facebook messages with a long-distance friend. Of course, some interpersonal communication may involve more than just two people. For instance, several family members converse at once while sitting around the dinner table, or a group of friends talk while enjoying an evening out. The dyadic nature of interpersonal communication allows us to distinguish it from intrapersonal communication—communication involving only one person, in the form of talking out loud to oneself or having a mental “conversation” inside one’s head.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, interpersonal communication creates impact: it changes participants’ thoughts, emotions, behaviors, and relationships. The impact on relationships is one of the most profound and unique effects created through interpersonal communication. When we interpersonally communicate, we forge meaningful bonds with others, easing the distance that naturally arises from differences between people. We don’t have to agree with everything another person says and does, but to communicate competently with others, we need to approach them with an open mind and a welcoming heart, affording them the same attention and respect we expect for ourselves. According to philosopher Martin Buber (1965), we then perceive our relationship with that person as I-Thou.

12

13

In contrast, when we focus on our differences, refuse to accept or even acknowledge rival viewpoints as legitimate, and communicate in ways that emphasize our own supposed superiority over others, the distance between us and others increases to the point where it becomes impenetrable. As a consequence, we increasingly perceive our relationships as I-It: we regard other people as “objects which we observe, that are there for our use and exploitation” (Buber, 1965, p. 24). The more we view others as objects, the greater is the likelihood that we’ll communicate with them in disrespectful, manipulative, or exploitative ways. When we treat others this way, our relationships deteriorate.

Interpersonal communication contrasts sharply with impersonal communication—exchanges that have a negligible perceived impact on our thoughts, emotions, behaviors, and relationships. For example, you’re watching TV with your lover, and one of you casually comments on an advertisement that is annoying. Within most close relationships, at least some communication has this impersonal quality. But we can shift to interpersonal at a moment’s notice. A while after the ad commentary, you snuggle up to your partner and murmur, “I love you.” You’re rewarded by warm eye contact, a tender smile, and a gentle hug—all signs that your message has had a significant impact on your partner.

Highlighting the mental, emotional, behavioral, and relational impact of interpersonal communication reinforces the central theme of this text: the communication choices we make determine the personal, interpersonal, and relationship outcomes that follow. Through communicating interpersonally with others, you can change your own feelings and thoughts about both yourself and others; alter others’ opinions of you; cause heartbreak or happiness; incite hugs or hostility; and create, maintain, or dissolve relationships. This power makes your interpersonal communication choices critically important.

Now that you know the definition of interpersonal communication, we can expand our understanding of how it functions in our daily lives by looking at several principles suggested by scholars, based on decades of research and theory development. These principles are affirmed repeatedly throughout our text, and each one suggests practical insights into how you can improve your interpersonal communication choices, skills, and relationships.

Interpersonal Communication Conveys Both Content and Relationship Information During every interpersonal encounter, people simultaneously exchange two types of information (Watzlawick et al., 1967). Content information is the actual meaning of the words you utter. Relationship information consists of signals indicating how each of you views your relationship. These signals may indicate whether you consider yourself superior, equal, or inferior to the other person and whether you see the relationship as intimate, acquainted, or estranged.

14

You convey content information directly through spoken or written words, but you communicate relationship information primarily through nonverbal cues. These cues can include vocal tone, pitch, and volume; facial expression and eye contact; hand gestures; position in relation to the listener; and posture. For instance, imagine that you’re FaceTiming with your mom about whether or not you’re coming home for Thanksgiving. She wants you to visit, but you’d rather stay at school and work the weekend to earn money. She says, “Everyone else in the family is coming, and so we hope you can make it, too,” with a friendly tone and welcoming smile. Now imagine the exact same situation—except this time she is frowning, using a loud and demanding voice, and pointing her finger at you. In both scenarios, the content information is identical—she uses exactly the same words—but very different relationship information is conveyed. In the first scenario, your mom indicates both equality and affection, suggesting a hopeful invitation. In the second, she communicates superiority and anger, implying criticism of your priorities and demanding your attendance.

