Phengz

Topics: Communication, Sociology, Interpersonal communication Pages: 29 (9851 words) Published: May 17, 2013
9
THE NATURE OF INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION
A Message-Centered Approach
Brant R. Burleson

T

he first edition of the Handbook of Communication Science included a chapter that focused on definitions and fundamental questions about interpersonal communication (Cappella, 1987). In this handbook’s second edition, I continue this tradition. In the sciences, definitions of central concepts (and the models these imply) are core theoretical equipment. Differences in opinion about definitions crop up even in mature sciences, and these disagreements may be healthy, serving as the harbinger of significant conceptual advances. However, a radical lack of consensus about fundamental conceptual matters undermines coherence in research areas, creating confusion and discord. At present, little consensus exists about the meaning of interpersonal communication. This is not a good situation—scientifically, pedagogically, or politically. To address this situation, I propose a new definition grounded in the idea that interpersonal communication fundamentally involves an exchange of messages. Although this notion hardly seems novel, some of the most influential definitions of interpersonal communication N

145

146–– N–– PART 3: Fundamental Processes – –
downplay or even exclude this necessary feature. To make the case for the new definition, I begin by describing the current state of dissensus about the fundamental nature of interpersonal communication and detail the undesirable consequences that follow from this. Next, I review and critique three popular definitions of interpersonal communication. I then present my message-centered definition and explicate its key terms. A subsequent section demonstrates how the conceptual model implied by this definition can serve as an organizing framework for theory and research on communication processes, structures, functions, and contexts. Finally, I comment on several potential objections to the proposed definition and consider directions for further conceptual development. (c) reviewed prominent theories and research findings in this area of study (e.g., Berger, 1977, 2005; Hallsten, 2004; Roloff & Anastasiou, 2001). Although there is some overlap among scholars in how interpersonal communication is conceptualized, there are also substantial differences. For example, consider some of the definitions of interpersonal communication that appear in recent textbooks: • “Interpersonal communication [refers] to dyadic communication in which two individuals, sharing the roles of sender and receiver, become connected through the mutual activity of creating meaning” (Trenholm & Jensen, 2008, p. 29). • “Interpersonal communication is a distinctive form of human communication that . . . is defined not just by the number of people who communicate, but also by the quality of the communication. Interpersonal communication occurs not when you simply interact with someone, but when you treat the other as a unique human being” (Beebe, Beebe, & Redmond, 2002, p. 6). • “Interpersonal communication refers to the exchange of messages, verbal and nonverbal, between people, regardless of the relationship they share. . . . Thus, interpersonal communication includes the exchange of messages in all sorts of relationships, ranging from functional to casual to intimate” (Guerrero, Andersen, & Afifi, 2007, p. 11). These definitions all represent interpersonal communication as involving some form of mutual activity, interaction, or exchange, but they also differ significantly. For Beebe et al. (2002), interpersonal communication occurs in close relationships; for Trenholm and Jensen (2008), it transpires within dyads—any two-person system. Guerrero et al. (2007) are even less restrictive; for them,

o Dissensus in Conceptualizations of Interpersonal Communication Since “interpersonal communication” emerged as a recognizable area of theory, research, and teaching in the early 1970s, its scholarship has been reviewed in...

