1
Chapter 12: Communication Privacy Management Theory
West, Introducing Communication Theory, 6e
Chapter 12
Communication Privacy Management Theory
Chapter Outline
I. Introduction
• Sandra Petronio (2002) states that Communication Privacy Management (CPM) is a
practical theory designed to explain the “everyday” issue of deciding whether to tell
someone what they are thinking.
• Deciding what to reveal and what to keep confidential is not a straightforward decision; it
is a continual balancing act.
• CPM differs from many theories presented in this text because it is relatively recent. This
recency is notable for two reasons.
o First, it is exciting because it indicates the currency of thought in the communication
discipline.
o Second, and related to the excitement generated by its recency, is the fact that CPM
grows specifically from a focus on communication. This also shows the maturing and
growth of the field of communication.
II. Evolution of Communication Privacy Management Theory
• Over 30 years ago, Petronio and her colleagues published some studies outlining principles
that would eventually become part of CPM (e.g., Petronio and Martin, 1986; Petronio,
Martin, and Littlefield, 1984).
o In these studies, the researchers were interested in how people decided on the rules
guiding their disclosure behavior.
o They noted that men and women have different criteria for judging when to be open
and when to stay silent. These criteria lead to differing rules for men and women on
work then differed from her later (Petronio, 2002) conceptualization in two ways.
o First, the theory had more limited boundaries in 1991.
2
Chapter 12: Communication Privacy Management Theory
West, Introducing Communication Theory, 6e
▪ At that time, Petronio referred to it as a microtheory because its boundaries
were confined to privacy management within a marital dyad.
▪ Petronio now refers to CPM as a macrotheory because its boundaries include
a large variety of interpersonal relationships, including groups and
organizations.
Management Theory.
III. Assumptions of CPM
• Communication Privacy Management Theory is rooted in assumptions about how
individuals think and communicate as well as assumptions about the nature of human
beings.
• CPM makes the following three assumptions about human nature that are congruent with
rules and systems:
use in their daily lives” (p. 2). That is, the principles of change and contradiction function
prominently in people’s lives and their needs for autonomy and sociability influence their
privacy decisions.
IV. Key Terms and Principles of CPM
• CPM is concerned with explaining people’s negotiation processes around disclosing
private information.
o Petronio (2000) commented that people define private information as information
about things that matter deeply to them.
o The process of communicating private information in relationships with others
becomes private disclosures.
• CPM views the definition differently in three ways:
o Private disclosure puts more emphasis on the personal content of the disclosure than
does traditional self-disclosure literature.
o CPM examines how people disclose through a rule-based system.
3
Chapter 12: Communication Privacy Management Theory
West, Introducing Communication Theory, 6e
o CPM does not consider that disclosures are only about the self.
• As Petronio (2002) observes, “[T]o fully understand the depth and breadth of a disclosure,
CPM does not restrict the process to only the self, but extends it to embrace multiple levels
of disclosure including self and group (p. 3). She is clear in noting that “disclosure, as a
concept, is defined as more dynamic than consigning it to only the self. CPM also
recognizes that people can give permission to access their private information without
disclosing (Petronio, 2016, p. 5).
• Communication Privacy Management Theory accomplishes this by proposing five,
interrelated, principles: private information ownership, private information control, private
information rules, private information co-ownership and guardianship, and private
information boundary turbulence.
A. Principle 1: Private Information Ownership
• The first principle asserts that people believe they “own” information about themselves,
and they can manage it however they want.
• As Sandra Petronio (2010) notes this belief in ownership is a perception, and as such,
may not always be factual.
B. Principle 2: Private Information Control
• The second principle of CPM builds on the first. The logic of these two principles is as
follows: Because I “own” the private information about me, I can choose how I want to
control that information.
• Petronio (2010) notes that the level of control may range from high to moderate to low.
• This principle introduces the concept of private boundaries. CPM relies on the
role in how boundaries are drawn.
C. Principle 3: Private Information Rules
• This principle asserts that people make decisions about controlling the private
information they own based on rules.
• Rule development is guided by people’s decision criteria for revealing or concealing
private information.
4
Chapter 12: Communication Privacy Management Theory
West, Introducing Communication Theory, 6e
• CPM Theory (Petronio, 2013; 2015) states that two criteria are used for developing
privacy rules. Two types of criteria are used to determine whether or not to allow
another person access to information: core and catalyst.
o Petronio (2015) defines core criteria as those that are “more resilient and often
function in the background” (p. 3) and catalyst criteria as opportunities when
“privacy rules have to be responsive to needed change” (p. 3).
• The decision criteria help explain the process of rule development, which is one element
of privacy rules. The second aspect of privacy rules concerns privacy rule attributes,
which refer to the ways people acquire rules and the properties of the rules.
