5.2 Communication in Relationships

We will begin this section by discussing different forms and stages of relationships and providing the foundation for discussing the various forms of communication and emotions that are involved in these relationships. Communication and the accompanying emotions play an integral role in all relationships, whether they are personal, social or professional.

We can classify our key relationships by distinguishing between our personal and social relationships (VanLear et al., 2006). Personal relationships meet emotional, relational, and instrumental needs because they are intimate, close, and interdependent relationships and include those we have with best friends, partners, or immediate family. Social relationships occasionally meet our needs but lack the closeness and interdependence of personal relationships. Examples of social relationships include co-workers, distant relatives, and acquaintances. Another distinction useful for categorizing relationships is whether or not they are voluntary. For example, some personal relationships are voluntary, such as those with romantic partners, and others are involuntary, like those with close siblings. Likewise, some social relationships are voluntary, such as those with acquaintances, and others are involuntary, like those with neighbours or distant relatives. You can see how various relationships fall into each of these dimensions. Now that we have a better understanding of how we define relationships, we will examine the stages that most of our relationships go through as they move from formation to termination.

The 10 Stages of Relational Interaction

Communication is at the heart of forming our interpersonal relationships. We reach the achievement of relating through the everyday conversations and otherwise trivial interactions that form the fabric of our relationships. It is through our communication that we adapt to the dynamic nature of our relational worlds, given that relational partners do not enter each encounter or relationship with compatible expectations. Communication allows us to test and be tested by our potential and current relational partners. It is also through communication that we respond when someone violates or fails to meet those expectations (Knapp & Vangelisti, 2009).

Knapp’s relational model has 10 established stages of interaction that can help us understand how relationships come together and come apart (Knapp & Vangelisti, 2009). We should keep the following things in mind about this model of relationship development: relational partners do not always go through the stages in order, some relationships do not experience all the stages, we do not always consciously move between stages, and coming together and coming apart are not inherently good or bad. Relationships are always changing—they are dynamic. Although this model has often been applied to romantic relationships, most relationships follow a similar pattern that may be adapted to a particular context.

The following video provides an overview of much of the content in this section and provides a foundational understanding of the development of relationships and the communication in them.

(Study Hall, 2022)

Stage 1: Initiating

In the initiating stage, people size each other up and try to present themselves favourably. Whether you run into someone in the hallway at school or in the produce section at the grocery store, you scan the person and consider any previous knowledge you have of them, expectations for the situation, and so on. Initiating is influenced by several factors.

If you encounter a stranger, you may say, “Hi, my name’s Crystal.” If you encounter a person you already know, you’ve already gone through this before, so you may just say, “Hey, what’s up?” Time constraints also affect initiation. A quick encounter calls for a quick hello, whereas a scheduled meeting may entail a more formal start. If you already know the person, the length of time that has passed since your last encounter will affect your initiation. For example, if you see a friend from high school while home for a winter break, you may set aside a long block of time to catch up; however, if you see someone at work that you just spoke to 10 minutes earlier, you may skip the initiating communication. The setting also affects how we initiate conversations because we communicate differently in a crowded bar than we do on an airplane. Even with all this variation, people typically follow standard social scripts for interaction at this stage.

Stage 2: Experimenting

A basic exchange of information is typical as the experimenting stage begins. For example, on the first day of class, you might chat with the person sitting beside you and take turns sharing information about where you’re from and your program of study. Then you may branch out and see if there are any common interests that emerge. Finding out that you are both fans of the same hockey team or like the same kind of music could then lead to more conversation about hockey and other hobbies or interests; however, sometimes the experiment may fail. If your attempts at information exchange with another person during the experimenting stage are met with silence or hesitation, you may interpret their lack of communication as a sign that you shouldn’t pursue future interaction.

Experimenting continues in established relationships. Small talk, a hallmark of the experimenting stage, is common among young adults catching up with their parents when they return home for a visit or committed couples when they recount their day while preparing dinner. Small talk can be annoying sometimes, especially if you feel like you have to do it out of politeness. However, it serves important functions, such as creating a communicative entry point that can lead people to uncover topics of conversation that go beyond the surface level, helping us audition someone to see if we’d like to talk to them further, and generally creating a sense of ease and community with others. And even though small talk isn’t viewed as very substantial, Knapp’s model indicates that most of our relationships do not progress far beyond this point (Knapp & Vangelisti, 2009).