Relationship information strongly influences how people interpret content information (Watzlawick et al., 1967). In the preceding example, you will likely look much more to your mom’s actions than her words in deciding how she feels about you and the relationship. During most interpersonal encounters, however, people aren’t consciously aware of the relationship information being delivered. You don’t usually sit there thinking, “Gee, what’s this person trying to convey to me about how she sees our relationship?” Relationship information becomes most obvious when it’s unexpected or when it suggests that the sender’s view of the relationship is different from the receiver’s. For example, a new acquaintance says something overly intimate to you, or a roommate starts ordering you around as if he’s your boss. When such events occur, we often experience annoyance or anxiety (“Who does he think he is?!”). That’s why it’s important to communicate relationship information in ways that are sensitive to and respectful of others’ impressions of the relationship while staying true to your own relationship feelings.

15

Because relationship information influences how people interpret content information, it can be considered a specific form of meta-communication—communication about communication (Watzlawick et al., 1967). Meta-communication includes any message, verbal or nonverbal, that has as its central focus the meaning of communication—everything from discussion of previous comments (“I actually was joking when I sent you that text message”) to exchanged glances between friends questioning how a message should be interpreted (“What did he mean when he said that?”). During interpersonal encounters, meta-communication helps us understand each other’s communication, giving us additional guidance regarding how messages should be perceived.

Interpersonal Communication Can Be Intentional or Unintentional During interpersonal encounters, people attach meaning to nearly everything you say and do—whether you intend to send a message or not. Scholars express this as the axiom, “One cannot not communicate” (Watzlawick et al., 1967, p. 51). In most situations, you intend certain meanings, and people understand you. Sometimes, however, people read meanings into behaviors that you didn’t intend as communicative. In such instances, interpersonal communication has occurred, even though it was unintentional. For example, imagine that you greet a friend of yours, “Hey, how’s it going?” She greets you back, “Hi, good to see you!” So far so good—both messages were intentional, and both were interpreted correctly. But then, as your friend tells you about her new boyfriend, your contact lens gets displaced. It’s the third time it’s happened that day, so you sigh loudly in frustration and move your eyes to try to get it back into position. Your friend, seeing this, thinks you’re sighing and rolling your eyes as a message about her boyfriend, and gets angry, “Oh, so you disapprove of him? Why!?” Whether you like it or not, interpersonal communication has occurred, even though it was unintentional. To avoid such misunderstandings, keep this simple rule in mind: when you’re interacting with others, most of what you say and do will be perceived as communication.

16

Interpersonal Communication Is Irreversible Every time you communicate interpersonally, you and the other person affect your future communication and the quality of your relationship. Take the way you answer your cell phone when your brother calls. The ringtone prompts you to look at the incoming number. Your warm and enthusiastic “Hi!” or terse “Yeah?” depends on how you feel about him. Your answer, in turn, influences how the caller responds. And his response further affects your next comment.

This interconnectedness of action makes all interpersonal communication irreversible. By tweeting, posting a message on someone’s Facebook timeline, sending a text, leaving a voice-mail message, or expressing a thought out loud during a face-to-face encounter, you set in motion the series of outcomes that follow. Simply put, once you’ve said something, you can’t take it back. This is why it’s important to think carefully before you communicate. Ask yourself, Is what I’m about to say going to lead to outcomes I want? If the answer is no, revise your message accordingly.

Interpersonal Communication Is Dynamic When you interact with others, your communication and all that influences it—perceptions, thoughts, feelings, and emotions—are constantly in flux. This has several practical implications. First, no two interactions with the same person will ever be identical. People with whom we once interacted effortlessly and joyfully can seem difficult to talk with during our next encounter. Those we once felt awkward around may become our closest confidants.

