A Qualitatively Constructed Interpersonal Communication Model

A Grounded Theory Analysis

GLEN H . STAMP
Ball State University

This study examined 288 interpersonal research articles published during the past 25years in Human Communication Research. The method used was grounded the0y.Through constant comparison analysis, a 17-part categorization system was developed to accountfor each of the articles. The categories were cognition, nonverbal communication, compliance-gaining, message type, personality, interpersonaleffects, conversation, close relationships,perception, deception, initial interaction, culture, relationship development, apprehension, selfdisclosure, competence,and conflict. The categories were then placed in relationship with one another to create a model of interpersonal communication that consists of seven components. The final representation provides a new model of interpersonal communication, which is obtainedfrom data, empirically supported, and analytically derived.

uring Human Communication Researchs (HCR)25-year existence, hundreds of its articles have been dedicated to advancing knowledge and understanding about human symbolic activities (Gallois, 1998, p. 474). Among these fine examples of scholarly research are many articles devoted to understanding interpersonal communication. Collectively, these research articles, written by the very best scholars in the communication discipline, define our collective state of knowledge of interpersonal communication.However, each of these articles is only a thread in a larger, still unwoven fabric. The purpose of this study is to weave these threads together into a coherent tapestry through the use of a grounded theory approach (Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Strauss & Corbin, 1990). Such an approach allows the discovery of categories through a method of constant comparison and coding of primary data. In this case, the data consist of the full corpus of interpersonal articles published in HCR. This method also generates theory by linking the categories together in a holistic manner. The grounded theory approach, theEfore,mates from the ground up anew way of conceptualizing

Glen H. Stamp (Ph.D., University of Texas at Austin, 1991)is an associate professor in the Department of Communication Studies at Ball State University, Muncie, IN 47306 (e-mail
OOghstamp@bsuvc.bsu.edu).
Human Communication Research, Vol. 25 No. 4 June1999 531-547 , 0 1999 International Communication Association

531

532

HUMAN COMMUNICATION RESEARCH / June 1999

the artifact(s) of interest. This procedure is more than content analysis because the procedure goes beyond mere categorization; rather, a framework is inductively built through which the item under examination-in this instance, interpersonal communication-might be better understood. In essence, the intent of this research is to construct a model of interpersonal communication by examining the interpersonal communication pieces (i.e., the research articles in HCR) and putting those pieces together into a coherent frame. In this way, a state-of-the-art understanding of interpersonal communicationcan occur by examining and integrating the fundamental interpersonal research by the primary scholars in the communication field.

METHOD
Initial Procedures The data set that was analyzed in this study was composed of all the interpersonal articles published in HCR to date, beginning with Volume 1, Number 1(Fall 1974),and ending with Volume 24, Number 4 (June 1998). Of the 646 total articles published in HCR during this period, 288 articles (45%)qualified as interpersonal communication articles. The 288 articles were selected using the following procedures. To begin, every published article was examined to determine whether it conformed to Bochners (1989)definition. Although definitions of interpersonal communication abound, Knapp, Miller, and Fudge (1994) suggest that Bochners (1989)definition is one with which most interpersonal scholars would agree. According to Bochner,
The most general meaning of the term interpersonal communicationis simply communicating between persons. Most scholars insist, however, on a narrower and more rigorous conceptualization.The anchor points for such a conceptualization are: 1)at least two communicators; intentionally orienting toward each other; 2) as both subject and object; 3) whose actions embody each others perspectives both toward self and toward other. In an interpersonal episode, then, each communicator is both a knower and an object of knowledge, a tactician and a target of anothers tactics, an attributer and an object of attribution, a codifierand a code to be deciphered. (P. 336)

Each HCR article was examined using this definition. However, it was found that the definition was so narrow and explicit that very few articles met the rigid criteria. Therefore, a looser formulation was developed; if an article did not have all the attributes listed within this definition, as most of them did not, a more general system was applied. An article was

