Conflict and Communication. Week 3:
Relationships. Analyzing Relationships
This video discusses key terms, theories,
models, and tools that you can use to
analyze interpersonal relationships. By
the end of this video you should be able
to: 1) identify and categorize
interpersonal relationships; and 2)
identify relational factors which may
influence conflict situations.
These include: why we develop
relationships; how relationships develop
over time; and tensions within
relationships
Review. So we have a model of conflict
that includes attitudes, behaviors, and
core issues. And this model also states
that conflict is further embedded in
relationships, a broader context, and a
series of historical factors. Remember,
we called this part in the middle the
episode and the broader part the
epicenter. We also talked about how
an episode can serve as a window into an
epicenter. Today we're going to focus on
the epicenter. In fact, we're gonna focus
just on the relationship. Sometimes you
might hear me use the words "relational
context" to describe this. Identifying
interpersonal relationships. Oh, you see
this thing here? I'm gonna throw that up
anytime I'm presenting material that you
won't find in the course textbook -  just
FYI (for your information) to help you out. So, what makes a
relationship interpersonal? It actually
depends on how you define "interpersonal
relationships." In fact, there's two ways
that you can define interpersonal
relationships: a quantitative way and a
qualitative way. The quantitative
definition focuses on the number of
parties involved. The qualitative
definition focuses on the
characteristics of the relationship. With
a quantitative definition you can say a
relationship is interpersonal anytime
two people (or a "dyad") are in a
relationship. So that means that when I
go to Safeway, the relationship between
me and the cashier - that's an
interpersonal relationship. My
relationship with every single one of
you? That's an interpersonal relationship.
My relationship
with my closest friends? Also an
interpersonal relationship. And my
relationship with my husband,
that's also an interpersonal
relationship.
The qualitative definition of
interpersonal relationships actually
sets out a series of criteria used to
determine if a relationship should be
classified as interpersonal. Firstly, every
interpersonal relationship is unique. You
can't be the same in the same type of
relationship with one friend that you
are with another friend. Every
relationship is unique, there's something
different about it. Because of this
difference, that relationship is
irreplaceable -
which means that if you lose that
relationship, you've really feel a
great sense of loss because you can
never have another relationship quite
like that one. Third, in an interpersonal
relationship there's a high level of
disclosure. Both parties share a great
deal of information about themselves.
Next, these relationships have some kind
of an intrinsic reward. There's a reason
why you want to be with someone that
goes beyond what you need to "get"
from them - you just LIKE being with them.
There's intrinsic rewards that come from
being in that relationship. And, lastly,
there's a high level of interdependence
between the folks that are in the
relationship. Tou depend on each other in
some way shape or form and influence
each other considerably. The qualitative
definition of interpersonal
relationships also suggests that the
opposite of an interpersonal
relationship - or a relationship that
doesn't meet this established criteria - 
can be termed "impersonal." This means that
we can classify our relationships as
either interpersonal or impersonal. So,
let's consider my examples from before.
The interaction between me and the
Safeway cashier? Most likely impersonal.
Right now my relationship with majority
of you? That would be classified as
impersonal. We don't know each other that
well right now.
But my interactions with my close
friends? Those will be interpersonal. And
obviously my interaction with my husband,
that would also be interpersonal. However,
relationships can change over time as
individuals share more information about
themselves and spend more time together.
A relationship that starts
off as impersonal can become more
interpersonal over time. If I'm "a regular"
at Safeway and always go to the same
cashier, our relationship may start to
develop more interpersonal
characteristics.
Similarly, if you and I get to know each
other, our relationship can shift from
impersonal to interpersonal. So, when
classifying a relationship, it may be
more useful to think in terms of a
spectrum with impersonal and
interpersonal at either ends. Our
relationship can then shift from one end
to the other
as each party discloses more information
about themselves, spends more time
together, and generally has more contact.
So, then, when we talk about relationships
we can identify to what "degree" they are
qualitatively impersonal or
interpersonal.
Pause the video. Think about one of your
closest relationships. How does it meet
the criteria for an interpersonal
relationship (qualitatively defined)?
Classifying Interpersonal Relationships.
The textbook does a nice job of
presenting two classification schemes.
First we can talk about the origin of
the relationship. And, we can talk about
the context in which other relationship
occurs. In terms of origin, we can
differentiate between relationships of
circumstance and relationships of choice.
A relationship of circumstance is
based upon the situations that we are in.
For example, in the class, most of you
will have a relationship of circumstance (with your classmates)
because you're in the class together. A
relationship of choice is
something that you actively seek to
develop further. So, relationships with
your closest friends - those would be
relationships of choice. Talking about the
context of relationships - we can identify
family relationships, friendships,
professional relationships, and romantic
or intimate relationships. And all of
these have particular characteristics.