Second, no two moments within the same interaction will ever be identical. The complex combination of perceptions, thoughts, moods, and emotions that fuels our interpersonal communication choices is constantly changing. For instance, you meet your long-distance romantic partner at the airport, and for the first few minutes after reuniting you both feel joyous. But half an hour later, while driving home, you suddenly find yourselves at a loss for things to talk about. As the minutes pass, the tension increases as you both silently ponder, “What happened?”

In the movie Cast Away (2000), Tom Hanks plays FedEx executive Chuck Noland, who survives a plane crash at sea, only to find himself alone on an uncharted island. Noland must improvise his survival, learning how to obtain food and fresh water, build a shelter, and create fire. But by far his biggest challenge is dealing with his isolation from others. Realizing that he will be presumed dead by all who knew him and likely live out the rest of his days alone on the island, Noland sinks into despair. To emotionally save himself, he creates a friend with whom he can interact: a volleyball named Wilson. Wilson becomes his constant companion, to whom he talks incessantly.

17

Since Cast Away’s release more than a decade ago, “Wilson the volleyball” has become iconic. Numerous YouTube videos spoof Noland’s conversations with Wilson; you can buy Wilson T-shirts, tote bags, and coffee mugs; and in 2014 the Myrtle Beach Pelicans—a minor league branch team of the Texas Rangers—tried to lure pro football star Russell Wilson to its baseball roster by creating a Cast Away-style video with “Wilson” as a football. But beneath the satire and silliness lies a deeper truth about our basic nature. We may be able to physically survive without interpersonal communication with others, but we can’t mentally and emotionally endure such isolation. Interpersonal communication isn’t trivial or incidental; it fulfills a profound human need for connection that we all possess. Of course, it helps us achieve more mundane practical goals as well.

Interpersonal Communication and Human Needs Psychologist Abraham Maslow (1970) suggested that we seek to fulfill a hierarchy of needs in our daily lives. When the most basic needs (at the bottom of the hierarchy) are fulfilled, we turn our attention to pursuing higher-level ones. Interpersonal communication allows us to develop and foster the interactions and relationships that help us fulfill all of these needs. At the foundational level are physical needs, such as air, food, water, sleep, and shelter. If we can’t satisfy these needs, we prioritize them over all others. Once physical needs are met, we concern ourselves with safety needs—such as job stability and protection from violence. Then we seek to address social needs: forming satisfying and healthy emotional bonds with others.

18

Next are self-esteem needs, the desire to have others’ respect and admiration. We fulfill these needs by contributing something of value to the world. Finally, we strive to satisfy self-actualization needs by articulating our unique abilities and giving our best in our work, family, and personal life.

Interpersonal Communication and Specific Goals In addition to enabling us to meet fundamental needs, interpersonal communication helps us meet three types of goals (Clark & Delia, 1979). During interpersonal interactions, you may pursue one or a combination of these goals. The first—self-presentation goals—are desires you have to present yourself in certain ways, so that others perceive you as being a particular type of person. For example, you’re conversing with a roommate who’s just been fired. You want him to know that you’re a supportive friend, so you ask what happened, commiserate, and offer to help him find a new job.

You also have instrumental goals—practical aims you want to achieve or tasks you want to accomplish through a particular interpersonal encounter. If you want to borrow your best friend’s prized Porsche for the weekend, you might remind her of your solid driving record and your sense of responsibility to persuade her to lend you the car.

Finally, you use interpersonal communication to achieve relationship goals—building, maintaining, or terminating bonds with others. For example, if you succeed in borrowing your friend’s car for the weekend and accidentally drive it into a nearby lake, you will likely apologize profusely and offer to pay for repairs to save your friendship.

19

The goal of this textbook is to provide you with knowledge regarding interpersonal communication that will help you improve your communication choices, skills, and relationships. But to be useful, knowledge has to be trustworthy. That means it must be based on solid research and theory. How does this come about?

When you conduct research, you formulate a question, then try to answer it through careful observation or the creation of a controlled “test” or experiment. When you develop theory, you formulate propositions (statements) about your interests, then identify factors relevant to them and how those factors interrelate (Chaffee & Berger, 1987).

