L

Chapter 3 Notes: Intrapersonal and Personality in Interpersonal Communication

3.1 Who are you? Intrapersonal processes

  • Manfred Kuhn’s exercise: answer each item with a complete sentence asking, “Who am I?”

  • 20-item test results typically reveal five categories of self-identity that a social group or individual belongs to:

    • social group membership

    • ideological beliefs

    • personal interests

    • personal ambitions

    • self evaluations

  • The 20-item exercise highlights intrapersonal processes occurring within the self and mind (intrapersonal level).

  • Definition of intrapersonal communication for this course: a hybrid view between the two ends of Barker & Wiseman and Racillo’s spectrum; it includes thinking, reflecting, and internal symbolic processes and can extend to inner dialogue, notes, or internal speech.

  • Core definitions:

    • Barker & Wiseman (oldest): interpersonal communication is the creating, functioning, and evaluating of symbolic processes which operate primarily within oneself.

    • Racillo (1969/1970): interpersonal communication as biological organism coordinating and organizing complex intentional actions anchored in symbolic language.

  • Our hybrid definition acknowledges biology, personality, and communication traits as part of intrapersonal communication.

  • Learning outcomes for 3.1:

    • (LO1) Differentiate self-concept and self-esteem.

    • (LO2) Explain Charles Horton Cooley’s looking-glass self.

    • (LO3) Examine how self-esteem impacts communication.

Self-concept

  • Self-concept is an individual’s belief about himself/herself, including attributes and what the self is.

  • Attribute: a characteristic, feature, or quality inherent to a person or group.

  • Norman Anderson (1968) proposed a list of 55 attributes, with top/desirable vs. bottom/undesirable traits:

    • Top 10 most desirable (from Anderson, 1968):
      1) sincere, 2) honest, 3) understanding, 4) loyal, 5) truthful, 6) trustworthy, 7) intelligent, 8) dependable, 9) open-minded, 10) thoughtful

    • Top 10 least desirable traits (from Anderson, 1968):
      1) liar, 2) phony, 3) mean, 4) cruel, 5) dishonest, 6) untruthful, 7) obnoxious, 8) malicious, 9) dishonorable, 10) deceitful

  • Jesse Chandler (expanded list: 10+42 attributes) found patterns in top positives and negatives (noting that terms evolve with time):

    • Top 10 positives: honest, likable, compassionate, respectful, kindly, sincere, trustworthy, ethical, good-natured, honorable

    • Top 10 negatives: pedophilic, homicidal, evildoer, abusive, evil-minded, Nazi, mugger, asswipe, untrustworthy, Hitler-ish

  • The three selves in Carl Rogers’ humanistic framework forming self-concept: self-image, self-worth, ideal self

    • Self-image: how one views oneself

    • Self-worth: the value one places on oneself

    • Ideal self: the version of oneself one would like to be; influenced by life experiences, culture, and others’ expectations

  • The interplay of these three selves influences overall self-concept and potential for self-actualization.

  • Real self vs. ideal self (Rogers): ideal self is often unattainable; real self is who you are now.

  • Congruence vs. incongruence (Rogers’ theory):

    • Incongruent: self-image, self-worth, and ideal self do not overlap; higher risk of psychological problems.

    • Congruent: overlap among the three parts; higher likelihood of self-actualization.

  • Figure references:

    • Figure 3.1 shows incongruence vs. congruence with self-concept parts.

    • Rogers linked self-actualization to overlap of self-concept parts (Maslow’s hierarchy as related context).

  • Self-actualization is a key objective in Rogers’ framework; without overlap, balance with the world and others is hindered.

  • Cooley’s looking-glass self (Human Nature and the Social Order, 1902)

    • Three postulates:
      1) We learn about ourselves in every situation by imagining ourselves through others’ eyes.
      2) We imagine how others judge us.
      3) We respond emotionally to the imagined evaluations of others.

    • Visual metaphor (Figure 3.2): a figure stands before four panes (devil horns, fake smile, tie, halo) representing different social judgments from different audiences (exes, friends, coworkers, guardians).

    • The looking-glass self emphasizes that self-image is shaped by perceived judgments, mediated by our mind, which also shapes our behavior (facade) to align with anticipated judgments.