The textbook does a nice job of
explaining these contexts further. One
thing we can ask ourselves is what might
be missing from this list. Are there any
other context that should be added? Now,
one additional thing to think about in
terms of context are our "internal working
models." These are basically our general
ways of handling and dealing with
relationships that are developed through
our early experiences - particularly our
early family experiences and our early
friendships. Although, I think you could
also make a case for saying that early
professional relationships and
early romantic relationships also shape the
way in which we handle future
interactions. Again all of these things
develop internal working models that
shape how we go about managing our
relationships. Pause the video. Go back to
the relationship you thought of before.
How would you classify this relationship?
Would it be a relationship of choice or
a relationship of circumstance? Maybe it
started as a relationship of
circumstance but then changed and became
a relationship of choice. What's the
context of this relationship?
Relational Factors which Influence
Conflict Situations  - or, how the epicenter
impacts the episode.
Why We Form Relationships.
Why do we do this? Relationships are hard - why bother?
Well, effectively, we need relationships
to meet our needs and we need
relationships to fulfill our goals. We
can talk about three related theories: human
needs theory, social capital theory, and
social exchange theory. The textbook goes
through all three.
Human Needs Theory.
Remember the onion diagram that we used
to analyze positions, goals, and needs?
We're gonna talk about the very center
of it - our basic basic human needs. We can
talk about our need for inclusion and
connection, our need for control and
influence, and our need for affection.
This is the textbook's classification of
human needs.
So, our need for inclusion and connection
basically relates to our need to be well
connected to others - both to have our
basic needs for things like food and
shelter met, as well as our needs for
social interaction and friendship.
What the textbook calls a need for
control is really more of a need to
influence - that is the need to influence
relationships, decisions, and activities
as well as the need to be influenced by
others. Think of it more in terms of how
we need others to teach us - how we need
to engage with others in order to learn
more about the world and about ourselves.
And lastly, we have a need for affection.
We need to feel like we're liked by
others. This includes physical affection
as well as affection that's displayed
through other verbal and nonverbal
behaviors. Moving on to social capital
theory. This draws from a theorist by
the name ofPierre Bourdieu and basically
argues that our relationships are
actually a resource that can be
converted into economic and other
benefits. Forms of social capital can be
further broken down into bonding social
capital, bridging social capital, and
linking social capital. Bonding social
capital are the benefits that result
from close relationships with their
families. Bridging social capital are the
benefits the result from connections
with friends and other very close
associates. And, lastly, linking social
capital are the benefits the result from
relationships with people in positions
of power who sit outside of
our usual social network. Take a look at
these photos. How would you classify these
as either bonding, bridging, or linking
forms of social capital?
Moving on to social exchange theory.
Basically, this uses an economic model to
weigh the costs and benefits associated
with the given relationship. So
the idea is that when we're in a relationship
we're constantly evaluating the
benefits of that relationship and the
associated costs. If we decide that the
costs outweigh the benefits then we are
far more likely to terminate that
relationship.
Pause the video. Think to
yourself, how can we use human needs
theory, social capital theory, and/or
social exchange theory to help analyze
interpersonal conflict.
Developing Relationships
One of the
central ways in which we develop
relationships is through the sharing of
information. This is the premise of
social penetration theory, which suggests
that we develop intimacy in our
relationships through the sharing of
information. Self-disclosure is the term
that we use for describing that process
of sharing personal information, which we
can analyze in terms of the breadth and
the depth of our sharing. Breadth refers
to the number of topics you are willing
to share with another person. So, for
example, maybe you're willing to talk to
a friend about your hobbies, interests, or
romantic relationships but are not
willing to talk about, say, your family or
your own childhood experiences. Depth
refers to how deeply you are willing to
share about each topic. For example, maybe
you're willing to tell your friend the
name of the person you are in a romantic
relationship with, but are not willing to
share details about the fight you had
with this person the other night. One
tool that you can use to analyze the
extent of self disclosure within a given
relationship is called the Johari Window.
This basically requires you to identify
the information about yourself
you are willing and unwilling to share
with others. We'll be using this tool in
class. Now there are some particular
risks and benefits to self disclosure.
The textbook does identify a few,
particularly in terms of risks
associated with safety - things like
identity theft and stalking.
Reasons why you might want to be careful
in terms of how much information you
share. But there are other things we can
consider. Firstly, when we disclose
information about ourselves we do run
the risk of rejection.
Maybe we'll be socially ostracized for
sharing what's on our minds. Disclosing
information can also impact how other
people see us. For example, if you're
trying to present yourself in a
particular way you need to be very
careful when talking about, say, your own
faults and mistakes.
Lastly, disclosing information can also
hurt the person you are talking to or
damage your relationship with them. For
example - and this is a very superficial
example - let's say a friend asks your
opinion regarding the shirt that they're
wearing. You think it's ugly and you tell
them. But maybe that's not what they
actually wanted to hear and they get offended.