To illustrate how research and theory give rise to interpersonal communication knowledge, let’s walk through an example. Imagine that you post a message in one of your favorite online discussion groups. Within hours, you find a couple of flames—inappropriately aggressive online messages that most people wouldn’t communicate face-to-face. You’re shocked and confused, but you want to know why this happened. So you decide to do some research and develop a theory.

Communication scholars typically take one of two approaches when conducting research and developing theory. Through qualitative approaches, they make careful observations, identify patterns in what they’re seeing, and try to determine the principles behind their observations (Znaniecki, 1934). If you opted to study flaming qualitatively, you would follow several steps (Katz, 1983). First, you would carefully define what you meant by flaming based on observation of various flame messages. You would consider questions such as: What characteristics of an online message make it a “flame”? How is flaming different from other negative messages? Once you had a clear definition of flaming, you would formulate tentative hypotheses—predictions that describe the relationship between your phenomenon of interest and other related factors. For example, you might hypothesize that flaming is more likely to occur in certain discussion forums than in others or that certain types of messages are especially likely to trigger flames. Then you would test your hypotheses by observing multiple instances of flaming in online discussion groups. If your observations consistently confirmed your hypotheses, you would conclude that your hypotheses were likely correct. If your observations disconfirmed your hypotheses, you would revise your hypotheses until they matched your observations. Then you would create a set of propositions describing the nature of flaming and the factors that influence it. These propositions would constitute your flame theory.

20

Whereas qualitative approaches begin with observation and description and then move to development of theory, quantitative approaches follow the opposite order. Researchers first propose a theory, then formulate hypotheses based on that theory, and finally test those hypotheses by conducting an experiment. For example, to study flaming from a quantitative perspective, you might first read previous research on flaming. You would then select an existing theory or create your own. From this theory, you would choose specific hypotheses and design and conduct a controlled test of them. For example, you might hypothesize that anonymity boosts flaming frequency and conduct a study in which people are provided with either anonymous or identifiable accounts. If the results from the controlled test support your hypothesis, you would consider your theory plausible. If the results do not match the hypothesis, you would reject the hypothesis and view your theory as suspect.

Many people view qualitative and quantitative approaches as opposites or even rivals, but both are equally valid for the study of interpersonal communication. Qualitative approaches are especially well suited for learning the details, nuances, and richness of real-life communication patterns. Quantitative approaches are excellent for determining the frequency of various communication behaviors, as well as systematically testing the influence of various factors on such behaviors (Pomerantz, 1990).

For nine seasons of South Park, Jerome “Chef” McElroy (voiced by the late, great R&B singer Isaac Hayes) was the only adult trusted and respected by the show’s central characters: Kyle, Stan, Kenny, and Cartman. In a routine interaction, the boys—while waiting on the school lunch line—would share their concerns and seek Chef’s counsel. He would do his best to provide appropriate, effective, and ethical advice, often bursting into song. Of course, given his reputation as a ladies’ man, the boys frequently asked him for advice regarding relationships and sex. Chef would answer in vague and allusive ways, trying to remain child appropriate but ending up completely unintelligible. In other instances he’d get carried away, singing about his sexual exploits before remembering his audience. But despite occasional lapses in effectiveness and appropriateness, Chef consistently was the most ethical, kind, and compassionate adult in a show populated by insecure, self-absorbed, and outright offensive characters.

21

Many of us can think of a Chef character in our own lives—someone who, even if he or she occasionally errs, always strives to communicate competently. Often, this person’s efforts pay off; competent communicators report more relational satisfaction (including happier marriages), better psychological and physical health, and higher levels of educational and professional achievement than others (Spitzberg & Cupach, 2002).

Although people who communicate competently report positive outcomes, they don’t all communicate in the same way. No one recipe for competence exists. Communicating competently will help you achieve more of your interpersonal goals, but it doesn’t guarantee that all of your relationship problems will be solved.