Stage 3: Intensifying

As we enter the intensifying stage, we indicate that we would like or are open to more intimacy, then we wait for a signal of acceptance before we attempt to pursue the relationship further. This incremental intensification of intimacy can occur over a period of weeks, months, or years, and may involve inviting a new friend to join you at a party, then to your place for dinner, then to go on vacation together. It would be seen as odd, even if the experimenting stage went well, to invite a person who you’re still getting to know on vacation with you without engaging in some less intimate interaction beforehand. To save face and avoid making ourselves overly vulnerable, steady progression is key in this stage. Aside from sharing more intense personal time, requests for and granting favours may also play into the intensification of a relationship. For example, one friend helping the other prepare for a big party on their birthday can increase closeness. However, if one person asks for too many favours or fails to reciprocate favours granted, then the relationship can become unbalanced, which could result in a transition to another stage, such as differentiating.

Other signs of the intensifying stage include the creation of nicknames, inside jokes, increased use of we and our, and a loosening of typical restrictions on possessions and personal space. For example, you may have a key to your best friend’s apartment and can hang out there if your roommate is getting on your nerves. Navigating the changing boundaries between individuals in this stage can be tricky, which can lead to conflict or uncertainty about the relationship’s future as new expectations develop. Successfully managing this increasing closeness can lead to relational integration.

Stage 4: Integrating

In the integrating stage, two people’s identities and personalities merge, and a sense of interdependence develops. Even though this stage is most evident in romantic relationships, elements of this stage can appear in other relationship forms. Some verbal and nonverbal signals of the integrating stage occur when the social networks of two people merge, when those outside the relationship begin to refer to or treat the relational partners as if they were one person (e.g., always referring to them together—“Let’s invite Olaf and Bettina”), or when the relational partners present themselves as one unit (e.g., both signing and sending one holiday card or opening a joint bank account). Even as two people integrate, they likely maintain some sense of self by spending time with friends and family separately, which helps balance their needs for independence and connection.

Stage 5: Bonding

The bonding stage includes a public ritual that announces formal commitment. These types of rituals include weddings, commitment ceremonies, and civil unions (Image 5.1). Obviously, this stage is almost exclusively applicable to romantic couples. In some ways, the bonding ritual is arbitrary in that it can occur at any stage in a relationship. In fact, bonding rituals are often later annulled or reversed because a relationship doesn’t work out, perhaps because there wasn’t sufficient time spent in the experimenting or integrating phases. However, bonding warrants its own stage because the symbolic act of bonding can have very real effects on how two people communicate about and perceive their relationship. For example, the formality of the bond may lead the couple and those in their social network to more diligently maintain the relationship if conflict or stress threatens it.

Stage 6: Differentiating

Individual differences can present a challenge at any given stage in the relational interaction model; however, in the differentiating stage, communicating these differences becomes a primary focus. Differentiating is the reverse of integrating, as we and our reverts back to I and my. People may try to re-boundary some of their life prior to the integrating of the current relationship, including reclaiming other relationships or possessions. For example, Carrie may reclaim friends who became “shared” as she got closer to her roommate Julie and their social networks merged by saying, “I’m having my friends over to the apartment and would like to have privacy for the evening.” Differentiating may occur in a relationship that bonded before the individuals knew each other in enough depth and breadth. Even in relationships where the bonding stage is less likely to be experienced, such as a friendship, unpleasant discoveries about the other person’s past, personality, or values during the integrating or experimenting stage could lead a person to begin differentiating.

Stage 7: Circumscribing

To circumscribe means to draw a line around something or put a boundary around it (Merriam-Webster, 2023), so in the circumscribing stage, communication decreases and certain areas or subjects become restricted as individuals verbally close themselves off from each other. They may say things like “I don’t want to talk about that any more” or “You mind your business, and I’ll mind mine.” If one person was more interested in differentiating in the previous stage or the desire to end the relationship is one-sided, verbal expressions of commitment may not be reciprocated; for example, when one person’s statement, “I know we’ve had some problems lately, but I still like being with you,” is met with silence. Once the increase in boundaries and decrease in communication becomes a pattern, the relationship further deteriorates toward stagnation.

