Chapter 35: Muted Group Theory

This theory deals with the relationship between women and language. It argues that the language of our culture is "man-made" and thus, is is not well-suited to be used in communication by women, who communicate differently from men. Because the language was not created by women, this theory argues, women are a "muted group" - unable to speak their minds except in terms defined by those who created the language (i.e. men). As a result of this, women have to "translate" into another language when they speak.

An example of this theory can be found in the fact that sports analogies are frequently used in our society. With sports largely being a male domain, these analogies are not created from more "feminine" terms and are not well-suited for use by female communicators.

Chapter 34: Standpoint Theory

This theory deals with the standpoints of different individuals in a society, and argues that one's position on the social hierarchy affects one's perceptions of reality. The theory also argues that groups that are more marginalized by society have more objective viewpoints than those in power. This is because those in power seek to maintain the status quo (as it is in their own interest), but those not in power are more aware of society's problems (because they affect them) and seek change in order to give themselves more power and take power away from those higher up in the hierarchy.

An example of this theory in action in the real world would be where one part of a country has a significant amount of institutionalized racism, while another region does not. Those in the region without the same level of racism may be unaware of what is occurring in the other part of the country and mistakenly believe that it is the same in that region. However, members of the race that is being discriminated against in the other region would be much more aware of what is going on and be better able to explain the situation than those not living in that region.

Chapter 33: Genderlect Styles

This theory deals with communication between men and women, and argues that because men and women communicate differently, communication between them is a form of cross-cultural communication. Much like certain regions of a country may have particular dialects, this theory argues that men and women have different "genderlects". The theory states that in male communication, men seek status through "report talk", and women seek conncection with others through "rapport talk" in their communications.

An example of genderlects in daily life would be a woman trying to tell a story of something that happened at her job to her husband. She may spend time discussing all of the social and emotional contexts surrounding the events in order to make the story more personal and establish a stronger connection between her husband and the events of the story, while her husband may feel anxious and impatient, wanting her to simply get to the point and tell him what actually happened.

Chapter 31: Face-Negotiation Theory

Face-Negotiation Theory deals with the kinds of conflict-management techniques people will use in a given culture. This is in large part affected by the concept of "face", which is a person,s public persona, and the way they want others to see them. People engage in "facework" to mainatain and repair face, as well as promote positive face. The type of conflict management strategies used depend on the type of culture (individualistic vs. collectivistic), a person's self-construal (independent or interdependent) and the type of face management strategy a person uses. In more collectivistic cultures, the face of others is more important, and vice versa for individualistic cultures.

An example of this would be the actions of Japanese kamikaze pilots during World War II. More concerned for their country than themselves, these pilots flew their planes into American ships in an attempt to sink them, sacrificing their own lives in the process. Such an action would likely not be taken by people from a more individualistic culture, such as the United States.

Chapter 30: Anxiety/Uncertainty Management Theory

Anxiety/Uncertainty Management Theory deals with intercultural communication, and how different cultural factors can influence how two people from different cultures interact when they encounter each other. The interaction between two people of different cultures depends on how different their respective cultures are in terms of four "dimensions" of culture. The first of these is power distance. Cultures with a low power distance see each person in society as being more equal, without much difference between the average person and a person in power. Cultures with a high power distance view those in power as being very seperate from those not in power. The second dimension of culture is a culture's level of "masculinity" or "femininity". More "masculine" cultures favor strong sex roles, and their values focus on money, success, and dominance. In more "feminine" cultures, sex roles are not strictly defined, and men and women are equally encouraged to participate in society. The third dimension of culture is the culture's level of uncertainty avoidance. This refers to the culture's tolerance or intolerance for uncertainty and how threatened its people feel by ambiguity. Finally, the fourth dimension of culture is individualism. This refers to whether the culture focuses more on the individual or the collective.

A real-world example of Anxiety/Uncertainty Management Theory would be a person traveling to a foreign country such as France or Germany, where the language contains more than one form of the word you - one for more formal interactions, and another for more informal interactions. The French "vous" and German "Sie" are the more formal forms of address, with "tu" and "du" as their informal counterparts. A person who is new to one of these two cultures may have difficulty knowing when to use each one, and this could create a significant amount of uncertainty in his or her interactions with people in those cultures.