Throughout this text, you will learn the knowledge and skills necessary for strengthening your interpersonal competence. In this chapter, we explore what competence means and how to improve your competence online. Throughout later chapters, we examine how you can communicate more competently across various situations, and within romantic, family, friendship, and workplace relationships.

Interpersonal communication competence means consistently communicating in ways that are appropriate (your communication follows accepted norms), effective (your communication enables you to achieve your goals), and ethical (your communication treats people fairly) (Spitzberg & Cupach, 1984; Wiemann, 1977). Acquiring knowledge of what it means to communicate competently is the first step in developing interpersonal communication competence (Spitzberg, 1997).

The second step is learning how to translate this knowledge into communication skills—repeatable goal-directed behaviors and behavioral patterns that you routinely practice in your interpersonal encounters and relationships (Spitzberg & Cupach, 2002). Both steps require motivation to improve your communication. If you are strongly motivated to do so, you can master the knowledge and skills necessary to develop competence.

Appropriateness The first characteristic of competent interpersonal communication is appropriateness—the degree to which your communication matches situational, relational, and cultural expectations regarding how people should communicate. In any interpersonal encounter, norms exist regarding what people should and shouldn’t say, and how they should and shouldn’t act. For example, in South Park, Chef commonly struggled when the boys asked him to talk about topics that aren’t considered appropriate for children. Part of developing your communication competence is refining your sensitivity to norms and adapting your communication accordingly. People who fail to do so are perceived by others as incompetent communicators.

22

We judge how appropriate our communication is through self-monitoring: the process of observing our own communication and the norms of the situation in order to make appropriate communication choices. Some individuals closely monitor their own communication to ensure they’re acting in accordance with situational expectations (Giles & Street, 1994). Known as high self-monitors, they prefer situations in which clear expectations exist regarding how they’re supposed to communicate, and they possess both the ability and the desire to alter their behaviors to fit any type of social situation (Oyamot, Fuglestad, & Snyder, 2010). In contrast, low self-monitors don’t assess their own communication or the situation (Snyder, 1974). They prefer encounters in which they can “act like themselves” by expressing their values and beliefs, rather than abiding by norms (Oyamot et al., 2010). As a consequence, high self-monitors are often judged as more adaptive and skilled communicators than low self-monitors (Gangestad & Snyder, 2000).

One of the most important choices you make related to appropriateness is when to use mobile devices and when to put them away. Certainly, cell phones and tablets allow us to quickly and efficiently connect with others. However, when you’re interacting with people face-to-face, the priority should be your conversation with them; if you prioritize your device over the person in front of you, you run the risk of being perceived as inappropriate. This is not a casual choice: research documents that simply having cell phones out on a table—but not using them—during face-to-face conversations significantly reduces perceptions of relationship quality, trust, and empathy compared to having conversations with no phones present (Przybylski & Weinstein, 2012). To avoid this, put your mobile devices away at the beginning of any interaction.

While communicating appropriately is a key part of competence, overemphasizing appropriateness can backfire. If you focus exclusively on appropriateness and always adapt your communication to what others want, you may end up forfeiting your freedom of communicative choice to peer pressure or fears of being perceived negatively (Burgoon, 1995).

Effectiveness The second characteristic of competent interpersonal communication is effectiveness: the ability to use communication to accomplish the three types of interpersonal goals discussed earlier (self-presentation, instrumental, and relationship). There’s rarely a single communicative path for achieving all of these goals, and sometimes you must make trade-offs. For example, a critical part of maintaining satisfying close relationships is the willingness to occasionally sacrifice instrumental goals to achieve important relationalship goals. Suppose you badly want to see a movie tonight, but your romantic partner needs your emotional support to handle a serious family problem. Would you say, “I’m sorry you’re feeling bad—I’ll call you after I get home from the movie” (emphasizing your instrumental goals)? Or would you say, “I can see the movie some other time—tonight I’ll hang out with you” (emphasizing your relationship goals)? The latter approach, which facilitates relationship health and happiness, is obviously more competent.