Stamp / INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATIONMODEL

533

classified as interpersonal if it was (a) judged to have met some but not necessarily all of the above criteria and (b) more readily classifiable as interpersonal research rather than within some other communication area (e.g., organizational, mass media, rhetorical, etc.). In addition, only empirical research articles were chosen, thereby eliminating state-of-theart articles or discussions of concepts. This examination yielded the 288 interpersonal articles used in the analysis. After the initial examination and selection of the database, the first page of all 288 articles was copied because the first page contained both the title and the abstract of each article. The titles of all 288 articles were then typed into a computer file. Each article was coded with a number from 1 to 288. The coding was done linearly, starting with the interpersonal articles in Volume 1and continuing through Volume 24. The list of articles then was sorted on the computer, in alphabeticalorder, by the first authors last name. After printing out the resulting list, each title was cut and pasted onto a separate index card. After completing these procedures, three sets of data were available: (a) 288 index cards containing the title of each article, (b) 288 copies of the first page of each article (each containing the title and the abstract), and (c) copies of each article. Categorization The index cards containing the articles titles were randomly sorted and initially categorized through an examination of key terms within the title. During this process of open coding (Strauss & Corbin, 1990), the cards were compared and contrasted, one to the other, and codes were placed on each card that indicated possible categories. The intent of the categorical system was to derive the single dimension or issue on which each respective article was most focused. Piles of cards representing initial categories were created and recreated, as the categories were refined with eachmovement through the data. At the end of this initial process, 29 categories were developed using 264 cards/titles. All but 24 cards, therefore, were initially categorized. The categories then were further refined by referencing the abstracts and the articles. The same procedure was used as above with one modification. When the abstract was not helpful in clarifying a potential category, the article itself was examined. Through a more detailed examination of the theory, method, and findings detailed in the abstract and, in many cases, the article itself, each article was eventually placed into 1 of 17 categories.It should be noted that most of the articles dealt with multiple issues, thereby making initial categorization challenging. However, the grounded theory method entails that all data or incidents be categorized. This procedure ensures continual refinement of the emergent categorical

534

HUMAN COMMUNICATION RESEARCH / June1999

system into a more general set of categories that collectively capture the essence of all the data.

A Communication Model
The above procedures entail taking apart a data set and putting the data together in a new categorical arrangement. The final procedure was to take the new arrangement (the 17 separate categories) and link them together by examining possible relationships between them. This brings the data analysis full circle with the re-creation of a coherent whole from the categorical system initially derived from disparate data points. This procedure forces the researcher to "develop ideas on a level of generality higher in abstraction than the qualitative material being analyzed (Browning, 1978, p. 102). In this case, a general model of interpersonal communication was developed through an examination of the relationships between the final categories that were, in the first instance, representative of interpersonal communication research.

RESULTS
Each of the 17 categories is identified and discussed below, including the number of articles that constitute each category, the percentage of the total each category represents, examples of the issues focused on in the research, and an example of an interpersonal research article within the category.
1.Cognition (32 articles, 11.1%)

These articles emphasize the internal state of the communicator. Included here were articles that focused primarily on such issues as information processing, pre-encoding aspects, pre-articulatory editing, memory, sequencing decisions, social cognition, motivation, knowledge, goals, cognitive editing, plans, and intent. An example of this category is the exploration by Greene and Lindsey (1989) pertaining to the differences between individuals who pursue tasks involving multiple goals with those who pursue single goals. The researchers found that both the pursuit of multiple goals and the opportunity for advance message preparation influenced individual encoding processes. 2. Nonverbal Communication (24 articles, 8.3%) Articles included in this category involve those aspects generally associated with nonspeech-relatedbehavior, such as touch, eyes, face, space,

Stamp / INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION MODEL

535

and so forth. Examples of such research issues include decoding nonverbal communication, body movement, space violations, illustrators, eye gaze, crowding, nonverbal encoding, motor mimicry, speech rate, touch, and nonverbal immediacy behaviors. Burgoons (1978) initial explication of a model of personal space violations exemplifies this category. In this article, Burgoon concludes that space violations by rewarding communicators produce more positive communication outcomes than do space violations by punishing communicators.
3. Compliance Gaining (22 articles, 7.6%)