Chapter 29: Spiral of Silence

The Spiral of Silence deals with people's fear to speak up in situations of public opinion. The theory states that people fear being isolated, and as a result of that fear, they are unlikely to voice their opinion if they believe they are in the minority. According to the theory, the farhter a person perceives their opinion to be from that of the majority, the less likely they are to speak out. The fear that one's opinion is in the minority can be compounded by the media if it presents only a limited range of opinions on a particular issue.

An example of the Spiral of Silence would be if a group of friends was trying to decide whether to see a movie or go bowling. Although there are seven people in the group, only three want to go bowling, but they are the first to speak up as well as the most vocal. The other four members may begin to believe they are in the minority even though they are not, and might be likely to keep silent about what they would prefer to do.

Chapter 28: Agenda-Setting Theory

Agenda-Setting Theory deals with the media and its effects on the public agenda and public discourse. There are two levels to this theory. The first level states that although the media may not tell us what to think, it does tell us what to think about. The media's decisions on what to cover can influence the public agenda; if people see a particular issue getting a lot of exposure in the media, they may view it as being more important than other issues. The second level of the theory revises the original theory and states that the media can have an effect on how people think. This can be done through "framing" - by presenting the story in a certain way, the media can affect how and what people think about an issue.

I saw an example of this while watching "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart" one time. Jon Stewart was discussing Fox News and their possible political bias, and was showing clips from the channel's reports. In the clips, the topic being discussed was written near the bottom of the screen, in a box directly above the "ticker". The topics that Jon Stewart was discussing were those that used a question mark; one in particular said "George Bush: The Greatest President Ever?" Jon Stewart's point was that by framing statements as questions, Fox News could say anything it wanted (and therefore set whatever agenda it wanted) while maintaining a kind of deniability by being able to say "We were just asking a question!" I thought this was an excellent example of how framing can be used to influence how people think about something.

Chapter 16: Cognitive Dissonance Theory

Cognitive Dissonance Theory holds that people experience discomfort when there is an inconsistency between their attitudes and their actions. This discomfort is known as "cognitive dissonance", and the theory states that people have an inherent need to avoid or alleviate this feeling. The level of dissonance a person experiences is directly proportional to the importance of the issue as well as the level of the discrepancy between the person's attitudes and behaviors.
To deal with cognitive dissonance, people can either change their behaviors or their attitudes; attitudes are easier to change.

As an example of this theory, a person might decide that he or she wants to save money rather than spending it. This person might set some kind of spending limit for a certain period, such as a month and decide that they will not go over that limit until they have saved what they wanted to save. However, as time goes on, the person might begin to go over the limit slightly at first, then gradually increasing their "overspending". As this person saw him or herself doing this, he or she would most likely try to rationalize the behavior by telling him or herself that it's only a slight overspending. Eventually, however, the monthly spending limit would most likely collapse. Rather than change the spending behavior, a person is more likely to change his or her attitude towards the spending behavior in order to justify it, ultimately leading him or her down a sort of slippery slope until the previously-established system is gone completely.

Chapter 15: Elaboration Likelihood Model

The Elaboration Likelihood Model deals with how people react to persuasive messages. According to the theory, people can react to persuasive messages in one of two ways, and the way they react affects what kind of change might occur in them. The first of these ways, known as the "central route", focuses on the content of the message. In the central route, a person examines the content of the message and carefully thinks about whatever issue it concerns. The second way a person can react to a persuasive message is to focus on aspects of the speaker moreso than the message itself. People using this method, called the "peripheral route", may focus more on the attitude, credibility, or likability of the speaker as opposed to the message itself. People use this method as a "shortcut" in order to think about a message without actually examining its contents.

Examples of this theory at work can be seen in the field of politics. A great deal of political advertising is used to present a good image of a particular candidate using graphics, music, and certain kinds of emotional appeals. These are examples of the peripheral route; the ads focus more on the person than on the message in the hopes that people using the peripheral route will vote in favor of the candidate in the ad.

Chapter 13: Constructivism

Constructivism is a theory that examines cognitive communication. The goal of this theory is to study the human mind, or, as researchers call it, the "black box". The main argument of this theory is that people make sense of the world through a set of constructs, and these constructs determine how a person will communicate.

A major aspect of this theory is the idea of "cognitive complexity", or the set of mental constructs a person has that enable him or her to more effectively read the subtle differences between different people. According to the theory, the more constructs a person has, the more cognitively complex they are in a given area. The focus of this theory is on personal constructs, which are constructs that humans use to view the world in terms of people.