There are also numerous benefits to self-disclosure. The textbook emphasizes that
self disclosure has intrinsic rewards.
People enjoy talking about themselves
and sharing with others. Sharing can also
improve one's overall well-being. Think
of how good it often feels to "get
something off your chest"
or how the sharing of stories is often a
key component of healing from traumatic
experiences. We also choose to disclose
information because we believe it is the
morally correct thing to do. For example,
you may choose to admit when you have
done something wrong despite potential
consequences because keeping that secret
does not sit well with you morally - it
doesn't feel right or correspond with
your own perception of who you are as a
person. On the other hand, our decision to
disclose information - and particularly
information that might damage our
reputation - can be a very strategic
choice. We may choose to be upfront about
things that we've done wrong or mistakes
we've made so that we can help shape how
other people receive and interpret that
information. We often see this with
public figures like celebrities or
politicians who opt to disclose
information about themselves or things
that they have done so as to control the
public narrative. Self-disclosure can
also be of benefit to our relationships.
Sharing information about ourselves can
not only deepen our connection to
another person but can encourage that
person to share more information about
themselves. That is, self-disclosure
encourages reciprocal sharing that can
strengthen a relationship. Lastly, by
strengthening relationships and helping
us manage how other people see us,
self-disclosure can help us to increase
our capacity to influence and/or support
other people. Consider, for example, how
self-disclosure operates in support
groups like Alcoholics Anonymous or even
what's happening online right now with
the #MeToo movement. So self-
disclosure can help to strengthen
relationships. But what if we don't
really want a deeper relationship with a
particular person? We all employ a
variety of strategies for managing
intimacy.
That is, for managing how close we get to
other people and how close we let other
people get to us. This includes a variety
of distancing strategies that we use to
avoid developing relationships and/or to
minimize our level of self-disclosure
within a relationship. Often we may
simply avoid interacting with the other
person completely. If this isn't possible
we may hold back on sharing - that is,
reduce the depth of our self-disclosure
and keeping our discussion superficial
and even shortening interactions where
possible. We may also restrict the number
of topics we talk about - that is, reduce
the breadth of our self-disclosure.
Showing restraint in our interactions is
another possibility. This would include,
for example, not laughing at someone's
jokes or asking them further questions.
Lastly, lying - that is deception or not
telling the whole truth about what we
are thinking - is another way that we may
minimize self-disclosure and reduce the
level of intimacy in a given
relationship. Pause the video. How can the
concept of self-disclosure help us to
analyze interpersonal conflicts? The
Development of Relationships Over Time.
The textbook identifies several stages
of relational development, suggesting
that we can think of these stages like
an elevator. We get into the relationship,
the relationship goes up, the
relationship comes down, and then we
leave the relationship. This is based on
the work of Mark Knapp, a very prominent
scholar in the study of nonverbal
behavior and interpersonal relationships.
Knapp specifically identified 10 stages
through which relationships move. This
model is actually based upon studies
of romantic relationships, but it can
be applied to relationships more
generally. We begin in the initiation
phase wherein we first notice another
person and form a first impression based
upon a variety of verbal and nonverbal
messages and interpretations. We then
move on to the experimenting stage wherein
we look for common ground with the other
person by sharing information on various
topics. The exchanges here are still
generally quite superficial - there is a
lot of breadth to our self-disclosure,
but not a lot of depth. During the
intensifying stage we spend more time
with the other person and the level of
reciprocal self-disclosure between both
parties deepens. During the integration
stage you start to see each other less
as two distinct individuals and more as
a social unit. For example, in a romantic
relationship you would become "a couple"
or "partners" and develop shared daily
rituals and maybe insider language like
inside jokes. When a pair reaches a
bonding stage they communicate the
status of their relationship in a more
formal or public way. With romantic
relationships this could include, for
example, changing your relationship
status on facebook. These first five
stages are collectively called "Coming
Together." Or, to go back to the elevator
metaphor, this is when we enter into the
relationship and the relationship goes
up. Then, according to this model, the
relationship "comes down." This starts as
the two people begin to differentiate.
They start to shift away from a shared
identity and begin to reestablish their
individual identities, decreasing contact
in interactions. Sometimes the pair will then go back
into reestablishing the relationship.
However, if the differentiation continues
the relationship may move into the
circumscribing stage wherein the
communication between the parties
becomes less frequent and more
superficial. You might also say the
relationship becomes less interpersonal
and more impersonal. If this continues
the relationship will stagnate, becoming
shallow and predictable. The extent to
which the parties care about the
relationship also decreases. If the
parties don't work to re-establish the
relationship they may begin avoiding
each other. You ignore each other and
your interactions become even more
impersonal. Lastly, one or both parties
may decide to formally end the
relationship.