This category focused on the use of strategies to gain compliance from another person or the need to persuade within an interpersonal context. Included in this categorical set are such issues as compliance-gaining strategies in different types of relationships, resisting compliance-gaining strategies, dimensions of compliance-gaining, persuasion in interpersonal relationships, selecting compliance-gaining behaviors, effects of noncompliance, sequencing of strategies, overcoming obstacles to interpersonal compliance, and verbal and nonverbal compliance-gaining strategies. For example, Boster and Stiff (1984)examined the factors influencing compliance-gaining message selection behavior. They found that during compliance-gaining situations, whereas individuals are concerned with equity (both the benefit to self and the benefit to other), the individuals are more concerned with whether compliance is in the best interest of the other.

4.Message Type (22 articles, 7.6%)

These articles are oriented around different classes of messages that are primarily verbal in orientation. The message types examined included messages of control, affection, empathy, ridicule, politeness, requesting, embarrassment, rejection, verbal aggression, advice, narratives, harmful speech, and concern. Goldsmith and Fitchs (1997)exploration of different ways in which advice messages can be experienced (i.e., as helpful, butting in, honest) is an example of the message type category.

5. Personality (20 articles, 6.9%)

These articles focused on the enduring personality characteristics of communicators and how those characteristics affect the communication process. This category included characteristics such as personality dominance, self-esteem, gender, assertiveness, predispositions toward verbal behavior, anomia, communication style, self monitoring, individual differences, cognitive complexity, affective orientation, and attachment

536

HUMAN COMMUNICATION RESEARCH / June1999

style. Norton and Warnick's (1976) study of assertiveness illustrates this category. They discovered that low anxiety, dominance, contentiousness, lack of intimidation, verbal intensity, and talkativeness were characteristics of assertiveness. 6. Interpersonal Effects (20 articles, 6.9%) The articles in this category focused on the interpersonal effects of messages, situations, or other variables. Examples of such interpersonal effects include the outcome of helping requests, anxiety-arousing messages, comforting messages, messages with multiple goals, guilt messages, and stereotyping; how disqualification and speech conversion occur; and the consequences of speech styles such as bragging or powerful or powerless speech. The exploration of the means through which guilt is produced (Vangelisti, Daly, & Rudnick, 1991)provides an example of this category. They determined that people are made to feel guilty through reminders of obligation or role responsibilities, stating sacrifices made, and comparisons to others. 7. Conversation (17 articles, 5.9%) These articles primarily examined the structure or nature of conversation, conversational components, or the effects on conversations of particular devices. Included here are such aspects as quantity of speaking time, conversational grammar, story or silence sequencing, conversational turn taking, conversational structure, interruptions, pauses, and interaction management. The examination of conversational talk and silence sequences by Cappella and Planalp (1981), in which moment-tomoment changes within pausing and talking are a result of interspeaker influence, provides an example of the category of conversation.
8. Close Relationships (17 articles, 5.9%)

These articles focused primarily on communication within close relationships such as family relationships,marital relationships, parent-child relationships, and close friendships. Communication-related issues examined within these relationships included instrumental and expressive communication,patterns of communication,understanding, content themes, and satisfaction in marital relationships;autonomy and idiomatic communication in friendship relationships; satisfaction and play in personal relationships; and communication schema and patterns in family relationships. The communicativemeans through which friendships are interactionally managed (Rawlins, 1983) provides an example of the research within the close relationship category.

