Instructor Resource
Dainton, Applying Communication Theory for Professional Life 4e
SAGE Publishing, 2018
Lecture Notes
Chapter 3: Cognition and Intrapersonal Communication
Learning Objectives
After reading this chapter, you will be able to . . .
2. Identify types of, conditions, and communicative strategies for reducing uncertainty
4. Explain how, by increasing or decreasing the magnitude of dissonance between beliefs
and behaviors, one can influence or prevent change
6. Provide systematic understanding of a professional situation by employing theories of
intrapersonal communication
Summary
Chapter 3 examines theories of intrapersonal communication by first providing a link to the field
of psychology. Four theories are included in the chapter: attribution theory, uncertainty reduction
theory, expectancy violations theory, and cognitive dissonance theory. Attribution theory
examines the cognitive process each person partakes to understand the behaviors of others.
Uncertainty reduction theory assumes there is one contributing motivation to communication and
Outline
I. Cognitive Process
A. At the beginning of the 1900s, American psychology was dominated by a focus on
behaviorism (Runes, 1984)
1. Focus on external cause and behavioral effect
2. Watson and Skinner argued that because we cannot observe mental processes, we
should focus only on these causes and effects (Runes, 1984)
B. In the mid-1900s, psychologists moved toward a cognitive approach
2. Cognition includes processes of reducing, elaborating, transforming, and storing
stimuli
II. Attribution Theory
A. Attributions as naïve psychology
1. Attribution theory explains the cognitive process one uses when trying to make
2. Heider (1958) argues inferences are the assumptions individuals make regarding
the causes of behavior as well as the judgments made about who is responsible for
that behavior
a. Heider identified two major categories of attributions
i. Dispositional factors—the internal or personal features of a person, such
B. Correspondent inference theory
1. Jones and Davis expanded upon Heider’s work arguing that when a perceiver
2. Determining the intentionality of an act is not easy; however, there are several
factors one can consider when determining the purpose of another’s behavior:
a. Choice—does the person have any alternatives?
b. Social desirability—does the person attempt to match social conventions?
3. While each of these factors can aid in assessing an actor’s intentions, relying on
any may lead to biased judgments of an actor’s disposition.
C. Kelley’s covariation model
1. The most holistic approach to attributions to demonstrate the causality between
behavior and attributions by examining four factors
a. Consensus—would other people react similarly if placed in the same
situation?
b. Consistency—would the person engage in similar behaviors over time?
c. Distinctiveness—does the person act differently depending on the situation?
2. Examining these three factors together, the perceiver can determine the
controllability of the actor’s behavior
III. Uncertainty Reduction Theory
A. Berger and Calabrese’s (1975) uncertainty reduction theory (URT) holds that social
life is filled with ambiguities. Guided by several assumptions and axioms of human
behavior, URT seeks to explain and predict when, why, and how individuals use
communication to minimize their doubts when interacting with others
1. Three assumptions guide the uncertainty reduction framework
a. Berger and Calabrese (1975) maintained that the primary goal of
c. Communication is the primary vehicle for reducing uncertainty
B. Reducing uncertainty
1. There are three antecedent conditions that influence whether people have the
motivation necessary to reduce their uncertainty
a. Anticipation of future interaction suggests that you are more motivated to
reduce uncertainty about someone who you are likely to see again
b. Incentive value includes the notion that you are prompted to learn more about
C. Types of uncertainty
1. Behavioral uncertainty considers your insecurity about which actions are
appropriate in each situation
2. Cognitive uncertainty is being unsure as to what to think about someone or
D. Axioms explaining the uncertainty reduction process
1. Axiom 1: As your verbal communication with a communication partner increases,
3. Axiom 3: The greater your uncertainty, the more information-seeking behaviors
you use. Conversely, as your uncertainty lessens, you seek less information
4. Axiom 4: When uncertainty in a relationship is high, the intimacy level of
communication content will be low. On the other hand, the reduction of
6. Axiom 6: The more similarities you perceive to share with the target person(s),
7. Axiom 7: As uncertainty decreases, liking increases. Conversely, if your
uncertainty rises, your liking of the person will decrease
E. Uncertainty reduction strategies
2. Berger (1995, 1997) note that much of social interaction is goal-driven. We
communicate for a reason and we create plans to guide interaction
a. Individuals who use the passive strategy observe their surroundings and
surreptitiously gather clues about which behaviors are appropriate as well as
F. Beyond initial interactions
1. Uncertainty exists in new and developing relationships, as well as in long-term,
ongoing relationships
2. Individuals in ongoing interpersonal relationships also experience uncertainty, in
part because relationships themselves are characterized by change and growth,
both of which promote the rise of uncertainty
IV. Expectancy Violations Theory
A. Expectancy violations theory (EVT) explains the various meanings that people
attribute to the violation, or infringement, of their personal space
2. EVT makes predictions as to how individuals will react to a given violation
C. Core concepts of EVT
1. Expectancy refers to what an individual anticipates will happen in each situation.
Expectancy is based on three primary factors
2. Once you have determined that someone’s behavior was a breach of expectation,
3. The communicator reward valence is an evaluation you make about the person
who committed the violation. Specifically, does this person can reward or punish
you in the future? If so, the person has a positive reward valence
D. Predicting reactions when expectations are violated
1. Guerrero and Burgoon (1996; Guerrero, Jones, & Burgoon, 2000) noticed that
predictable patterns develop when considering reward valence and violation
valence together
a. If the violation valence is perceived as positive and the communicator reward
2. Violations are not necessarily negative. One must evaluate the anticipated
behavior, the communicator’s characteristics, and the violation itself
V. Cognitive Dissonance Theory (CDT)
A. Persuasion may be understood as a cognitive event whereby an individual is
motivated to create balance between one’s own beliefs and behavior
2. We change to create more of a balance between attitudes and behavior
B. Schemata: creating familiarity or discomfort
1. According to Festinger (1957, 1962), when presented with a new or unfamiliar
2. When we are exposed to new information that is not consistent with our existing
attitudes, we experience dissonance
3. Dissonance is a highly persuasive tool because humans feel uneasy with holding
C. Relationships between behaviors and beliefs. There are three relationships between
behaviors and beliefs
2. Consonance—when the behaviors and the beliefs match or align with one another.
We prefer the feeling associated with consonance
3. Dissonance—when the behaviors and the beliefs do not match; they contradict one
another, which makes us feel uncomfortable. Not all dissonance is equal—we can
ignore some dissonance, yet other forms of dissonance lead to behavior change
a. Importantly, not all dissonance is created equally. Magnitude of dissonance
exists whereby some forms of incongruence produce greater discomfort than
others (Zimbardo, Ebbesen, & Maslach, 1977). This magnitude of dissonance
can be measured by three variables
i. Perceived importance—how significant is this behavior to you?
ii. Dissonance ratio—the proportion of incongruent beliefs held in relation to
the consonant beliefs
iii. Rationalize—justifying the dissonance; the ability to comfort yourself
when faced with dissonance
b. CDT argues that an individual selectively perceives various stimuli so as to
minimize dissonance
i. Selective exposure—actively avoiding information inconsistent with
established beliefs
ii. Selective attention—if you cannot avoid the situation, attending (or
listening) only to the information which pertains to those beliefs
iii. Selective interpretation—deciphering ambiguous information to force it
to match your established beliefs
iv. Selective retention—only storing inconsistent information for as long as
necessary
D. Persuasion through dissonance
1. The theory is useful in a variety of outlets, such as advertising and organizational
commitment
3. Creating too much dissonance can lead to the receiver of the message disliking
you rather than changing behaviors