These last five stages are collectively
called "Coming Apart." This is where we
come down the elevator and get off.
This is a good overview of the stages,
but it doesn't totally capture what
Knapp was trying to describe -
particularly in his later works. To
unpack this further, we can keep the idea
that relationships go up and down. And we
can use the terms "coming together" and
"coming apart" to describe these processes.
We can also keep the ten stages.
But we're going to "flatten out" the model
just a little bit to account for
relationships that don't end. In these
relationships, the people involved
undertake a continual process of
"relational maintenance" wherein they move
back and forth through, primarily, the
stages of integrating, bonding, and
differentiating - constantly working to
manage the tension between their need
for establishing a sense of self and
autonomy while also trying to meet their
need for connection. In this expanded
model there are three main phases of
relational development: coming together,
relational maintenance, and coming apart.
Tensions Within Relationships.
Let's go back to human needs theory. So
we are all trying to have our basic
needs met - both within and through our
relationships. However, the way we go
about having our needs met varies
considerably. So, in a relationship, while
we may share a basic need with the other
party, our goals and positions are often
very different.
The textbook suggests that, in
relationships, people are constantly
trying to find the best way of having
their needs met. For example, as we try to
meet our need for inclusion in a
relationship we have to find a balance
between meeting our need for inclusion -
wanting to be with the other person
without smothering them. The textbook
suggests that those who work too hard to
seek attention and be liked by others
are "oversocial" while those who avoid
interactions are "undersocial." As we try
to meet our need for control or
influence we have to find a balance
between trying to influence others and
allowing ourselves to be influenced.
Those who are constantly seeking to
control others are considered "overcontrolling" and those who passively
allow themselves to be controlled or
influenced are considered "undercontrolling."
As we try to meet our need
for affection we have to balance our
need to be liked by others while also
being okay with not being liked by
everyone. Those who are what the textbook
call "overpersonal" try too hard to be
liked by everyone while those who are
"underpersonal" assume that they will
never be liked and try to avoid
relationships altogether.
Obviously these terms - oversocial, undersocial, overcontrolling, undercontrolling,
overpersonal, underpersonal -
are extremes and, in reality, we all move
between these extremes in our
interactions with others.
Another way in which tensions within
relationships are presented in
scholarship from the study of
interpersonal communication is the
notion of "dialectical tensions." This
scholarship - which focuses, again, on
romantic relationships - suggests, again,
that we have these competing goals that
are of equal importance. Specifically two
people within a relationship both want
connection and autonomy. That is, they
want to feel close to the other party
without completely losing their sense of
Independence. Each person also wants both
predictability and novelty. That is, they
want some stability in the relationship
but don't want to get bored. Lastly, each
person wants both openness and "closedness"
within the relationship. This relates
to the idea of self-disclosure. We try to
be both open with our partner, but also
want to keep some information to
ourselves. So within our relationships we
are constantly trying to negotiate these
competing goals - both within ourselves
and with the other party. At the same
time, the couple also perceives
themselves as a "social unit" and, as a
unit, wants to engage with others - that is,
with "the world" in general - in ways that
are also characterized by dialectical
tensions. First, the couple wants to be
both included and secluded. That is, the
pair wants to be part of the world while
also being able to just spend time
together. So, for example, say there's a
couple trying to decide if they should
go out for dinner with a group of
friends or just stay home and watch
Netflix. This would be an example of the
inclusion-seclusion dialectic. Secondly,
the couple wants to be socially
recognized as a couple while also not
feeling like they have to abide by every
single dominant social norm regarding
what a couple "should be" or "look like" - so
they want to be seen as a unique couple
with their own "way of doing things" while
still being socially accepted as a
couple. Lastly, the
dialectic of revelation and concealment
refers to the couple's desire to both
share information about their
relationship with others while still
keeping some details themselves. So a
couple needs to negotiate how much they
will share with others about the
relationship. There are similarities
between each pair of dialectics and each
pair can be further classified as
follows: connection-autonomy and
inclusion-seclusion are both
manifestations of an integration-
separation dialectic. Again, this idea of
wanting to be with others while also
being separate from others.
Predictability-novelty and
conventionality and uniqueness both fall
under the stability-change dialectic.
Again, we want both predictability
and conventionality as well as a
difference and uniqueness.
Ppenness-closedness and revelation-
concealment
both fall under the expression-privacy
dialectic - again, this need to both share
information with others while also
keeping certain information to
themselves.
Pause the video. Think to yourself, how
can the notion of dialectical tensions
help us to analyze interpersonal
conflict?
This video discussed certain theories,
models, and tools that you can use
to analyze interpersonal relationships.
You should be able: to identify and
categorize interpersonal relationships; [and]
identify relational factors which may
influence conflict situations. And these
various factors include: why we develop
relationships; how relationships develop
over time; and tensions within
relationships.