Stamp / INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION MODEL

537

9. Perception (16 articles, 5.6%)

These articles examined the ways in which communicators perceive the world, other communicators, or themselves. Included in this category were variables such as communicator attitudes, attributional processes, person perception, interpersonal accounts, and interpersonal expectations. Bergers (1975) examination of attribution processes in interpersonal communication interactionsprovides an example of the perception category. This research found that the type of information provided during early interactions is helpful in understanding and explaining later behavior. 10. Deception (15 articles, 5.2%) This category focused on interpersonal deception. Article topics included deception as a construct, detection of deception, detection in various relationship types, deceptive behaviors, and the relationship of deception to other personality characteristics. For example, Knapp, Hart, and Dennis (1974)examined deception as a communicationconstruct and found that deceivers display more uncertainty, vagueness, nervousness, reticence, dependence, and unpleasantness than do nondeceivers.
11.Initial Interaction (14 articles, 4.9%)

This category centered on communication within initial interactions. The research examined different variables affecting initial interactional outcomes, including attraction, homophily, dissimilarity, initial interaction scripts, language features during initial interactions,and interactions with different types of persons. An example of this category is Sunnafrank and Millers (1981)exploration of the relationship between attraction and similarity in initial interactions.Findings indicated that participants who were similar but did not interact with their partners found those partners to be more attractive than partners who worked with similar interactants. In addition, interactants who were dissimilar found their partners to be more attractive when they worked with them than partners who were dissimilar and did not interact. 12. Culture (12 articles, 4.2%) The research represented in this category focused on how culture affects communication and how communication differs within various cultures. Among the topics examined within different cultural groups were acculturation, information acquisition, relationship types, relationship terms, social identity, intimacy, communication problems, and

538

HUMAN COMMUNICATION RESEARCH / June 1999

communication constraints. For example, Gudykunst and Nishida (1986) examined how communication and intimacy differ within specific relationships (e.g., stranger, acquaintance, classmate, friend, best friend, lover) in Japan and the United States.
13. Relationship Development (12 articles, 4.2%)

These articles focused on communication during the development of close relationships. The various aspects examined were the social penetration process, relationship change, turning points, idiomatic communication in developing relationships, relationship escalation, and the impact of social networks on relationship development. This category is exemplified by Aune, Buller, and Aune (1996), who examined how emotional expression differed in dating and married/cohabiting relationships. Negative emotions were managed more, and seen to be most inappropriate, in early dating relationships than in later relationships.
14. Apprehension (12 articles, 4.2%)

The theme of the articles in this category was on the particular construct of communication apprehension. Among the features related to communication apprehension within these articles were the effects of communication apprehension, expectations of apprehensive others, nonverbal and verbal behaviors associated with apprehension, and the relationship between communication apprehension and self-esteem. An example of this category is provided by McCroskey, Daly, Richmond, Falcione (1977), who found a strong relationship between communication apprehension and self-esteem across various age groups and occupations. 15. Self-Disclosure (12 articles, 4.2%) Different facets of self-disclosure within interpersonal relationships were the focus of this category. Among the features examined were the level, valence, and anticipation of self-disclosure;the relationship of trust, affection, and reciprocity to self-disclosure; disclosure styles; behaviors associated with disclosure; and disclosure as a strategy in interpersonal relationships. As an example of this category, Wheeless and Grotz (1977) examined the relationship between trust and self-disclosure.
16. Competence (11 articles, 3.8%)

The focus of the articles within this category was on skillful or competent communication. Among the areas investigated were social

Stamp / INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION MODEL

539

perspective taking, role taking, social competence, development skill, social skilldeficits, competence in different groups, and various models of communication competence. This category is represented by Wiemann (1977), who determined that competent communicators manage interactions better and are perceived to be more affiliative, supportive, and relaxed than are less competent communicators.
17. Conflict (10 articles, 3.5%)

