Theories of Interpersonal Communication

Why This Matters

Every conversation you have—from awkward first meetings to deep talks with your closest friends—follows predictable patterns that communication scholars have mapped out for decades. These theories aren't just abstract ideas; they explain why you feel uncomfortable when someone stands too close, how relationships deepen over time, and what drives you to stalk someone's social media before meeting them. You're being tested on your ability to identify these mechanisms and apply them to real-world scenarios.

Don't just memorize theory names and definitions. Instead, understand what problem each theory solves: some explain relationship development, others focus on meaning-making, and still others examine how we interpret behavior. When you can categorize theories by their core function, you'll be ready for any compare-and-contrast question or scenario-based prompt the exam throws at you.

---

Relationship Development Theories

These theories answer a fundamental question: How do strangers become intimates? Each one identifies different mechanisms—self-disclosure, uncertainty, or reward calculations—that drive relationships forward or hold them back.

Social Penetration Theory

• Self-disclosure drives intimacy—relationships develop as people reveal increasingly personal information in layers, like peeling an onion from surface topics to core vulnerabilities
• Reciprocity is essential—when one person shares, the other must match that depth for the relationship to progress; one-sided disclosure stalls connection
• Depenetration explains relationship decline—the process can reverse, with partners withdrawing to more superficial layers during conflict or disengagement

Uncertainty Reduction Theory

• Uncertainty motivates communication—in initial interactions, we're driven to gather information about strangers to predict their behavior and reduce anxiety
• Three information-seeking strategies exist: passive (observing from a distance), active (asking others about them), and interactive (direct conversation)
• High uncertainty inhibits liking—the more unpredictable someone seems, the less comfortable we feel, which explains why we research people before dates or interviews

Social Exchange Theory

• Relationships operate on cost-benefit analysis—we pursue connections where rewards (companionship, support) outweigh costs (time, emotional labor)
• Comparison level (CL) sets your baseline—your expectations based on past relationships determine whether current rewards feel satisfying or disappointing
• Comparison level for alternatives (CLalt) predicts commitment—you'll stay in a relationship only if it beats your perceived alternatives, even if it's below your ideal

---

Expectation and Interpretation Theories

These theories examine how we make sense of others' behavior. They explain the mental processes behind our reactions—why the same action can feel flattering from one person and creepy from another.

Expectancy Violations Theory

• We hold implicit expectations for others' behavior based on social norms, relationship type, and context—especially regarding personal space and communication patterns
• Violations trigger evaluation—unexpected behavior forces us to assess the violator's reward valence (how much we value them) before deciding if the violation is positive or negative
• High-reward communicators get latitude—when someone attractive or powerful violates expectations, we often interpret it favorably; low-reward violators get judged harshly

Attribution Theory

• We constantly explain behavior—when someone acts, we automatically assign causes, categorizing them as internal/dispositional (their personality) or external/situational (their circumstances)
• Fundamental attribution error distorts judgment—we overattribute others' behavior to personality while excusing our own mistakes as situational ("They're lazy" vs. "I was tired")
• Self-serving bias protects ego—we claim credit for successes (internal) but blame failures on external factors, which creates conflict when others see it differently

Cognitive Dissonance Theory

• Conflicting cognitions create discomfort—when your beliefs, attitudes, or behaviors contradict each other, you experience psychological tension that demands resolution
• Three reduction strategies exist: change the belief, add new consonant information, or minimize the importance of the conflict
• Post-decision dissonance is common—after making choices, we convince ourselves we chose correctly by emphasizing positives and downplaying negatives

---

Meaning-Making Theories

These theories focus on how meaning is constructed through interaction. Rather than treating communication as simple information transfer, they emphasize that reality itself is created through symbols, language, and coordinated conversation.

Symbolic Interactionism

• Meaning emerges from interaction—objects, words, and gestures have no inherent meaning; we assign significance through social processes and shared understanding
• Self-concept is socially constructed—your identity develops through how others respond to you; you see yourself through the "looking glass" of social feedback
• Symbols enable complex thought—language allows us to imagine, plan, and take the perspective of others, making sophisticated communication possible

Coordinated Management of Meaning

• Communication creates social reality—we don't just exchange information; we actively construct the situations we're in through conversational choices
• Hierarchical meaning levels shape interpretation—episodes (what's happening now), relationships (who we are to each other), and life scripts (cultural narratives) all influence how we understand messages
• Coordination doesn't require agreement—people can interact smoothly while holding completely different interpretations of what's happening

---

Adaptation and Context Theories

These theories examine how we adjust communication based on who we're talking to and where. They highlight that effective communication isn't one-size-fits-all—we constantly modify our approach based on social dynamics.

Communication Accommodation Theory

• Convergence builds connection—we adapt speech patterns, accent, vocabulary, and nonverbal behavior to match our conversation partner, signaling affiliation and seeking approval
• Divergence asserts identity—sometimes we emphasize differences to maintain distinctiveness or express disapproval, especially when group identity feels threatened
• Over-accommodation backfires—excessive adjustment (like speaking loudly to elderly people who hear fine) can feel patronizing and damage rather than build rapport

Social Information Processing Theory

• Online relationships can match offline depth—despite lacking nonverbal cues, computer-mediated communication allows meaningful connections through adapted strategies
• Verbal cues replace nonverbal ones—in text-based communication, we use timing, emoji, word choice, and message length to convey what facial expressions would show in person
• Time is the key variable—online relationships develop more slowly because information exchange takes longer, but given enough time, they reach equivalent intimacy levels

---

Quick Reference Table

---

Self-Check Questions

1. Both Social Penetration Theory and Uncertainty Reduction Theory address early relationship stages—what specific mechanism does each one emphasize, and when would you apply each on an exam?

2. If someone receives a compliment from a stranger that feels creepy but the same compliment from a crush feels flattering, which theory best explains this difference, and what key concept is at work?

3. Compare and contrast Attribution Theory and Cognitive Dissonance Theory: How does each explain the mental processes involved when someone's behavior doesn't match your expectations?

4. A student adjusts their vocabulary when talking to professors versus friends. Which theory explains this, and what would we call it if they deliberately used more slang around professors to emphasize their student identity?

5. An FRQ asks you to explain how meaningful relationships can develop through text messaging despite the absence of nonverbal cues. Which theory provides your framework, and what is its central argument about time?