Unlock document.
This document is partially blurred.
Unlock all pages and 1 million more documents.
Get Access
1
Chapter 11: Relational Dialectics Theory
West, Introducing Communication Theory, 6e
Chapter 11
Relational Dialectics Theory
Chapter Outline
I. Introduction
• Relational Dialectics Theory (RDT) maintains that relational life is characterized by
ongoing tensions between contradictory impulses (Baxter and Norwood, 2016).
• People are not always able to resolve the contradictory elements of their beliefs, and they
can hold inconsistent beliefs about relationships.
• Leslie Baxter and Barbara Montgomery (1996) formulated the most complete statement of
the theory in their book Relating: Dialogues and Dialectics, although both of them had
been writing about dialectical thinking for several years prior to that book’s publication.
• Baxter and Montgomery’s work was directly influenced by Mikhail Bakhtin, a Russian
philosopher who developed a theory of personal dialogue. From Bakhtin’s thinking, Baxter
and Montgomery (1996) shaped the notion of the dialectical vision. One can best explain
this vision of human behavior by contrasting it to two other common approaches:
o The monologic approach pictures contradictions as either/or relationships. For
instance, monologic thinking would lead to the belief whether a relationship is either
close or distant.
o The dualistic approach sees the two parts of a contradiction as two separate entities,
somewhat unrelated to each other.
• Alternatively, thinkers with a dialectic approach maintain that multiple points of view
play off one another in every contradiction. Although a contradiction involves two
opposing poles, the resulting situation expands beyond these two poles.
• A simple way of putting it is that dialectic thinking substitutes both/and for either/or,
recognizing that people want multiple (and often contradictory) goals in their relational
lives. Thus, in RDT, there are often more than two different elements involved in a
relational situation (Baxter and Scharp, 2016).
II. Assumptions of Relational Dialectics Theory
• RDT is grounded in four main assumptions that reflect its contentions about relational life:
o Relationships are not linear.
o Relational life is characterized by change.
2
Chapter 11: Relational Dialectics Theory
o Contradiction is the fundamental fact of relational life.
o Communication is central to organizing and negotiating relational contradictions.
• The most significant assumption that grounds this theory is the notion that relationships do
not progress in a linear fashion. Rather, relationships consist of oscillation between
contradictory desires. In fact, Baxter and Montgomery (1996) suggest that people should
rethink their language and their metaphors about relationships. They note that the phrase
relational development connotes some linear movement or forward progress, when, in fact,
relationships do not steadily move in one direction.
• The second assumption of RDT promotes the notion of process or change, although not
necessarily framing this change as linear progress. Baxter and Montgomery observe that
“relationship process or change . . . refers to quantitative and qualitative movement through
time in the underlying contractions around which a relationship is organized” (1996, p. 52).
• The contradictions or tensions between opposites never go away and never cease to
provide tension, the third assumption of RDT. The push and pull represented by dialectic
2011).
• The final assumption of RDT pertains to communication. Specifically, this theory gives a
central position to communication. It is through communication practices that people
achieve dialectical unity, or the way in which people are able to make contradictions feel
7).
• Contradiction refers to oppositions—two elements that contradict each other.
o As such, contradiction is the central feature of the dialectic approach. Dialectics are
the result of oppositions.
• Motion refers to the processual nature of relationships and their change over time.
3
Chapter 11: Relational Dialectics Theory
• Praxis means that humans are choice makers.
o Although people do not have completely free choice in all instances and are
restricted by their previous choices, by the choices of others, and by cultural and
social conditions, they are still conscious and active choice makers.
IV. Basic Relational Dialectics
A. Autonomy and Connection
• The dialectic between autonomy and connection refers to people’s simultaneous
desires to be independent of their significant others and to find intimacy with them.
• Seeing both autonomy and closeness as constants in relational life is a hallmark of RDT,
which makes it unique from many other theories of communication in relationships.
• Dialectic theory holds that contradictions are inherent in all relationships and that the
dynamic interplay between autonomy and closeness is important to understanding a
relationship.
B. Openness and Protection
• The openness and protection dialectic focuses on people’s conflicting desires first to
be open and vulnerable, revealing personal information to their relational partners, and
second to be strategic and protective in their communication.
• The dialectic position features both with respect to candor and concealment.
• Angela Hoppe-Nagao and Stella Ting-Toomey (2002) found six ways that married
couples manage the tension between openness and closedness: (1) topic selection, (2)
time alternation, (3) withdrawal, (4) probing, (5) antisocial strategies, and (6) deception.
C. Novelty and Predictability
• The dialectic between novelty and predictability refers to the conflict between the
comfort of stability and the excitement of change.
• The dialectic position sees the interplay of certainty and uncertainty in relationships.