This final category was composed of articles that examined different approaches to conflict within interpersonal life. The specific topics investigated included models of conflict, verbal conflict tactics, managing conflict, conflict strategies, mediation, argumentation and aggression, and conflict in different contexts. For example, Sillars, Colettif Parry, and Rogers (1982) examined how conflict can be coded as either avoidance, integrative, or distributive as well as the verbal and nonverbal behaviors associated with these strategies. A MODEL OF INTERPERSONALCOMMUNICATION Within the grounded theory method, creating relationships among the categories is an important step to developing theory (Glaser & Strauss, 1967).Selective coding is one means through which this is accomplished. Selective coding, as defined by Strauss and Corbin (1990), is the process of selecting the core category (and) systematically relating it to other categories (p. 116). The core category is the central phenomenon around which all the other categories are related (Strausskcorbin, 1990,p. 116). The following procedures were performed to identify both the relationships among the 17categories as well as the core category. The goal of the procedure was to develop a model of interpersonal communication that would take into consideration the 17 categories inductively derived from the journal articles. The 17 categories were first written on index cards and examined for the ways in which each related to the others. The cards were tangibly examined (i.e.,moved around) to explore the various ways in which each fit with the others. Notes were taken regarding possible relationships. Through this procedure, various categories clustered together into higher level, more abstract categories (referred to as cornponen ts). For example, perception, personality, and cognition clustered together because all focus on an internal aspect of the self. This internal component is conceptually distinct from other components in the model. Once this and other components were identified, the categories within each component were examined to determine their relationships with

540

HUMAN COMMUNICATIONRESEARCH / June1999

conversation

Conflict

b b b b

conversation

Conflict

b b

Conversation

Conflict

Initial Interaction

RelationshipDevelopment

b b

Close Relationship

Figure 1: A Grounded Theory Model of Interpersonal Communication

each other (e.g., how perception, personality, and cognition are related) as well as how the more abstract components relate to each other (e.g., how the internal states might relate to competencies). As the relationships crystallized, a core category was developed as well. This category, labeled interaction/relationship,was at the center of the model, with all of the other categoriesand components in the dyadic model directed toward this core

Stamp / INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION MODEL

541

category. Through this examination of the initial categories, the dimensions of those categories, as well as the relationship between the different categories, the following model was created (see Figure 1). The model contains seven components that accommodate all 17 categories. The model represents the interactionbetween two people: Person I (the top half of the model) and Person I1 (the bottom half). The starting point for examining the model is either the top left (PersonI) or the bottom right (Person 11). Component 1:Culture Culture is the first component of the model. In the model, culture is the only component not highlighted by a box because the overall interpersonal model is placed within cultural constraints. As Geertz (1973) explains, culture is a historically transmitted pattern of meanings embodied in symbols, a system of inherited conceptions expressed in symbolic forms by means of which men communicate, perpetuate, and develop their knowledge about and attitudes toward life (p.89). The culture we live within, therefore, affects all aspects of our communication experiences, including who we are, how we talk, the roles we take, and the type of relationships we develop. Culture, therefore, continually impinges on our interpersonal lives. Component 2: Internal States The second component is our internal states, composed of the internal dimensions of our perceptions, personality, and cognitions. This component is driven by culture (indicatedby the arrows between Components 1 and 2) because who we are, how we make sense of the world, and how we think are all influenced by our culture. Each of these internal dimensions affects the other two (indicated by the arrows between the three dimensions). That is, how we perceive the world affects our cognitive processes (and vice versa); how we think (i.e., cognitions) affects our personality (and vice versa). For example, if one makes an attribution about another person (perception), this attribution affects the plans we may make vis-8-vis the other (cognition).Similarly, if we have low self-esteem (personality),then our plan of action (cognition) toward the other may be different than if we have high self-esteem. Component 3: Interpersonal Competencies The third component of the model is oriented toward interpersonal skills and competence levels. Specific attention is given to three essential processes within interpersonal life (indicated by the circles connecting