23

Ethics The final defining characteristic of competent interpersonal communication is ethics—the set of moral principles that guide our behavior toward others (Spitzberg & Cupach, 2002). At a minimum, we are ethically obligated to avoid intentionally hurting others through our communication. By this standard, communication that’s intended to erode a person’s self-esteem, that expresses intolerance or hatred, that intimidates or threatens others’ physical well-being, or that expresses violence is unethical and therefore incompetent (Parks, 1994).

To truly be an ethical communicator, however, we must go beyond simply not doing harm. During every interpersonal encounter, we need to strive to treat others with respect, and communicate with them honestly, kindly, and positively (Englehardt, 2001). For additional guidelines on ethical communication, review the “Credo for Ethical Communication” on page 24.

We are all capable of competence in contexts that demand little of us—situations in which it’s easy to behave appropriately, effectively, and ethically. True competence is developed when we consistently communicate competently across all situations that we face—contexts that are uncertain, complex, and unpleasant, as well as those that are simple, comfortable, and pleasant. One of the goals of this book is to arm you with the knowledge and skills you need to meet challenges to your competence with confidence.

24

Much of our interpersonal interaction is online communication: connecting with others by means of new media, including social networking sites, e-mail, text- or instant-messaging, Snapchat, Skype, chatrooms, and even massively multiplayer video games like World of Warcraft (Walther & Parks, 2002). Online communication enables us to meet and form friendships and romances with people we wouldn’t encounter otherwise, and it helps us maintain established relationships (Howard, Rainie, & Jones, 2001). This is especially important for people who are geographically separated. For example, friends who are thousands of miles apart can routinely text each other and maintain a sense that they are actually proximic (Baym et al., 2012). In fact, we can predict quality and strength of interpersonal relationships by the frequency of technology use: relational partners who talk for longer periods of time on their cell phones and text each other more often typically have stronger, closer relationships (Licoppe, 2003).

Given how often we use technology to interpersonally communicate, building online competence becomes extremely important. A host of factors—including comfort with mobile devices and beliefs about their usefulness for achieving goals—impact whether or not someone will be a competent online communicator (Bakke, 2010). People who are confident learning new apps tend to be better online communicators because they use new media frequently and have fun doing it (Bakke, 2010). But beyond these factors, what can you do to improve your online competence? Based on years of research, scholar Malcolm Parks offers five suggestions (see Table 1.2 on p. 26).²

²Personal communication with author, May 13, 2008. This material was developed specifically for this text and published with permission of Dr. Malcolm Parks; it may not be reproduced without the written consent of Dr. Parks and the author.

25

As we move through the twenty-first century, scholars and students alike increasingly appreciate how important interpersonal communication is in our daily lives and relationships. Moreover, they’re recognizing the impact of societal changes, such as diversity and technological innovation. To ensure that the field stays current with social trends, communication scholars have begun exploring the issues of culture, gender and sexual orientation, online communication, and the dark side of interpersonal relationships.

In this text, we define culture broadly and inclusively as an established, coherent set of beliefs, attitudes, values, and practices shared by a large group of people (Keesing, 1974). Culture includes many different types of large-group influences, such as nationality, ethnicity, religion, gender, sexual orientation, physical and mental abilities, and even age. We learn our cultural beliefs, attitudes, and values from parents, teachers, religious leaders, peers, and the mass media (Gudykunst & Kim, 2003). As our world gets more diverse, scholars and students must consider cultural differences when discussing interpersonal communication theory and research, and how communication skills can be improved.

Throughout this book, and particularly in Chapter 5, we examine differences and similarities across cultures and consider their implications for interpersonal communication. As we cover this material, critically examine the role that culture plays in your own interpersonal communication and relationships.