An example of this theory at work could be when a person enters a classroom for the first time and does a quick visual survey of the class. The more cognitively complex a person is, the more constructs they will have for classifying the people in the classroom. They may start with the more obvious constructs-male vs. female, short vs. tall, etc. However, a more cognitively complex person will look a bit more closely and will most likely have a greater number of categories to place people in. In fact, they may have so many constructs that they find it difficult to easily categorize everyone in the class.

Chapter 11: Relational Dialectics

Relational Dialectics deals with human relationships. The major assumption that this theory operates under is that people always have three dialectical tensions in their relationships.

The first of these dialectic tensions is the "Integration-Separation" dialectic. Internally, this refers to the conflict between the people in the relationship between connectedness and separation. Externally, it refers to the conflict over how the people in the relationship will relate to others outside the relationship; will they be more inclusive of others, or will they keep themselves more secluded in their relationship?

The second dialectic is "Stability-Change". Internally, this refers to the levels of certainty and uncertainty between the two people in the relationship. Externally, it refers to what the relationship is like in relation to other peoples' relationships, i.e. its level of conventionality versus its level of uniqueness.

The third dialectic is "Expression-Nonexpression". Internally, this refers to how open or closed the people in the relationship are to each other. Externally, it refers to how much information the people in the relationship reveal to people outside the relationship.

I once overheard a girl on her cell phone talking to one of her friends about her boyfriend's apparent lack of openness. She also seemed concerned that he didn't feel as close to her as she did to him. This girl's concerns illustrated the Expression-Nonexpression and Integration-Separation dialectics, respectively.

Chapter 10: Social Information Processing Theory

Social Information Processing Theory largely deals with the concept of online relationships, and how people interact with each other via computer-mediated communication. It discusses how people gather information about someone they are meeting for the first time. In person, people use nonverbal cues, like appearance, how a person carries him or herself, and his or her facial expressions. However, when interacting online, nonverbal cues are not present, as we cannot see the person we are interacting with. Because of this, people seek information they might otherwise get nonverbally through verbal means.

A debate that this theory raises is whether or not relationships that develop online are the same as relationships that develop in person, and there are arguments for both sides. I believe that this issue should be looked at on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the nature of the relationship in question and what the people involved expect from the relationship. It is possible that two people might develop a friendship by playing online games together, but might also wish to keep the relationship in that context and not meet in person. At the same time, two people might meet online and develop a more intimate relationship, which would lead to them wanting to meet. In both instances, the relationship is "real", even if these two example relationships exist on different levels. I don't believe that there is a concrete rule that can be applied to these situations, and that they should be examined and judged on their own.

Chapter 8: Social Penetration Theory

Social Penetration Theory largely deals with self-disclosure, and the levels of information that people are generally willing to expose to different people depending on the relationship they have with them. In fact, one of the main concepts of the theory is that self-disclosure is the deciding factor in how close a person wishes to be to someone else. The idea is that there are many layers to a person's personality, and some are more easily shared, while there are others that a person is only willing to expose to a select few, usually those whom they are very close to. An example of this theory at work in the real world would occur if, when meeting someone for the first time, he or she began to ask you very personal questions about things like your relationships, secrets, religion, or career goals. These are things that people generally keep very closely guarded, and having someone whom you don't feel very close to and probably don't fully trust asking you these questions can make you very defensive and suspicious of them.

Chapter 6: Expectancy Violations Theory

Expectancy Violations Theory deals with the ideas people have about how other people are supposed to behave in certain situations, and how they evaluate and deal with people who break those social norms. How people deal with these violations is based on the context of the violation, the relationship of the person making the violation to the person receiving the violation, and the individual characteristics of the person making the violation. A real-world example of this theory would be if a person were sitting in an empty movie theater, waiting for the show to begin, when a stranger enters the theater and immediately sits down in the seat right next to him or her. Our expectations of behavior tell us that, with so many other seats available, the stranger should not intrude upon our space unnecessarily by sitting down right next to us, and so the first person in this example would definitely feel violated. The person would then try to evaluate what this violation means, and try to determine if it is good or bad. This can be influenced by the individual characteristics of the stranger - if the stranger is someone the first person finds attractive, for instance, he or she might be more likely to interpret the violation more positively, or at least be more tolerant of it than if the stranger were someone the first person found unattractive or even dangerous-looking.