  • Self-esteem: subjective evaluation of one’s abilities and limitations; emotionally driven judgments about value.

  • Impostor syndrome: fear of being exposed as a fraud, despite evidence of competence; common in high-achieving individuals (physicians, CEOs, academics, celebrities, etc.).

  • Self-concept: combination of attributes, beliefs, and perceived worth; subject to change due to new experiences and feedback.

  • Evaluation: ongoing judgments about quality, importance, or value of various aspects (interactions, work, abilities).

  • Abilities: inherent talent (natural capacity) + learned skills; both influence performance; examples include basketball talent vs. learned skills such as playing basketball; achievement matters—success requires both knowing and doing.

  • Limitations: recognizing fixed vs. alterable limits; confusion about what can be changed; misalignment between desired and possible abilities hurts self-esteem.

  • Interpersonal effects: self-esteem and communication are reciprocal; how you communicate affects others’ perceptions and vice versa.

  • Self-compassion (Kristin Neff): alternative to self-esteem, emphasizes accepting one’s suffering with kindness rather than judgment.

    • Three components:

    • Self-kindness: treat oneself with warmth and understanding, not harsh judgment.

    • Common humanity: recognize that everyone suffers and makes mistakes; you are not alone in your experience.

    • Mindfulness: observe painful thoughts/feelings with balanced awareness without over-identifying with them.

  • Self-compassion advantages: reduces harsh self-criticism; fosters resilience and healthier coping strategies.

  • Don’t feed the vulture (negative self-talk): metaphor for self-criticism feeding on daily negative thoughts.

    • Common vultures statements (from Richmond, Wrench, Gorham-Gorham):

    • “Oh, boy. Do I look awful today?”; “I left my graded exams at home.”; “I did an awful job of teaching that unit.”; “Why can’t I do this as well as someone else?”; “I’m a failure at teaching.”; etc. (long list in the transcript)

    • Four strategies to challenge vulture statements (Ben Martin):
      1) Reality testing: evidence for/against; are thoughts factual? are interpretations biased?
      2) Alternative explanations: other ways to view the situation; how would a positive perspective view it?
      3) Perspective: is the situation as bad as it seems? consider worst/best outcomes and likelihood; what good could come from it?
      4) Problem solving: what can I do to solve or improve the situation?

    • Outcome: reducing negativity by countering negative self-talk, reducing the power of vultures, shrinking them over time.

  • Research Spotlight (2018): Umfrey & Sherblom

    • Relationship among social communication competence, self-compassion, and hope

    • Finding: higher social communication competence predicts greater self-compassion, suggesting practice in social communication supports internal compassion.

  • Key takeaways for 3.1:

    • Self-concept is a belief system about oneself (attributes and identity).

    • Self-esteem is a subjective evaluation of one’s abilities/limitations; it interacts with communication.

    • Cooley’s looking-glass self explains how others’ perceived judgments shape self-image, mediated by cognition.

    • Self-concept components (self-image, self-worth, ideal self) may be incongruent or congruent; overlap facilitates self-actualization.

    • Self-compassion offers a healthier framework than raw self-esteem by emphasizing kindness, shared humanity, and mindful awareness.

    • Vulture statements are common negative self-talk patterns; we can challenge them with reality testing, alternative explanations, perspective, and problem-solving.

  • Key research notes:

    • Twin studies illustrate the nature-nurture interplay in personality and communication; identical twins show more similar communication styles than fraternal twins, suggesting genetic influences with environmental modulation.

    • The environment interacts with biology to shape communication behavior, with context (e.g., schooling, family income, opportunities) affecting expression of traits like aggression or prosocial behavior.

3.2 Personality and perception in interpersonal communication

  • Learning outcomes for 3.2:

    • Define and differentiate personality and temperament.

    • Explain common temperament types found in research and pop culture.

    • Categorize personality traits as cognitive dispositions or personal/social dispositions.

  • Relationship between self-concept and personality: other people’s judgments and communications influence self-view; personality and perception further shape communication.

  • Personality concept: a combination of traits or qualities (behavioral patterns, emotional stability, mental attributes) that make a person unique.