D. Contextual Dialectics
• Interactional dialectics are located within the relationship itself—they are part of the
4
Chapter 11: Relational Dialectics Theory
West, Introducing Communication Theory, 6e
of the relationship in the culture.
• Rawlins discusses two contextual dialectics—between the public and the private and
between the real and the ideal. Although perhaps a little less important than interactional
dialectics, these two do affect interpersonal communication in relationships. The public
and private dialectic refers to the tension between the two domains: a private
relationship and public life.
• Lillian Rubin (1998) makes the same observation, noting that public expectations favor
kin relationships over friendships even when individuals may value their friends more
highly than their kin.
• Rawlins (1992) argues that tension arises in a close friendship between this marginal
public status and the friendship’s deep private character. Rawlins states that this
dialectic results in friendships (and by implication, other unsanctioned relationships)
acting with what he calls double agency.
• Rawlins observes that sometimes the public functions constrain the private ones.
• The tension of the real and ideal dialectic is featured when people think of old family
sitcoms (1950s/60s), such as Leave It to Beaver. They receive an idealized message of
what family life is like in televised families and then when they look at the families they
live in, they have to contend with the troublesome realities of family life.
o In addition, this dialectic contrasts all the expectations one has of a relationship with
its lived realities. Generally, expectations about relationships are lofty and idealized.
• Cultural and contextual factors influence these two dialectics. In cultures where friends
are elevated to the status of family (e.g., some Middle Eastern cultures), the tension will
be experienced quite differently than in Rawlins’s description, if it is felt at all.
V. Beyond Basic Dialectics
satisfaction versus dissatisfaction with their appearance and acceptance or rejection
of race-based “otherness.” Rawlins (1992) found no evidence of the novelty–
predictability dialectic in his study.
5
Chapter 11: Relational Dialectics Theory
West, Introducing Communication Theory, 6e
▪ Instead, he found a dialectic focusing on the tensions between judgment and
acceptance. This dialectic emerges in the tension between judging a friend’s
behaviors and simply accepting them.
o In studying friendships in the workplace, Ted Zorn (1995) found the three main
dialectics, but he also found some additional tensions that were specific to the
workplace context.
• Julie Apker, Kathleen Propp, and Wendy Zabava Ford (2005) note that the workplace is a
relatively unexplored context for applying RDT. When they studied nurses working in
health care team interactions, they found several dialectics related to how the nurses
negotiated their status and identity. They called these role dialectics because they spoke to
the tensions nurses experienced relative to being both equal to and subordinate to the
physicians on the health care team.
• In examining people’s participation in a community theater group, Michael Kramer (2004)
advanced 11 dialectic tensions ranging from commitment to group and commitment to
2005) examined issues of illness and death in the context of the family and also uncovered
additional dialectics.
• They noted that parents experiencing a premature birth experienced the contradictory
emotions of joy and grief and needed to find communication strategies for managing this
contradiction.
• A study in stepfamilies’ communication (Baxter, Braithwaite, Bryant, and Wagner, 2004)
found the dialectic of one parent versus two parents in authority to be important to
children. The children experience a tension between wanting their biological parent to have
all the authority and wanting their stepparent to share authority with their biological parent.
Also in the context of stepfamilies, other researchers (Braithwaite, Toller, Daas, Durham,
and Jones, 2008) found children voicing the dialectic of control and restraint.
VI. Responses to Dialectics
• Although the dialectic tensions are ongoing, people do make efforts to manage them.
Baxter (1988) identifies four specific strategies for this purpose: cyclic alternation,
segmentation, selection, and integration.
o Cyclic alternation occurs when people choose one of the opposites to feature at
particular times, alternating with the other. For instance, when sisters are very young,
they may be inseparable, highlighting the closeness pole of the dialectic. As
6
Chapter 11: Relational Dialectics Theory
West, Introducing Communication Theory, 6e
adolescents, they may favor autonomy in their relationship, seeking separate
identities. As adults, when they are perhaps living in the same town, they may favor
closeness again.
o Segmentation involves isolating separate arenas for emphasizing each of the
opposites. For example, a husband and wife who work together in a family business
might stress predictability in their working relationship and novelty for times they are
at home.
o The third strategy, selection, refers to making a choice between the opposites. A
couple who choose to be close at all times, ignoring their needs for autonomy, use
selection.
o Finally, integration involves some kind of synthesis of the opposites. Integration can
take three forms: neutralizing, disqualifying, or reframing the polarities.
▪ Neutralizing involves compromising between the polarities. People who
choose this strategy try to find a happy medium between the opposites.
▪ Disqualifying neutralizes the dialectics by exempting certain issues from the
general pattern. A family might be very open in their communication in general
yet have a few taboo topics that are not discussed at all, such as sex and
finances.
▪ Reframing refers to transforming the dialectic in some way so that it no longer
seems to contain an opposition.
