COMM 305 1st Edition Lecture 7 Outline of Last Lecture Relational Contradictions Praxis Communicative Mechanisms Praxis Pattens Outline of Current Lecture 2c Praxis Communicative Mechanisms 3 Applying Relational Dialectics to Disclosure Current Lecture Relational Contradictions Internal Dialectics within the relationship External Dialectics between the relationship and the community Connection Autonomy Inclusion Seclusion Certainty Uncertainty Conventionality Uniqueness Openness Closedness Revelation Concealment What do we share disclose and what don t we What do we share outside the relationship Simpsons clip Homer doesn t just share information about their relationships but he defiles what he and Marge said they would and wouldn t share It is about the commitment they made to each other in not to share different things Differing ideals and contradictions Homer should keep some things private and share some things 2C Praxis Communicative Mechanisms The negotiations happen through different ways Praxis Patterns 1 Denial 2 Disorientation 3 Spiraling inversion 4 Segmentation 5 Balance 6 Integration 7 Recalibration 8 Reaffirmation Marge let the family and was gambling every night They were also negotiating certainty and uncertainty Marge could be counted on She always helped the kids They didn t balance certainty uncertainty Marge became completely uncertain Homer didn t just share some things but he shared everything Denial involves responding to one part of the dialectic while ignoring the other side all together The first two denial and disorientation are dysfunctional That is what we saw in Homer and Marge s relationship Disorientation is a dysfunctional response Instead of denying the contradictions the participants become overwhelmed by them They can t take any action at all Whatever happens as a result is that the competing means of the contradiction are overwhelming They can t take action The other 6 patterns may or may not be dysfunctional It depends on the relationship 1 and 2 denial and disorientation are dysfunctional 3 Spiraling inversion participants negotiate the tension over time We see this with seclusion and inclusion A couple going out with friends one weekend and the next weekend they stay home There is an understanding that they will go out They agree that later they will do things differently Overtime there is a change in pattern If they say they are going to do something next weekend but they don t that can be problematic 4 Segmentation focuses on topic and not time For different situations topics issues the partners resolve the dialectic differently Marge wasn t angry about Homer sharing information about there family She was mad about Homer sharing private information We can talk about some things but not others Spiraling inversion and segmentation mange the contradiction by carving out what we can and can t communicate about A choice is being made We may be both autonomous and connected over time we may focus on one thing each weekend Denial and spiral inversion and segmentation there is a choice being made Balance and integration want to have cake and eat it too COMM 305 1st Edition 5 Balance is a compromise approach We try to do both at once We serve both connection and autonomy We aren t doing either completely A friend falls in love and disappears for a time They don t include relationships outside of the particular relationship There compromise around the holidays may be we will visit our families but not for very long 6 Integration you have your cake and eat it too You have a situation that honors all aspects at once Integration and balance are similar The difference is that you have a pattern that serves all examples at once A couple may have an agreement every Friday night they will try something new Focus on ways the partners are aware of the problems itself 7 Recalibration participants reframe the dialectic so that there is no contradiction Example if your partner is acting distant they are acting disconnected You may label this as there stubbornness or just the way they communicate The reframing may allow you some comfort at the same time you think they can change His dad likes to go on long trips on the weekend His mom puts in GPS directions to go to the grocery store when she has been many times before This is how he keeps there relationship fresh This is reframing One partner values certainty and the other values uncertainty His mom reframed the uncertainty as a form of connection his dad tries to develop It is a temporary reframing Ultimately the underling dialectic will surface 8 Reaffirmation reframing a contradiction With affirmation they are communicating about the contradiction itself Reaffirmation is meta communication about the communication itself The relationship is aware that the tension exists The goal of the theory isn t to explain every pattern across all relationships It isn t trying to get a mutually exclusive or exhaustive list The point isn t to give an exhaustive list It is not to focus on what is most important We can still see what is happening This is different from what social penetration theory is trying to do SPT is trying to see if a relationship will move forward when they will disclose information and when they won t These praxis patterns aren t mutually exclusive You may see people talking about different ideals You may know relationships need both of these and may try to do both We have focused so far on what the theory has to say 3 Applying Relational Dialectics to Disclosure Disclosure is the act of revealing information about oneself It is voluntary It is your choice to share It is intentional We know that disclosure can vary in terms of depth breadth intimacy level We also know sometimes we share something positive Other times we share something negative Not all information is created equally It can be incomplete or insincere Sometimes people lie They aren t always truthful There is a relationship between qualities that disclosure has and relationship development