Gender consists of social, psychological, and cultural traits generally associated with one sex or the other (Canary, Emmers-Sommer, & Faulkner, 1997). Unlike biological sex, which we’re born with, gender is largely learned. Gender influences how people communicate interpersonally, but scholars disagree about how. For example, you may have read in popular magazines or heard on TV that women are more “open” communicators than men, and that men “have difficulty communicating their feelings.” But when these beliefs are compared with research and theory on gender and interpersonal communication, it turns out that differences (and similarities) between men and women are more complicated than the popular stereotypes suggest. Throughout this book, we discuss such stereotypes and look at scholarly research on the impact of gender on interpersonal communication.

28

Each of us also possesses a sexual orientation: an enduring emotional, romantic, sexual, or affectionate attraction to others that exists along a continuum ranging from exclusive homosexuality to exclusive heterosexuality and that includes various forms of bisexuality (APA Online, n.d.). You may have heard that gays and lesbians communicate in ways different from “straights” or that each group builds, maintains, and ends relationships in distinct ways. But as with common beliefs about gender, research shows that same-gender and opposite-gender relationships are formed, maintained, and dissolved in similar ways. We also discuss these assumptions about sexual orientation throughout this text.

Radical changes in communication technology have had a profound effect on our ability to interpersonally communicate. Mobile devices keep us in almost constant contact with friends, family members, colleagues, and romantic partners. Our ability to communicate easily and frequently, even when separated by geographic distance, is further enhanced through online communication. In this book, we treat such technologies as tools for connecting people interpersonally—tools that are now thoroughly integrated into our lives. In each chapter, you’ll find frequent mention of these technologies as they relate to the chapter’s specific topics.

Interpersonal communication strongly influences the quality of our interpersonal relationships, and the quality of those relationships in turn affects how we feel about our lives. When our involvements with lovers, family, friends, and coworkers are satisfying and healthy, we feel happier in general (Myers, 2002). But the fact that relationships can bring us joy obscures the fact that relationships, and the interpersonal communication that occurs within them, can often be destructive.

32

In studying interpersonal communication, you can learn much by looking beyond constructive encounters to the types of damaging exchanges that occur all too frequently in life. The greatest challenges to your interpersonal communication skills lie not in communicating competently when it is easy to do so but in practicing competent interpersonal communication when doing so is difficult. Throughout the text, we will discuss many of the negative situations that you may experience, as well as recommendations for how to deal with them.

Interpersonal communication is our primary vehicle for exchanging meaning, connecting emotionally, and building relationships with others. This makes it essential that we base our interpersonal decisions on the best knowledge to which we have access. No one would consider making choices about collegiate majors, future careers, or monetary interests without first gathering the most trustworthy information available. Interpersonal communication should be no different.

This chapter—which introduces key definitions and important principles—will start you on your journey into the study of interpersonal communication. As we travel together through interpersonal essentials, skills, and relationships, the transformative potential of your interpersonal communication will become apparent.

33

LearningCurve Adaptive Quizzes

Video clips that help you understand interpersonal communication

communication, 6

message, 7

interaction, 7

contexts, 7

channel, 7

media, 7

linear communication model, 8

sender, 8

noise, 8

receiver, 8

interactive communication model, 8

feedback, 9

fields of experience, 9

transactional communication model, 9

interpersonal communication, 11

dyadic, 11

intrapersonal communication, 11

I-Thou, 13

I-It, 13

impersonal communication, 13

meta-communication, 15

self-presentation goals, 18

instrumental goals, 18

relationship goals, 18

interpersonal communication competence, 21

communication skills, 21

appropriateness, 21

self-monitoring, 22

effectiveness, 22

ethics, 23

online communication, 24

gender, 27

sexual orientation, 28

You can watch brief, illustrative videos of these terms and test your understanding of the concepts in LaunchPad.

What Is Communication?

What Is Interpersonal Communication?

What Is Interpersonal Communication Competence?

Issues in Interpersonal Communication