• Baxter and Montgomery (1996) review these and other techniques for dealing with
dialectical tensions. They argue that any techniques that people use share three
characteristics: They are improvisational, they are affected by time, and they are possibly
complicated by unintended consequences.
o Improvisational, according to Baxter and Montgomery, means that whatever people
do to deal with a particular tension of relational life, they do not alter the ongoing
nature of the tension.
o The aspect of time refers to the notion that, when dealing with dialectics,
communication choices made by relational partners are affected by the past, enacted
enough novelty in their relationship.
VII. Integration, Critique, and Closing
Chapter 11: Relational Dialectics Theory
West, Introducing Communication Theory, 6e
• Dialectical process thinking adds a great deal to people’s explanatory framework for
relational life.
o First, they can think specifically about issues around which relational partners
construct meaning.
o Communication context: Interpersonal
o Approach to knowing: Interpretive
A. Parsimony
• With respect to parsimony, some researchers question whether the dialectics of
autonomy and connection, openness and protection, and novelty and predictability are
the only dialectics in all relationships.
• In some ways, the original conception of RDT may have been too parsimonious in only
listing three basic dialectics.
• Endless lists of new dialectic tensions make the theory problematic.
o However, it’s possible that some of these newer tensions may enable RDT to
explain relational life in a more complete manner, eschewing the need for a
parsimonious model.
B. Utility
• Perhaps the most positive appeal of the theory is that it seems to explain the push and
straight-line pattern. Instead, they often seem to be both/and as people live
through them.
C. Heurism
8
Chapter 11: Relational Dialectics Theory
West, Introducing Communication Theory, 6e
• Leslie Baxter (2006) observed, the most important criterion for a theory like RDT is
heurism because the theory’s goal is to shed light on the “complex and indeterminate
(O’Boyle, 2014), nonvoluntary family relationships (Carr and Wang, 2012), among
others.
Classroom Activities
1. Managing Dialectical Tensions
Objective: The objective is to have students role-play the various methods of managing
dialectical tensions. In doing so, students will become more cognizant of the potential
benefits of employing various management strategies in various communication situations.
Materials: Video cameras with videotapes (optional) and index cards with strategies for
managing dialectical tensions written on them
Directions:
If video cameras are available, follow the steps mentioned below:
If video cameras are not available and you have a limited amount of time:
g. Divide the students into six groups.
h. Write the name of each strategy on an index card.
i. Have each group draw a strategy card, and create a 1–2 minute role-play depicting
the chosen strategy.
j. Ask groups to perform their role-plays for the class, and have students identify the
Copyright © 2018 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior
written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Copyright © 2018 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior
written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
b. Ask students to generate a list of new dialectical tensions. Instruct them to consider
the tensions that arise in various contexts such as the workplace and the classroom.
c. Share the new tensions as a class. Play “devil’s advocate” and ask students to
consider whether their “new” tensions could fit into any of the existing dialectics.
4. Relational Dialectics on The Simpsons
Objective: The objective is to help students visualize and apply the dialectical concepts of
RDT. (Note: This activity can be used to review the concepts from both this theory and
Social Exchange Theory.)
Materials: Episode 4F04 of The Simpsons, “A Milhouse Divided” (from Season Eight).
Directions:
a. Briefly review the theory’s major concepts, and ask students to look for examples of
these concepts as well as any behaviors that seem inconsistent with the theory while
contradictory to the theory’s assumptions? (e.g., Do we see evidence of the
assumption that relational life is characterized by change?)
• Do we see any evidence of dialectics operating in the relationships between the
characters in this episode? (e.g., Homer/Marge: novelty/predictability,
real/ideal, autonomy/connection; Kirk/LuAnn: novelty/predictability, etc.)
• How do the characters experience dialectic-related conflicts, and how do they
attempt to manage them? (e.g., Marge wants to throw a dinner party to increase
novelty and move closer to her image of an ideal married life; fearing his
marriage is in trouble, Homer tries to increase the connection and novelty in his
marriage by surprising Marge with event tickets and a new hairstyle; LuAnn
seems thrilled by the novelty she is now getting from her new relationship after
feeling like her marriage had been in a rut, etc.)
• Are any other concepts from the theory evident in this episode? (e.g., motion,
praxis and other elements of dialectics, the responses to dialectic tensions, etc.)
Are there any other possible dialectics that could be operating that have not yet
been established in the literature?
11
Chapter 11: Relational Dialectics Theory
West, Introducing Communication Theory, 6e
“Identifying the Tensions” Worksheet
Directions: For each of the categories listed below, identify one or two dialectical tensions
that you have experienced. If possible, indicate which strategy you feel is/would be the
most effective for managing these tensions.
Tensions Experienced
Management Strategy
With your
parents
In your
workplace
At school
12
Chapter 11: Relational Dialectics Theory
West, Introducing Communication Theory, 6e
With your
friends
