test 2 questions - Question #1 (FACTS COLLECTED) As we...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–4. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Question #1 (FACTS COLLECTED) 20:03 As we discussed in class, Sue and Joe’s relationship began with a long  conversation at a party.  Their nonverbal liking behaviors changed during that  conversation.  How would uncertainty reduction theory explain that change? (4  points)  How would expectancy violations theory explain that change? (4 points)  How do the fundamental explanatory bases for these two theories differ? (2  points)  How would uncertainty reduction theory explain the change?  Information seeking decreases Basic information about other person obtained so you can progress in conversation Reciprocity of speaking turns decreases Less formal passing back and forth of conversation, one person can hold floor for longer Naïve Scientist Metaphor Product of Gestalt psychological tradition We have need to understand the world (reduce uncertainty about it) We form implicit theories to summarize our understandings Serves functions of description, prediction, explanation, and control Seven Axioms of Uncertainty Reduction Theory – Berger Amount of communication (negative relationship with uncertainty)  (-) As one goes up, other goes down and vice versa Amount of liking behaviors (negative relationship with uncertainty)  (-) As one goes up, other goes down and vice versa Information seeking (positive relationship with uncertainty)  (+) As one goes up, other goes up and vice versa
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Content intimacy (negative relationship with uncertainty)  (-) As one goes up, other goes down and vice versa Turn reciprocity (positive relationship with uncertainty)  (+) As one goes up, other goes up and vice versa Similarity (negative relationship with uncertainty)  (-) As one goes up, other goes down and vice versa Liking (negative relationship with uncertainty)  (-) As one goes up, other goes down and vice versa Fewer interruptions with less uncertainty so interaction runs more smoothly These axioms can be applied to each other  A=B, B=C, then A=C (transitive property applies) Multiplicative properties Ex. Positive x positive = positive Ex. Negative x negative = positive How would expectancy violations theory explain the change? 4 zones of distance Intimate – 0 to 18 inches Ex. People who are very close to one another relationally Personal – 18 inches to 4 feet Ex. Conversationalists who are comfortable with each other
Background image of page 2
Social – 4 feet to 12 feet Ex. Slightly less formal situation Public – more than 12 feet Ex. Giving a lecture Closer implies liking Posture Indicators of liking – forward lean, open arms and legs, direct body orientation Eye Gaze Eye contact rare Gaze toward those we attend to, both liked and disliked, and those in power
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 4
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 03/19/2012 for the course COMM 341 taught by Professor Johnson during the Fall '11 term at University of Delaware.

Page1 / 19

test 2 questions - Question #1 (FACTS COLLECTED) As we...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 4. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online