542

HUMAN COMMUNICATION RESEARCH / June1999

competence to each of the three): deception (what self conceals from the other), compliance-gaining (what self obtains from the other), and selfdisclosure (what self reveals to the other). The use or nonuse of each of these processes is fueled by the second component, our internal cognitions, perceptions, and personality. For example, our disclosures, deceptions, or attempts to gain compliance may be part of a plan (cognition) based on our attributions about the other (perception) or necessitated by our having a high need for affection, control, or inclusion (personality). In addition, each of these processes is a skill as well; what is challenging about these skills is that either the use or nonuse of each of these processes can be perceived as competent or incompetent, depending on the circumstances. That is, self-disclosure, for example, can be accomplished in a skillful manner to advance either the self or the relationship (or both). However, self-disclosure can be performed in a nonskillful manner as well, damaging the relationship and/or risking the self. Using discretion with self-disclosure can be just as competent as the use of self-disclosure. The same reasoning also applies to the other two processes. For instance, the use of either deception or honesty and persuasion or information can protect self, other, and/or the relationship or damage self, other, and/or the relationship. Therefore, to be a competent communicator is to understand the impact of self-disclosure, deception, and compliance-gaining within different circumstances, at certain times, or with particular people. Component 4 Communication Apprehension The fourth component of the model is communication apprehension. Our overall willingness or fear to communicate (trait apprehension) or our willingness or fear to communicatein a particular situation or circumstance (state apprehension) will affect how we self-disclose, deceive, or persuade (or whether we are able to at all). For example, we may want to self-disclose to another and believe it is the competent thing to do, and even know how we plan on doing so, but be unable to accomplish the act because of our apprehensiveness. Apprehension, therefore, is a mediating component between our competencies (Component 3) and our messages (Component 5). Component 5: Message Behaviors The model's fifth component represents the tangiblebehaviors used to advance the components discussed above. These behaviors are the actual verbal and nonverbal messages used by each person. The addition sign that connects the message type (which is primarily verbal) and nonverbal communication indicates that although we typically treat these two areas

Stamp / INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATIONMODEL

543

discretely (in research and in actual life), they are interwoven with each other. The competencies discussed above (i.e., self-disclosure, deception, and compliance-gaining), as well as other messages, will invariably involve both verbal and nonverbal codes. Component 6 Interaction/Relationship The sixth component of the model is the core category. Whereas the other 6 components of the model pertain to the individual level (e.g., internal dimensions, competencies,etc.) or the overarching cultural level, this component resides at the level of the relationship or interaction itself. As such, it is composed of conversation, conflict, and the development o f the dyadic relationship over time. As the individual messages (both nonverbal and verbal) of both self and other are displayed, the interactional sequencing of those messages creates a conversation between self and other. As a result of ongoing conversations created by the messages of both self and other, a relationship is also created and sustained. However, also as a result of ongoing conversation and relationship creation, conflict can, and most likely will, occur. Conflict is also an interpersonal phenomenon existing at the level of the relationship. That is, conflict is socially constructed and shared with the other through ongoing conversation. As conversationscontinue and conflicts are managed (or not managed), interactions may develop from an initial meeting between two people through ongoing development to a close interpersonal relationship. Component 7 Interpersonal Effect The seventh and final component of the model is the interpersonal effect the different components, mediated through the interaction/relationship, may have on both self and other. For example, at a given moment in time, our actualized plan (Component 2) and confidence (Component 4) to self-disclose (Component 3) in a particular message form (Component 5) may foster anger, sadness, or some other emotion, reaction, or another effect in the other person. However, this reaction is mediated through the dyadic interaction itself. The arrows in the figure indicate that the interpersonal effect only occurs after movement through the dyadic core Component 6. In addition, these ongoing interpersonal effects have an impact on the entire process of interpersonal communication by influencing the internal perceptions, personality, and cognitions of both the self and other (indicated by the arrows from Component 7 back to Component 2), which subsequently influences each of the other components as well.

