যোগাযোগ তত্ত্ব/অনিশ্চয়তা হ্রাস

উইকিবই থেকে

আন্তঃব্যক্তিক যোগাযোগের অগ্রগতি: চার্লস বার্গার, রিচার্ড ক্যালাব্রেস এবং মূল অনিশ্চয়তা তত্ত্ববিদ[সম্পাদনা]

বিংশ শতাব্দীর মাঝামাঝি থেকে, তথ্যের ধারণাটি যোগাযোগ গবেষণা এবং যোগাযোগ তত্ত্বের বিকাশের জন্য একটি শক্তিশালী ভিত্তি হয়ে দাঁড়িয়েছে। তথ্য বিনিময় একটি মৌলিক মানব ফাংশন যেখানে ব্যক্তিরা অনিশ্চয়তা হ্রাস করার লক্ষ্যে তথ্যের অনুরোধ, প্রদান এবং বিনিময় করে। অনিশ্চয়তা হ্রাস তত্ত্ব (URT), চার্লস আর. বার্গার এবং রিচার্ড জে. ক্যালাব্রেস (১৯৭৫) এর কাছে স্বীকৃত, স্বীকৃত যে অনিশ্চয়তা হ্রাস করা যোগাযোগের একটি কেন্দ্রীয় উদ্দেশ্য। ইউআরটি-এর বিকাশের মাধ্যমে, এই পণ্ডিতরা অনিশ্চয়তা গবেষণায় এই উল্লেখযোগ্য সম্পর্ক পরীক্ষা করে আন্তঃব্যক্তিক যোগাযোগের ক্ষেত্রে অগ্রণী ভূমিকা পালন করেছেন।

হিথ এবং ব্রায়ান্ট (২০০০) বলেছেন: “আন্তঃব্যক্তিক যোগাযোগের অনুপ্রেরণাগুলির মধ্যে একটি হল তথ্যের অধিগ্রহণ যা অনিশ্চয়তা হ্রাস করতে পারে” (পৃ: ১৫৩)। তথ্যের অধ্যয়ন যোগাযোগের সমস্ত ক্ষেত্রের জন্য মৌলিক, তবে আন্তঃব্যক্তিক যোগাযোগের ক্ষেত্রে বিশেষভাবে উন্নত তাত্ত্বিক গবেষণায় অনিশ্চয়তার অধ্যয়নের সাথে এর সম্পর্ক। ইউআরটি কেন্দ্রীয় ফোকাসে যোগাযোগের ভূমিকা রাখে, যা আন্তঃব্যক্তিক যোগাযোগের ক্ষেত্রের উন্নয়নে একটি গুরুত্বপূর্ণ পদক্ষেপ ছিল। বার্জার এবং ক্যালাব্রেস (১৯৭৫) নোট: “যখন যোগাযোগ গবেষকরা আন্তঃব্যক্তিক যোগাযোগ প্রক্রিয়ার উপর অভিজ্ঞতামূলক গবেষণা পরিচালনা করেন, তখন তারা সামাজিক মনস্তাত্ত্বিক তত্ত্বগুলিকে প্রারম্ভিক পয়েন্ট হিসাবে নিয়োগ করার প্রবণতা দেখান” (পৃ: ৯৯)। অন্যান্য সমসাময়িকদের দ্বারা করা তত্ত্ব এবং প্রচেষ্টার অন্তর্নিহিত গবেষণা আন্তঃব্যক্তিক যোগাযোগ গবেষণার উত্থানকে চিহ্নিত করেছে; ইউআরটি-এর বিকাশের সাথে সাথে, যোগাযোগ গবেষকরা অন্যান্য সামাজিক বিজ্ঞানে প্রতিষ্ঠিত তাত্ত্বিক পদ্ধতির পরিবর্তে বৃহত্তর বোঝার জন্য যোগাযোগ পদ্ধতির দিকে নজর দিতে শুরু করেন।

আন্তঃব্যক্তিক যোগাযোগ গবেষণার ইতিহাস: একটি সংক্ষিপ্ত বিবরণ[সম্পাদনা]

ঐতিহ্যগতভাবে, যোগাযোগ একটি আন্তঃবিভাগীয় ক্ষেত্র হিসাবে দেখা হয়। আন্তঃব্যক্তিক যোগাযোগ প্রায়শই ভাষা, সামাজিক জ্ঞান এবং সামাজিক মনোবিজ্ঞানের অধ্যয়নের সাথে যুক্ত থাকে। ১৯৬০-এর আগে, আন্তঃব্যক্তিক যোগাযোগের লেবেলের অধীনে কেবলমাত্র একটি পরিমিত পরিমাণ গবেষণা সম্পন্ন হয়েছিল। হিথ এবং ব্রায়ান্ট (২০০০) এই সময়টিকে আন্তঃব্যক্তিক যোগাযোগের ক্ষেত্রের উৎস হিসাবে চিহ্নিত করেছেন: “বিশেষত ১৯৬০ সাল থেকে, পণ্ডিতরা যোগাযোগকে কেন্দ্রীয় শব্দ হিসাবে গ্রহণ করেছিলেন কারণ তারা এটিকে মানুষের আচরণের একটি উল্লেখযোগ্য এবং অনন্য দিক হিসাবে অধ্যয়ন করতে চেয়েছিলেন” (পৃ: ৫৯)।