Stage 8: Stagnating

During the stagnating stage, the relationship may come to a standstill as individuals basically wait for the relationship to end. Outward communication may be avoided, but internal communication may be frequent. The relational conflict flaw of mind reading takes place as a person’s internal thoughts lead them to avoid communication. For example, a person may think, “There’s no need to bring this up again because I know exactly how he’ll react!” This stage can be prolonged in some relationships. Parents and children who are estranged, couples who are separated and awaiting a divorce, or friends who want to end a relationship but don’t know how to do it may have extended periods of stagnation. Short periods of stagnation may occur right after a failed exchange in the experimental stage, where you may be in a situation that’s not easy to get out of, but the other person is still there. Although most people don’t like to linger in this unpleasant stage, some may do so to avoid the potential pain of termination, some may still hope to rekindle the spark that started the relationship, or some may enjoy leading their relational partner on.

Stage 9: Avoiding

Moving to the avoiding stage may be a way to end the awkwardness that comes with stagnation as people signal that they want to close down the lines of communication. Communication in the avoiding stage can be very direct—“I don’t want to talk to you any more”—or more indirect—“I have to meet someone in a little while, so I can’t talk long.” Although physical avoidance such as leaving a room or requesting a schedule change at work may help clearly communicate the desire to terminate a relationship, we don’t always have that option. In a parent-child relationship where the child is still dependent on the parent or in a roommate situation where a lease agreement prevents leaving, people may engage in cognitive dissociation, which means they mentally shut down and ignore the other person even though they are still physically co-present.

Stage 10: Terminating

The terminating stage of a relationship can occur shortly after initiation or after a 10- or 20-year relational history has been established. Termination can result from outside circumstances such as geographic separation or from internal factors such as changing values or personalities that lead to a weakening of the relationship bond. Termination exchanges involve some typical communicative elements and may begin with a summary message that recaps the relationship and provides a reason for the termination. For example, a statement such as “We’ve had some ups and downs over our three years together, but I’m getting ready to go to college, and I either want to be with someone who is willing to support me, or I want to be free to explore who I am.” The summary message may be followed by a distance message that further communicates the relational drift that has occurred, such as “We’ve really grown apart over the past year,” which may be followed by a disassociation message that prepares people to be apart by projecting what happens after the relationship ends—“I know you’ll do fine without me. You can use this time to explore your options and figure out whether or not you want to go to college, too.” Finally, there is often a message regarding the possibility for future communication in the relationship, such as “I think it would be best if we don’t see each other for the first few months, but text me if you want to” (Knapp & Vangelisti, 2009).

These 10 stages of relational development provide insight into the complicated processes that affect relational formation and deterioration. We also make decisions about our relationships by weighing costs and rewards.

Social Exchange Theory

Social exchange theory essentially entails weighing f the costs and rewards in a given relationship (Harvey & Wenzel, 2006). Rewards are outcomes that we get from a relationship that benefit us in some way, whereas costs range from granting favours to providing emotional support. When we do not receive the outcomes or rewards that we think we deserve, then we may negatively evaluate the relationship, or at least a given exchange or moment in the relationship, and view ourselves as being “under benefited.” In an equitable relationship, costs and rewards are balanced, which usually leads to a positive evaluation of the relationship and satisfaction.

Commitment and interdependence are important interpersonal and psychological dimensions of a relationship that relate to social exchange theory. Interdependence refers to the relationship between a person’s well-being and involvement in a particular relationship.

A person will feel interdependence in a relationship when

• Satisfaction is high or the relationship meets important needs;
• The alternatives are not good, meaning that the person’s needs couldn’t be met without the relationship; or
• Investment in the relationship is high, meaning that resources might decrease or be lost without the relationship (Harvey & Wenzel, 2006).

