Interpersonal Final

hearing

the physical ability to hear/percieve sound

listening

the process of receiving, construting meaning from, responding to messages

the listening process

Attending, interpreting, remembering, evaluating, then responding (AIRER)

attending (listening process)

Process of paying attention to specific cues- relevant to convo

interpreting (listening process)

Attaching meaning to those cues

Strategies for interpreting

Determine organization, attend to nonverbal cues (do they match verbal), paraphrase, question

remembering (listening process)

Recalling and retaining info shared with you

evaluating (listening process)

analyzing info to determine ow truthful/believable you think it is (may seek additional info)

responding (listening process)

forming a reply to a message

ways of listening

discriminatory, appreciative, comprehensive, evaluative, active-empathetic listening (DACEA)

Discriminatory listening

Listening to distinguish between different words/sounds

appreciative listening

Listening for enjoyment (eg, podcast)

Comprehensive listening

Listening for learning’s sake

Evalutative listening

Listening to judge accuracy/completeness of a message

listening styles

people-centered, action-centered, content-centered, time-centered (PACT)

people-centered

listen to communicate concern for others

action-centered

listening to get the point as easily as possible

content-centered

listen to understand the facts/details of a message

time-centered

 listen in the least amount of time possible

barriers to effective listening

• Noise

• Features of messages (complexity, amount of info)

• thoughts/feelings (preoccupied? prejudice?)

• Lack of effort

• Non listening (pretending to listen)

Common forms of nonlistening

SPAMDL- selective listening, psuedolistening, ambushing, monopolizing, defensive, literal

psuedolistening

pretending to listen when you aren’t

selective listening

focusing on only specific parts of message that are relevant to you

ambushing

Listening to gain info you can use to attack speaker

monopolizing

Focusing communication on yourself instead of listening

defensive listening

Perceiving personal attacks in messages that are not criticism

literal listening

listening for content and ignoring cues about relationship

when are you more likely to engage with nonlistening?

when speaking to someone you already know

using appropriate listening strategies

complete the listening process, tailor your listening to situation, prepare to listen

active listening

engage in the exchange of ideas and taking steps to better understand your partner

showing active listening

paraphrasing, asking questions, showing empathy

techniques to improve active listening

asking questions, pay attention to relational messages

nonverbal signs of active listening

smiling, eye contact, body position, facial expression

verbal signs of active listening

positive encouragement, remembering, asking questions, paraphrasing

relational messages

expressions showing how two people feel about each other (8 relational contexts)

relational framing

happens automatically, frame used depends on different factors and shapes interpretations of messages

different factors affecting relational frame used:

content of utterances, type of interaction, history of relationship, social and cultural differences

relational frames used

dominance vs submission, affiliation vs disaffiliation

biased listening

we use active listening in some situations more than others- i.e., remember more info in disageements

lean into listening

use questions strategically, read between lines, don’t read too deep into messages

action assembly theory

explains how thought process connects to overt communication behavior- how individual thoughts form into action

expressing empathy

messages that evoke empathy are more likely to activate bystanders

transcendence

a state of listening characterized by intense, mutual engagement in an interaction (4 factors)

4 factors of transcendence

• strong sense of mutuality,

• mutuality fosters a sense of connection/shared responsibility for meanings created,

• Level of mutual engagement and connection promotes creativity and insight

• partners in interaction discover new ways of thinking/being

attending to detail when responding to partners

practice makes better, empathize with limits

pathways to commitment

accelerated courtship

accelerated arrested courtship

intermediate courtship

prolonged courtship

accelerated courtship

develop quickly, fast commitment

Accelerated arrested courtship

want to be quickly, but not smooth

Intermediate courtship

takes roughly 5 years to decide to be married

prolonged courtship

roughly 7 years to decide

Knapps Model of relationship DEVELOPMENT

initiating, experimentation, intensifying, integrating, then bonding

Knapps model of relationship DISSOLUTION

differentiation, circumscribing, stagnation, avoidance, then termination

initiating

first impressions

intensifying

“honeymoon stage”, mutual awareness and ground rules

integrating

see yourself and partner as a unit, “we” instead of “I”, shared objects/routines

bonding

formal, legal proclamation

differentiation

begin to use “I'“ statements, emphasize individuality, pressure starts to form

circumscribing

limited convos, boundaries form, psychological distance (avoiding topics out of fear)

stagnation

used to fighting, going through motions, further avoid comm.

avoidance

avoid partner all together

how to reduce uncertainty

through self disclosure

coping with uncertainty

-address same topic

match length/expansiveness of each other’s messages

match qualities of messages

predicted outcome value

rewards a person expects to get from a future relationship (high =more talking/questions)

toe the line as you self disclose

exchange public info, reciprocate behaviors, portray yourself truthfully

social penetration theory

to establish a relationship, you must increase depth and breadth (beyond out layer)- onion metaphor

relational uncertainty

lack of knowledge people have about relationships

3 kinds of doubts in relational uncertainty

self-uncertainty, partner uncertainty, relationship uncertainty

self-uncertainty

questions about involvement in relationship

partner uncertainty

doubts you have about partners commitment

relationship uncertainty

doubts about nature of relationship

relationship talk

communication about relationship w/ partner

resolving doubts

secret tests, relationship talk

Relation turbulence

people move beyond formative state of relationship development by allowing partners to influence everyday behavior- turbulence is unavoidable

social exchange

transferring personal resources between each other

rule of distributive justice

guideline dictating each partner’s rewards should be proportional to costs

navigating roads to intimacy

balance breadth and depth (self-disclosure), talk about uncertainties, give interdependence effort

The investment model predicts you are more likely to stay in a relationship when you…

• Receive more awards than costs

• Lack alternatives

• Invested lots of time/energy/resources 

investment model

satisfaction - availability of alternatives + resources invested = commitment

face threat

experiences that can make either partner feel constrained or disliked

decreasing own face threats

Monitor partner’s social media, Pay attention to actions during conflicts

When you’re initiating a breakup, you may…

positive tone, avoid partner, use texting to end relationship

reasserting independence

The process of a breakup involves recovering sense of self not tied to relationship- shifts from “we” to “me” language

coming to terms with a breakup

involves coping with the changes in your circumstances and understanding how you will (not) communicate with partner in the future- comfort in knowing why

exiting gracefully

weigh pros and cons, manage face threats by being direct and respectful

obsessive relational intrusion

repeated and unwanted pursuit that constitutes an invasion of privacy 

cyberstalking

Hard to study because many find this behavior normal , Women more likely to engage

intimacy

a connection between two people that includes psychological, emotional, and behavioral bonds

5 components of intimacy

closeness, openness, trust, affection, mutuality (COTAM)

core of intimacy

closeness

closeness revealed through…

Communication, shared memories, similar social media profiles, expressions conveying support, use of pluralistic language

3 components of love

intimacy, passion (arousal via attraction), commitment

Complete (consummate) love

when all 3 components are present in relationship- Sternberg’s triangle of love theory

Hendrick and Hendrick’s Love Styles

eros love, ludus love, storge

eros love

passionate, beauty and sexuality

ludus love

a game that is entertaining and excited

storge

familial, peaceful and grounded in friendship

overlapping in Hendrick and Hendrick’s Love styles

pragma, mania, agape

pragma

logical, practical

mania

obsessive, dependent

agape

all-giving, selfless, sacrificial