544

HUMAN COMMUNICATION RESEARCH / June 1999

DISCUSSION
This analysis provides an innovative perspective on interpersonal communication. The 17 individual categories developed within this article are certainly not new; they reflect the research findings in HCR during the past 25 years. Many of the categories, therefore, are used as chapter headings in current interpersonal textbooks. Indeed, texts by Adler and Towne (1999), Beebe, Beebe, and Redmond (1999), and Wood (1999) all contain chapters on perception, conflict, and nonverbal communication. However, other categories, such as personality, cognition, or compliancegaining, rarely are given separate chapters in our textbooks. Although the research scholars in the field may address such issues, the synthesis of the research may not be as readily apparent in our textbooks. Without a systematic categorizationof the research, such limitations would be difficult to discover. Creating a grounded theory model of interpersonal communication provides support for the importance of these dimensions within interpersonal life. Moreover, the creation of the model offersa new way of viewing interpersonal communication.Whereas many interpersonal communication textbooks, for example, still contain models of interpersonal communicationsuch as the linear, interactional, and transactional models (e.g., Adler & Towne, 1999; Beebe et al., 1999;Wood, 1999),these models, although empirically developed (and important in understanding interpersonal life), are not systematically derived from data. The model presented here provides an initial attempt to create such a model of communication. Perhaps of greater importance than the development of the categories or the model is what these results contribute to furthering our understanding and ongoing development of interpersonal communication theory. Although many of the theories themselves were initially coded, they typically were subsumed by other categories. For example, uncertainty reduction theory was used in much of the research within what became the final categories of initial interactions and culture. Further research could examineand further develop uncertainty reduction theory by using the model presented here.2 For example, working linearly through the model, the following questions pertaining to uncertainty reduction theory might be addre~sed:~
1. Does either the general culture in which we reside or the particular culture in which we are socialized (i.e., our family) influence our personality, perceptions, or cognitions so that we are prone to be more or less certain within our interactions?

Stamp / INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION MODEL

545

2. Is our degree o certainty (or uncertainty) in using (or being competent f with) strategiesof self-disclosure,deception,or compliance-gainingrelated

to specific perceptions, cognitions,or personality types?

3. Do situations o high or low certainty affect our competency in selff

disclosing, deceiving others, or compliancegaining?

4. Does competent self-disclosure,deception, or compliance-gainingreduce

our uncertainty about communication? 5. Are persons who experience high or low communication apprehension more certain or uncertain in their choice of verbal and nonverbal messages within particular contexts? 6. Do persons who are more interpersonally competent use different verbal and nonverbal messages to reduce their uncertainty? 7. Are different message types used during conversationsof high or low certainty across the three relationship stages? 8. Are different message types used during conflict of high or low certainty across the three relationship stages? 9. What is the interpersonal effect o reducing (or increasing)uncertainty durf ing conversationsacross each of the three relationship stages? 10.What is the interpersonal effect of reducing (or increasing)uncertaintyduring conflict across each of the three relationship stages?

Although other avenues of exploration pertaining to uncertainty reduction theory could certainly be addressed, examining the above questions would advance our understanding of this communication theory within interpersonal life. There are also implicationsfor HCR resulting from this model. As these articles were examined, it became clear that the breadth of research pertaining to interpersonal communication was impressive. As mentioned earlier, it was very difficult to code many of the articles because they involved multiple dimensions. This finding suggests that much of the existent research already is exploring connections between the various categories found. There was also a sense of advancement, inboth the theories and conceptualizations of interpersonal communication, during the 25 years. The later articles did indeed build on what was previously published. Overall, the work in the area of interpersonal communication, as reflected in HCR, is quite impressive. There may be other avenues to explore, however, pertaining to possible gaps in the HCR interpersonal literature base made evident by this study. For example, whereas emotion, power, and context were addressed in some of the articles, these categories did not hold up in the final analysis in terms of being centrally addressed within the research. As such, although they are arguably important interpersonal dimensions, they did not emerge from the analysis and were not part of the final model. Future interpersonal research might address in more detail these important, yet possibly neglected, areas of interpersonal life.

546

HUMAN COMMUNICATION RESEARCH / June 1999

In the final analysis, the contribution of HCR to both developing and sustaining the research within interpersonal communication cannot be denied. Those of us in the field can feel proud of the rich history reflected here and look forward to further research that will advance our understanding of the complex process of interpersonal communication. NOTES
1. A complete list of the articles examined, alongwith the categories, is available from the author. 2. It should be noted that the initial formulation of uncertainty reduction theory by Berger (1975) and his colleagues, as well as the extension by Gudykunst and his colleagues (e.g., Gudykunst & Nishida, 1986),advance many of the categories within the model, induding cognition, behavioral messages, and competencies. The formulation here is intended to broaden the scope of the theory by examining how the 17 categories and the seven components might address the theory in relation to interpersonal life. 3. In their original formulation of the grounded theory method, Glaser and Strauss (1967) suggest advancing premises based on the theory created from the data.