  • John Daly’s four general categories of personality:

    • Cognitive dispositions

    • Personal-social dispositions

    • Communicative dispositions

    • Relational dispositions

  • Nature vs. nurture and temperament discussion:

    • Historical roots: Francis Galton (1875) argued nature (genetics) is powerful; twin studies suggested strong genetic influence but did not fully separate nature/nurture due to shared upbringing.

    • Minnesota Twins Raised Apart (Boucard et al., late 1970s): separated twins studied to parse environment vs genetics; found many similarities across separated twins, emphasizing genetic components but not excluding environmental effects.

    • Twin research in communication (Horvath, 1995): identical twins’ communicator styles were more similar than fraternal twins, indicating genetic influence on communication style; many communication variables show genetic associations (affiliation, aggressiveness, etc.).

    • Environment and genetics interact: context (socioeconomic status, schooling, opportunities) shapes how traits and behaviors manifest; biology provides predispositions that environment can amplify or suppress.

  • Temperament vs. personality:

    • Temperament: innate, genetic predisposition to behave, react, and think in particular ways; observed in infancy;

    • Personality: develops through social environment and experiences; more influenced by life events and socialization.

  • Historical and current ideas about temperament:

    • Hippocrates’ four temperaments (classical root).

    • Jan Strelau’s distinctions between temperament and personality: five key differences (biological vs social basis; early vs later development; animal analogies; temperament as style; personality as content).

  • Keirsey Temperament Sorter (KTS) and Kretschmer’s four temperaments:

    • Keirsey blends Briggs-type indicators with Kretschmer’s four temperaments into a widely used four-type framework (often described as Artisan, Guardian, Idealist, Rational).

    • Numerous four-type models exist; no consistent sex differences found across these types.

  • The Big Five (five-factor model) and personality traits:

    • Five clusters:

    • Openness (to experience): curious, imaginative, creative vs. conventional, down-to-earth

    • Conscientiousness: careful, reliable, hardworking vs. negligent, disorganized

    • Extraversion: sociable, outgoing vs. reserved, solitary

    • Agreeableness: cooperative, good-natured vs. suspicious, critical

    • Neuroticism (emotional stability): anxious vs. calm; easily upset vs. emotionally stable

    • The Big Five model has grown from early work by Toups & Crystal (1950s–60s) and later Costa & McCrae; there are many trait adjectives and facet-level descriptions.

    • Mehta & Hicks (2018): mindfulness facets relate to the Big Five; findings:

    • Openness, Conscientiousness, Agreeableness, Extraversion positively relate to mindfulness.

    • Neuroticism negatively relates to mindfulness.

  • Cognitive dispositions (patterns of mental processing):

    • Locus of control: internal vs external locus of control;

    • Internal: belief that outcomes are the result of one’s own actions/choices.

    • External: belief that outcomes are due to luck, fate, or outside forces.

    • Cognitive complexity: number of distinct constructs used to describe others; differentiation, integration, and levels of abstraction.

    • Differentiation: ability to recognize many distinct nonverbal cues; high differentiation.

    • Integration: ability to see connections among differentiated cues; high integration.

    • Abstraction: ability to interpret communication cues at higher levels of generalization.

    • Implications: higher cognitive complexity predicts more nuanced impressions, better memory of impressions, resolving inconsistencies, learning complex social information, and multi-dimensional judgments.

    • Authoritarianism and dogmatism (W. R. Altemeyer; Christie & Guise):

    • Authoritarianism: preference for obedience to authority and submission to the powerful; defense of authority structures.

    • Dogmatism: inflexible belief in one correct point of view; resistance to evidence or debate.

    • Both traits produce rigid communication and resistance to differing viewpoints.

    • Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA): Altemeyer’s construct with three features:

    • Submit to traditional authorities

    • Strict adherence to norms

    • Aggression toward those who violate norms; negatively impacts interactions with nondominant or outgroup members.

  • Emotional intelligence (EI) and effective orientation (AO):

    • EI: ability to appraise and express emotions in oneself and others to enhance thought, living, and communication; four basic processes (Salovey & Mayer) – recognition, understanding, managing, and using emotions in decision-making and social interactions.