References: Applegate, J. L., & Delia, J. G. (1980). Personcentered speech, psychological development, and the contexts of language usage. In R. S. Clair & H. Giles (Eds.), The social and psychological contexts of language usage (pp. 245–282). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Bavelas, J. B. (1991). Some problems with linking goals to discourse. In K. Tracy (Ed.),
The Nature of Interpersonal Communication–– N–– – –161
C. Hendrick & S. S. Hendrick (Eds.), Close relationships: A sourcebook (pp. 244–258). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Cappella, J. N. (1987). Interpersonal communication: Definition and fundamental questions. In C. R. Berger & S. H. Chaffee (Eds.), Handbook of communication science (pp. 184–238). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Clark, H. H., & Bly, B. (1995). Pragmatics and discourse. In J. L. Miller & P. D. Eimas (Eds.), Speech, language, and communication (pp. 371–410). San Diego: Academic Press. Courtright, J. A. (2007). Relational communication: As viewed from the pragmatic perspective. In B. B. Whaley & W. Samter (Eds.), Explaining communication: Contemporary theories and exemplars (pp. 311–332). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Cronen, V. E. (1998). Communication theory for the twenty-first century: Cleaning up the wreckage of the psychology project. In J. S. Trent (Ed.), Communication: Views from the helm for the 21st century (pp. 18–38). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Daly, J. A., & Wiemann, J. M. (Eds.). (1994). Strategic interpersonal communication. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Deetz, S. A. (1994). Future of the discipline: The challenges, the research, and the social contribution. In S. A. Deetz (Ed.), Communication yearbook 17 (pp. 565–600). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Delia, J. G. (1987). Communication research: A history. In C. R. Berger & S. H. Chaffee (Eds.), Handbook of communication science (pp. 20–98). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Delia, J. G., O’Keefe, B. J., & O’Keefe, D. J. (1982). The constructivist approach to communication. In F. E. X. Dance (Ed.), Human communication theory: Comparative essays (pp. 147–191). New York: Harper & Row. Dillard, J. P. (2003). Persuasion as a social skill. In J. O. Greene & B. R. Burleson (Eds.), Handbook of communication and social interaction skills (pp. 479–514). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Dillard, J. P. (2008). Goals-plan-action theory of message production. In L. A. Baxter & D. O. Braithwaite (Eds.), Engaging theories in interpersonal communication: Multiple perspectives (pp. 65–76). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Dindia, K., & Timmerman, L. (2003). Accomplishing romantic relationships. In J. O. Greene & B. R. Burleson (Eds.), Handbook of communication and social interaction skills (pp. 685–722). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Fay, B., & Moon, J. D. (1977). What would an adequate philosophy of social science look like? Philosophy of Social Science, 7, 209–227. Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (2007). Social cognition: From brains to culture. Boston: McGraw-Hill. Giles, H., & Ogay, T. (2007). Communication accommodation theory. In B. B. Whaley & W. Samter (Eds.), Explaining communication: Contemporary theories and exemplars (pp. 293–310). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Greene, J. O. (2007). Formulating and producing verbal and nonverbal messages: An action assembly theory. In B. B. Whaley & W. Samter (Eds.), Explaining communication: Contemporary theories and exemplars (pp. 165–180). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Guerrero, L. A., Andersen, P. A., & Afifi, W. A. (2007). Close encounters: Communication in relationships (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Hallsten, J. (2004). Theories of interpersonal communication. In J. R. Baldwin, S. D. Perry, & M. A. Moffitt (Eds.), Communication theories for everyday life (pp. 106–121). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Hewes, D. E. (1995). Cognitive processing of problematic messages: Reinterpreting to “unbias” texts. In D. E. Hewes (Ed.), The cognitive bases of interpersonal communication (pp. 113–138). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Kellermann, K. (1992). Communication: Inherently strategic and primarily automatic. Communication Monographs, 59, 288–300. Knapp, M. L., & Daly, J. A. (Eds.). (2002). Handbook of interpersonal communication (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Knapp, M. L., Daly, J. A., Fudge, K. A., & Miller, G. R. (2002). Background and current trends in the study of interpersonal communication. In M. L. Knapp & J. A. Daly (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal communication (3rd ed., pp. 3–20). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Mandelbaum, J. (2008). Conversation analysis theory. In L. A. Baxter & D. O. Braithwaite
162–– N–– PART 3: Fundamental Processes – –