We should be careful, though, to not view social exchange theory as a this-for-that accounting of costs and rewards (Noller, 2006). We wouldn’t be very good relational partners if we carried around a little notepad, notating each favour or good deed we completed so we can expect its repayment. As noted earlier, we all become aware of the balance of costs and rewards at some point in our relationships, but that awareness isn’t persistent. We also have communal relationships in which members engage in a relationship for mutual benefit and do not expect returns on investments such as favours or good deeds (Harvey & Wenzel, 2006). As the dynamics in a relationship change, we may engage communally without even being aware of it, just by simply enjoying the relationship. It has been suggested that we become more aware of the costs and rewards balance when a relationship is going through conflict (Noller, 2006). Overall, relationships are more likely to succeed when there is satisfaction and commitment, meaning that we are pleased in a relationship intrinsically or by the rewards we receive.

Intercultural Relationships and Communication

Intercultural relationships are formed between people who have different cultural identities and include friends, romantic partners, family, and co-workers. This type of relationship has certain benefits, including increasing cultural knowledge, challenging previously held stereotypes, and learning new skills (Martin & Nakayama, 2010). Although differences between people’s cultural identities may be obvious, it takes some effort to uncover commonalities that can form the basis of a relationship. Perceived differences in general also create anxiety and uncertainty that is not as present in intracultural relationships. Once some similarities are found, the tension, if present, begins to balance out and uncertainty and anxiety lessen. Negative stereotypes may also hinder progress towards relational development, especially if the individuals are not open to adjusting their preexisting beliefs. Intercultural relationships may also take more work to nurture and maintain. The benefit of increased cultural awareness is often achieved because the relational partners explain their cultures to each other. This type of explaining requires time, effort, and patience and may be an extra burden that some are not willing to carry.

Intercultural communication competence (ICC) is the ability to communicate effectively and appropriately in various cultural contexts. ICC has numerous components, including motivation, self- and other knowledge, and tolerance for uncertainty. Two main ways to build ICC are through experiential learning and reflective practices (Bednarz, 2010). We must first realize that competence isn’t any one thing. Part of being competent means that you can assess new situations and adapt your existing knowledge to new contexts. What it means to be competent will vary depending on your physical location, your role (personal, professional, etc.), and your life stage, among other things. Sometimes we will know or be able to figure out what is expected of us in a given situation, but sometimes we may need to act in unexpected ways to meet the needs of a situation. Competence enables us to better cope with the unexpected, adapt to the non-routine, and connect to uncommon frameworks. Reflective practices can also help us process the rewards and challenges associated with developing ICC. As we open ourselves to new experiences, we are likely to have both positive and negative reactions. It can be very useful to take note of any negative or defensive reactions you have. This can help you identify certain triggers that may create barriers to effective intercultural interaction. Noting positive experiences can also help you identify triggers for learning that you could seek out or recreate to enhance the positive (Bednarz, 2010).

Now that we have discussed the stages and important aspects of relationships and the communication in them, we will now discuss disclosure in relationships. This is an important component of how we communication in any given relationship.

References

Bednarz, F. (2010). Building up intercultural competences: Challenges and learning processes. In M. G. Onorati  & F. Bednarz (Eds.), Building intercultural competencies: A handbook for professionals in education, social work and health care (pp. 29–52). Acco.

Harvey, J. H., & Wenzel, A. (2006). Theoretical perspectives in the study of close relationships. In A. L. Vangelisti & D. Perlman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of personal relationships (pp. 35–50). Cambridge University Press.

Knapp, M. L., & Vangelisti, A. L. (2009). Interpersonal communication and human relationships (6th ed.). Pearson.

Merriam-Webster. (2023). Circumscribe. In Merriam-Webster.com dictionary. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/circumscribe

Noller, P. (2006). Bringing it all together: A theoretical approach. In A. L. Vangelisti & D. Perlman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of personal relationships (pp. 769–789). Cambridge University Press.

Study Hall. (2022, December 8). Coming together and coming apart | Intro to Human Communication | Study Hall [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMw57_aCEss&list=PLID58IQe16nFcsed5sqo0VfQUZ7EF8rqY&index=17

VanLear, C. A., Koerner, A., & Allen, D. M. (2006). Relationship typologies. In A. L. Vangelisti & D. Perlman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of personal relationships (pp. 91–110). Cambridge University Press.

Image Credit

13 Feb, wedding ceremony at church (1) by Armineaghayan, CC BY-SA 4.0