D. Principle 4: Private Information Co-ownership and Guardianship
• When private information is shared, the boundary around it is called a collective
boundary, and the information is not only about the self; it belongs to the relationship.
• When private information remains with an individual and is not disclosed, the boundary
is called a personal boundary.
• An important element of this principle is boundary coordination, which refers to how
information that is co-owned is managed.
o Boundary linkage refers to the connections that form boundary alliances between
people.
o Boundary ownership refers to rights and privileges accruing to co-owners of
private information.
o Boundary permeability refers to how much information is able to pass through
▪ When access is open, people have thin boundaries in place.
E. Principle 5: Private Information Boundary Turbulence
• Boundary turbulence exists when the rules of boundary coordination are unclear or
when people’s expectations for privacy management come into conflict with one
another.
• CPM Theory asserts that when individuals experience boundary turbulence, they will
try to make adjustments so that they can reduce the turbulence and achieve
coordination.
• Boundary turbulence can occur for a number of different reasons.
o In some cases, the turbulence results from what Petronio (2010) calls “fuzzy
boundaries” by which she means that the boundaries are ambiguous.
5
Chapter 12: Communication Privacy Management Theory
West, Introducing Communication Theory, 6e
o In any event, turbulence will ensue when “expectations for privacy management
are unfulfilled” (Petronio, 2010, p. 182).
V. Integration, Critique, and Closing
• Communication Privacy Management Theory has enjoyed significant attention from
scholars in communication as well as from those in other disciplines.
• The theory appears to resonate because its boundaries and boundary rules guide all sorts of
behaviors in all types of relationships.
A. Logical Consistency
• Some critics have observed that CPM uses the term dialectic inaccurately, claiming to
be dialectic in nature when it’s really based on dualistic thinking.
• Petronio (2002) responds to this criticism by noting that perhaps the accusation of
dualistic thinking comes from the use of the terms balance and equilibrium in the early
original]). Thus, Petronio argues that it is legitimate to call CPM Theory dialectical in
nature.
B. Utility
• Communication Privacy Management Theory has much promise of utility.
• It offers an explanation for the delicate process of coordination disclosing and
concealing that people perform continually in their relationships with others.
C. Heurism
• Communication Privacy Management Theory demonstrates heurism because it has been
utilized as a framework in a variety of situations, including romantic relationships (e.g.,
Nichols, 2012), military families (Owlett, Richards, Wilson, DeFreese, and Roberts,
2015), academic advising (e.g., Thompson, Petronio, and Braithwaite, 2012), and health
care (e.g., Romo, 2012; Petronio and Sargent, 2011).
• One promising and exciting area where CPM has been investigated is with blogging and
Facebook. Jeff Child (e.g., Child and Petronio, 2011; Child and Starcher, 2016; Child
and Westerman, 2013; Child, Petronio, Agyeman-Budu, and Westerman, 2011) has
6
Chapter 12: Communication Privacy Management Theory
West, Introducing Communication Theory, 6e
been in the forefront of scholars who have explored notions of privacy and how it
relates to online experiences.
Classroom Activities
1. Boundary Role-Play
Objective: The objective is to illustrate the fourth principle of CPM, allowing students to
clarify the concepts of personal and collective boundaries.
Materials: Figure 12.2
Directions: Divide the class into dyadic groups, and assign each dyad a specific
relationship (mother-son, friend-friend, romantic couple, long-term married couple, etc.).
information creates a collective boundary, while the withheld information creates a
personal boundary. Encourage the students to consider how the ratio of the collective
boundary to the personal boundary affects the relationship and vice versa.
2. Examining Privacy Rule Characteristics
Objective: The objective is to increase students awareness of privacy rule management
processes and to help them understand the relationship of the rules metatheory to CPM.
Materials: “Privacy Rule Characteristics” worksheet (see below)
Directions: Read the following scenario to students:
Michael and Antonio are good friends who spend a lot of time together. They both like
watching football on Sunday afternoons and playing tennis doubles together against their
friends, Tom and Ron. They have the same taste in food, and they both like to camp. They
have been friends for five years, but Michael has never told Antonio that he is adopted. It
seems strange to Michael that he has never mentioned it to Antonio, because his family has
always been pretty open about the topic. Somehow, it has just never come up between the
two of them. Lately, he has started to wonder why he never has disclosed this personal fact
to his friend, and he’s wondering how it would affect the relationship if he told Antonio
7
Chapter 12: Communication Privacy Management Theory
now.
Distribute the “Privacy Rule Characteristics” worksheet (see below), and instruct the
students to fill it out individually. Then, have the students discuss how the elements of this
theory will help them to predict Michael’s decision to tell Antonio or not.
Privacy Rule Characteristics
Michael’s Rule Development Decision Criteria