(Eds.), Engaging theories in interpersonal communication: Multiple perspectives (pp. 175–188). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. McCall, G. J., & Simmons, J. L. (1978). Identities and interactions: An examination of human associations in everyday life (Rev. ed.). New York: Free Press. McCornack, S. A. (2008). Information manipulation theory. In L. A. Baxter & D. O. Braithwaite (Eds.), Engaging theories in interpersonal communication: Multiple perspectives (pp. 215–226). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Metts, S., & Grohskopf, E. (2003). Impression management: Goals, strategies, and skills. In J. O. Greene & B. R. Burleson (Eds.), Handbook of communication and social interaction skills (pp. 357–399). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Miller, G. R. (Ed.). (1976a). Explorations in interpersonal communication. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Miller, G. R. (1976b). Foreword. In G. R. Miller (Ed.), Explorations in interpersonal communication (pp. 9–16). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Miller, G. R. (1978). The current status of theory and research in interpersonal communication. Human Communication Research, 4, 164–178. Miller, G. R. (1990). Interpersonal communication. In G. L. Dahnke & G. W. Clatterbuck (Eds.), Human communication: Theory and research (pp. 91–122). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Miller, G. R., & Steinberg, M. (1975). Between people: A new analysis of interpersonal communication. Chicago: Science Research Associates. Motley, M. T. (1990). On whether one can(not) not communicate: An examination via traditional communication postulates. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 54, 1–20. O’Keefe, B. J. (1988). The logic of message design: Individual differences in reasoning about communication. Communication Monographs, 55, 80–103. Popper, K. (1963). Conjectures and refutations: The growth of scientific knowledge. New York: Harper & Row. Rawlins, W. K. (1985). Stalking interpersonal communication effectiveness: Social, individual, or situational integration? In T. W. Benson (Ed.), Speech communication in the 20th century (pp. 109–129). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press. Robinson, W. P. (2001). Language in communication: Frames of reference. In W. P. Robinson & H. Giles (Eds.), The new handbook of language and social psychology (pp. 3–32). Chichester, England: Wiley. Roloff, M. E., & Anastasiou, L. (2001). Interpersonal communication research: An overview. In W. B. Gudykunst (Ed.), Communication yearbook 24 (pp. 51–71). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Roloff, M. E., & Miller, G. R. (Eds.). (1987). Interpersonal processes: New directions in communication research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Rowan, K. E. (2003). Informing and explaining skills: Theory and research on informative communication. In J. O. Greene & B. R. Burleson (Eds.), Handbook of communication and social interaction skills (pp. 403–438). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Saarni, C. (2000). Emotional competence: A developmental perspective. In R. Bar-On & J. D. A. Parker (Eds.), The handbook of emotional intelligence (pp. 68–91). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Seibold, D. R., & Myers, K. K. (2006). Communication as structuring. In G. J. Shepherd, J. St. John, & T. Striphas (Eds.), Communication as . . . : Perspectives on theory (pp. 143–152). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Sillars, A. L., & Vangelisti, A. L. (2006). Communication: Basic properties and their relevance to relationship research. In A. L. Vangelisti & D. Perlman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of personal relationships (pp. 331–352). New York: Cambridge University Press. Slugoski, B. R., & Hilton, D. J. (2001). Conversation. In W. P. Robinson & H. Giles (Eds.), The new handbook of language and social psychology (pp. 193–220). Chichester, England: Wiley. Smith, S. W., & Wilson, S. R. (Eds.). (2009). New directions in interpersonal communication. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Stewart, J. (1973). Introduction: Bridges not walls. In J. Stewart (Ed.), Bridges not walls: A book about interpersonal communication (pp. 2–26). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
The Nature of Interpersonal Communication–– N–– – –163
Swanson, D. L., & Delia, J. G. (1976). The nature of human communication. Chicago: Science Research Associates. Tracy, K. (2002). Everyday talk: Building and reflecting identities. New York: Guilford. Trenholm, S. (1986). Human communication theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Trenholm, S., & Jensen, A. (2008). Interpersonal communication (6th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. Watzlawick, P., Beavin, J. H., & Jackson, D. D. (1967). Pragmatics of human communication. New York: John Wiley. White, C. H. (2008). Expectancy violations theory and interaction adaptation theory: From expectations to adaptation. In L. A. Baxter & D. O. Braithwaite (Eds.), Engaging theories in interpersonal communication: Multiple perspectives (pp. 189–202). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Wyer, R. S., Jr., & Adaval, R. (2003). Message reception skills in social communication. In J. O. Greene & B. R. Burleson (Eds.), Handbook of communication and social interaction skills (pp. 291–355). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Continue Reading

Please join StudyMode to read the full document

Become a StudyMode Member

Sign Up - It's Free