Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
39 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Symbolic Interactionism |
Meaning, language, thinking |
|
|
Symbolic interactionism |
Looking glass self, society, generalized other |
|
|
Self-fulfilling prophecy |
Our expectations to evoke response that confirm what we anticipated |
|
|
Three critiques of symbolic interactionism |
Does not call for social reform Lacks aesthetic appeal Mead overstates his case |
|
|
Expectancy violations theiry |
Expectancy, violation valence, communicator reward valence |
|
|
Expectancy |
Is what is predicted to occur rather than what is desired |
|
|
Violation valence |
The positive or negative value we place on an expected behavior |
|
|
Communicator reward valence |
The sum of positive and negative attributes that the person has plus their potential to reward or punish |
|
|
Three critiques of expectancy violation theory |
Does not account for reciprocity Is communication valence or behavior valence more important? Hypotheses haven’t always been supported |
|
|
Social penetration theory |
Why or how do we allow ourselves get close to other people? |
|
|
Social penetration theory |
Closeness develops if individuals proceed in gradual, orderly fashion from superficial to intimate |
|
|
Social penetration theory |
Self-disclosure has both depth and breadth |
|
|
Four observations of depth |
Peripheral items are exchanged more often and sooner Self disclosure is reciprocal Social pen is rapid at the beginning but slows as you get deeper De-penetration is a gradual process |
|
|
Social exchange theory |
People regulate closeness based on rewards and costs Whether people decide to invest into a relationships |
|
|
Minimax principle |
People seek out maximize benefits with minimized costs |
|
|
Social penetration theory |
Relational satisfaction is gauged using the comparison level which is the threshold above which an outcome appears attractive |
|
|
Comparison level |
Determined by your history in relationships, family history, etc. if something exceeds your threshold you are satisfied if not then you are not satisfied |
|
|
Relational stability |
Comparison level of alternatives versus the currently available comparison level |
|
|
Social penetration theory |
Outcomes, comparison levels, and comparison level alternatives help us decide how willing we are to self-disclose |
|
|
Three critiques of social pen theory |
Disclosure does not always mean closeness Social exchange assumptions Do people always act in their own interest? |
|
|
Uncertainty reduction theory |
It is natural to have initial doubts upon first meeting someone, but how do we reduce those uncertainties |
|
|
Three primary reasons to reduce uncertainty |
Anticipate a future interaction See an incentive value within that person - they have something we want Deviance - they act in an abnormal way, so you are motivated to reduce your doubts |
|
|
Axiom |
Self evident truth that requires no proof |
|
|
8 axioms about initial uncertainty |
1. Verbal communication 2. Nonverbal warmth 3. Information seeking 4. Self-disclosure 5. Reciprocity 6. Similarity 7. Liking 8. Shared networks |
|
|
Uncertainty reduction theory |
8 axioms make up 28 theorems Each theorem is made up of 2 axioms |
|
|
Four strategies to reduce uncertainty |
1. Seeking information 2. Choosing plan complexity 3. Hedging 4. Hierarchy hypothesis |
|
|
Passive information seeking |
People watching and observing |
|
|
Actively information seeking |
Asking a third party about the person, talking to a mutual contact for information |
|
|
Interactive information seeking |
Interpersonal interaction, engaging with the person one on one asking questions |
|
|
Extractive information seeking |
Seeking information via the internet, looking at social media, etc. |
|
|
Hedging |
Use of strategic ambiguity and humor to provide a way for both parties to save face when a message fails to achieve its goal |
|
|
Relational turbulence theory |
How uncertainty affects people in ongoing relationships |
|
|
Relational uncertainty |
Self doubt Doubts about your partner Doubts about the viability of the relationship |
|
|
Relational turbulence |
Heightened reactivity, feeling anger and anxieties, reacting bigger than usual |
|
|
Three critiques of uncertainty reduction theoru |
Theorems may not be true Reasons for reducing uncertainty don’t always hold up Uncertainty reduction may not drive our behavior |
|
|
Social information processing theory |
Computer mediated communication complexities |
|
|
Social information processing theory |
Analyzing computer mediated communication to develop closeness. People can develop closeness just as easily and just as much using CMC as face to face |
|
|
Social information processing theory |
Social information - impression formation - relationship development |
|
|
Social information processing theory |
We develop relationships and interpersonal connections due to the primary need for human affiliation |