REFERENCES
Adler, R. B., & Towne, N. (1999) Looking out/looking in (9th ed.). Fort Worth, Tx. Hartcourt Brace College. Aune, K. S., Buller, D. B., & Aune, R. K. (1996). Display rule development in romantic relationships: Emotion management and perceived appropriateness of emotions across relationship stages. Human Communication Research, 23,115-145. Beebe, S. A., Beebe, S . J., & Redmond, M. V. (1999).Interpersonal communication: Relating to others (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. Berger, C. R. (1975).Proactive and retroactive attribution processes in interpersonal communications. Human Communication Research, 2,33-50. Bochner, A. P. (1989). Interpersonal communication. In E. Barnouw, G. Gerbner, W. Schramm, T. L. Worth, & L. Gross (Eds.), International encyclopedia ofcommunications (pp. 336-340). New York Oxford University Press. Boster, F. J., & Stiff, J. B. (1984). Compliance-gaining message selection behavior. Human Communication Research, 20,539-556. Browning, L. D. (1978). A grounded organizational communication theory derived from qualitative data. Communication Monographs, 45,93-109. Burgoon, J. K. (1978).A communication model of personal space violations: Explication and an initial test. Human Communication Research, 4,129-142. Cappella, J. N., & Planalp, S. (1981).Talk and silence sequences in informal conversations III: Interspeaker influence. Human Communication Research, 7,117-132. Gallois, C. (1998).Human Communication Research, 24,474. Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books. Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery o grounded theory. Chicago: Aldine. f Goldsmith, D. J., &Fit& K. (1997).The normative context of advice as socialsupport. Human Communication Research, 23,454-476.

Stamp / INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION MODEL

547

Greene, J. O., &Lindsey, A. E. (1989).Encoding processes in the production of multiple-goal messages. Human Communication Research, 16,120-140. Gudykunst, W. B., & Nishida, T. (1986).The influence of cultural variability on perceptions of communication behavior associated with relationship terms. Human Communication Research, 23,147-166. Knapp, M. L., Hart, R. P., & Dennis, H. S. (1974).An exploration of deception as a communication construct. Human Communication Research, I, 15-29. Knapp, M. L., Miller, G. R., &Fudge, K. (1994).Background and current trends in the study of interpersonal communication. In M. L. Knapp & G. R. Miller (Eds.), Handbook ojinterpersonal communication (2nd ed., pp. 3-20). Thousands Oaks, C A Sage. McCroskey,J. C., Daly, J. A., Richmond, V. P.,& Falcione, R. L. (1977).Studies of the relationship between communication apprehension and self-esteem. Human Communication Research, 3,269-277. Norton, R., & Wamick, B. (1976).Assertiveness as a communication construct. Human Communication Research, 3,62-66. Rawlins, W. K. (1983).Negotiating close friendship: The dialective of conjunctive freedoms. Human Communication Research, 9,255-266. Sillars, A. L., Coletti, S. F., Parry, D., & Rogers, M. A. (1982). Coding verbal conflict tactics: distincNonverbal and perceptual correlates of the "avoidance-distributive-integrative" tion. Human Communication Research, 9,83-95. Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1990).Basics ofqualitative research: Grounded theoryproceduresand techniques. Thousands Oaks, C A Sage. Sunnafrank, M. J., & Miller, G. R. (1981). The role of initial conversations in determining attraction to similar and dissimilar strangers. Human Communication Research, 8,16-25. Vangelisti, A. L., Daly, J. A., & Rudnick, J. R. (1991). Making people feel guilty in conversations: Techniques and correlates. Human Communication Research, 18,3-39. Wheeless, L. R., & Grotz, J. (1977). The measurement of trust and its relationship to selfdisclosure. Human Communication Research, 3,250-257. Wiemann, J. M. (1977). Explication and test of a model of communicative competence. Human Communication Research, 3,195-213. Wood, J. T. (1999).Interpersonal communication: Everyday encounters (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.