    • Effective Orientation (AO): degree to which people are aware of and consider their own and others’ emotions when deciding how to act; linked with higher affect intensity in relationships.

    • AO and parenting: higher AO in parents associated with more open communication with their children.

  • Personal-social dispositions (seven identified by John Daly):

    • Loneliness (emotional vs. social): emotional loneliness = lack of intimate connection; social loneliness = lack of satisfying social network.

    • Depression: a psychological disorder with sadness, hopelessness, and impaired functioning; negatively affects dating, friendships, family, and work.

    • Self-esteem: already covered; separate from self-compassion construct but interacts with personality.

    • Narcissism: inflated self-focus; lack of empathy for others; can be measured via conversational narcissism in interactions.

    • Conversational narcissism (Evangelisti, Knapp, Daly): four categories of behavior in conversations:

    • Inflate self-importance (bragging, avoiding criticism)

    • Topic intrusion/redirecting conversation toward self

    • Exhibitionism (displaying self to attract attention)

    • Impersonal relationships (lack of care for others in interaction)

    • Machiavellianism: manipulative tactic in interpersonal relations; measured by MAC-IV; high-Machiavellian individuals see others as means to an end; pragmatic and rational, often stealthy manipulation.

    • Empathy: ability to recognize and share others’ feelings; high empathy correlates with more satisfying interactions.

    • Self-monitoring (Snyder, 1974): degree to which individuals regulate their behavior to fit social contexts; high self-monitors adapt to contexts; low self-monitors act consistently across contexts.

    • High self-monitors: more meaningful relationships, faster relationship formation, more leadership opportunities, broader social networks.

    • Low self-monitors: deeper but fewer close friendships; more consistent behavior across contexts.

  • Summary of key takeaways for 3.2:

    • Personality and temperament are related but distinct: temperament is biological and present earlier; personality is shaped by environment and experiences.

    • Four broad personality categories (per Daly) plus the Big Five model provide frameworks for understanding how people differ in communication.

    • Cognitive dispositions shape how people process information and perceive others (locus of control, cognitive complexity, authoritarianism, dogmatism, EI).

    • Personal-social dispositions describe how people relate socially and emotionally (loneliness, depression, self-esteem, narcissism, Machiavellianism, empathy, self-monitoring).

    • Mindfulness relates to personality traits and social functioning, influencing self-regulation and relationships.

  • Connections to earlier chapters/foundations:

    • Intrapersonal processes underpin communication with others (3.1) and shape perceptions, biases, and communication effectiveness (3.2).

    • The looking-glass self and self-concept intersect with personality development and perceived social feedback, influencing how one engages in interpersonal communication.

  • Real-world relevance and ethical implications:

    • Understanding temperament and personality helps tailor communication to others and avoid miscommunications.

    • Awareness of RWA, dogmatism, Machiavellianism, and empathy can inform conflict resolution and ethical interactions.

    • Recognizing tendencies like conversational narcissism can improve relational satisfaction and collaborative work.

Formulas, numbers, and key constructs (LaTeX)

  • Five distinct categories of intrapersonal self-understanding: 5 categories (social group, ideological beliefs, personal interests, personal ambitions, self evaluations).

  • The Big Five model: $O$, $C$, $E$, $A$, $N$ represent Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, Neuroticism.

  • Three selves in Rogers’ concept: ext{Self-concept} = ( ext{Self-image}, ext{Self-worth}, ext{Ideal self})

  • Overlap concept for self-actualization: greater overlap among self-image, self-worth, and ideal self → higher likelihood of self-actualization.

  • Locus of control: internal vs external; expressed as two opposing constructs: ext{Locus}{internal} ightarrow ext{control of outcomes is internal} vs. ext{Locus}{external}
    ightarrow ext{outcomes determined by outer forces}

  • Cognitive complexity components: differentiation, integration, abstraction; high values in all indicate sophisticated social understanding.

  • Four basic Machiavellian traits (Christie & Guise): lack of effect in interpersonal relationships; relationships as means; lack of concern with conventional morality; rational views of others.

  • Four components of Salovey & Mayer’s emotional intelligence model: recognizing, using, understanding, and managing emotions (four processes).