১৯৬০-এর দশকে গবেষণা তৈরি হয়েছিল যা একটি আন্তঃব্যক্তিক ক্ষেত্রের বিকাশকে প্রভাবিত করেছিল। মনোরোগবিদ্যায় গবেষণা ব্যক্তিত্ব এবং সম্পর্কের প্রভাব পরীক্ষা করে, আবিষ্কার করে যে মানসিক সমস্যাগুলি কেবল নিজের সমস্যার ফলাফল নয়, সম্পর্কগত সমস্যারও ফল। মানবতাবাদী মনোবিজ্ঞান এবং অস্তিত্ববাদের গবেষণার প্রবণতা এই ধারণাটিকে অনুপ্রাণিত করেছে যে কার্যকর যোগাযোগের মাধ্যমে সম্পর্ক উন্নত করা যেতে পারে (হিথ এবং ব্রায়ান্ট, ২০০০)।

আন্তঃব্যক্তিক যোগাযোগের শিরোনামে পরিচালিত গবেষণা প্রাথমিকভাবে প্ররোচনা, সামাজিক প্রভাব এবং ছোট গোষ্ঠী প্রক্রিয়ার উপর দৃষ্টি নিবদ্ধ করে। তত্ত্বগুলি শেখার ভূমিকা, অসঙ্গতি, ভারসাম্য, সামাজিক বিচার, এবং প্রতিক্রিয়া (বার্গার, ২০০৫) অনুসন্ধান করেছে। কার্ট লেউইন, সামাজিক মনোবিজ্ঞানের পূর্বপুরুষ, ফেস্টিঙ্গার, হাইডার, কেলি এবং হোভল্যান্ডের মতো আন্তঃব্যক্তিক গবেষণা অগ্রগামীদের প্রভাবিত করার ক্ষেত্রে যথেষ্ট ভূমিকা পালন করেছেন।

১৯৭০ এর দশকের মধ্যে, গবেষণার আগ্রহগুলি সামাজিক মিথস্ক্রিয়া, সম্পর্কীয় বিকাশ এবং সম্পর্কীয় নিয়ন্ত্রণের ক্ষেত্রে স্থানান্তরিত হতে শুরু করে। এটি ন্যাপ, মেহরাবিয়ান, অল্টম্যান, টেলর, ডাক, কেলি এবং থিবাউটের মতো পণ্ডিতদের গবেষণা দ্বারা প্রভাবিত হয়েছিল। দশকের শেষের দিকে এবং ১৯৮০-এর দশকে, হিউস, প্ল্যানালপ, রোলফ এবং বার্গারের জ্ঞানীয় পন্থা জনপ্রিয় হয়ে ওঠে এবং গাইলস, বার্গুন এবং প্যাটারসনের আচরণগত এবং যোগাযোগমূলক অভিযোজনের গবেষণার সাথে জনপ্রিয় হয়ে ওঠে। বার্জার (২০০৫) বলেছেন: “এই প্রাথমিক তাত্ত্বিক অভিযানগুলি গত দুই দশকে আন্তঃব্যক্তিক কম গবেষণা এজেন্ডা গঠনে সহায়তা করেছিল” (পৃ: ৪১৬)।

আজ, আন্তঃব্যক্তিক যোগাযোগ ডায়াডিক যোগাযোগের উপর ফোকাস করার প্রবণতা, যোগাযোগ যার মধ্যে মুখোমুখি মিথস্ক্রিয়া জড়িত, বা সম্পর্ক উন্নয়নের একটি ফাংশন হিসাবে যোগাযোগ। আন্তঃব্যক্তিক যোগাযোগ তত্ত্বের গবেষণা সাধারণত সম্পর্কের বিকাশ, রক্ষণাবেক্ষণ এবং বিলুপ্তির উপর দৃষ্টি নিবদ্ধ করে। এটি স্বীকৃত হয়েছে যে আন্তঃব্যক্তিক যোগাযোগ অনিশ্চয়তা হ্রাসের দ্বারা অনুপ্রাণিত হয় (বার্গার এবং ক্যালাব্রেস, ১৯৭৫)। ১৯৭০ এর দশকে এর প্রবর্তনের পর থেকে, অনিশ্চয়তা অধ্যয়নের একটি প্রধান ক্ষেত্র হিসাবে স্বীকৃত হয়েছে যা সামগ্রিকভাবে যোগাযোগের ক্ষেত্রের বিকাশে অবদান রেখেছে। এই অধ্যায়টি সেই সমস্ত তাত্ত্বিকদের উপর ফোকাস করার চেষ্টা করে যারা যোগাযোগের অনিশ্চয়তা হ্রাসের গবেষণায় অগ্রণী ভূমিকা পালন করেছিল। তাদের কাজ আন্তঃব্যক্তিক যোগাযোগের ক্ষেত্রের বিকাশের জন্য অত্যন্ত গুরুত্বপূর্ণ এবং আন্তঃব্যক্তিক প্রক্রিয়া সম্পর্কে আমাদের বোঝার কেন্দ্রবিন্দু।

অনিশ্চয়তার সংজ্ঞা[সম্পাদনা]

যেহেতু অনিশ্চয়তাকে একটি গুরুত্বপূর্ণ গঠন হিসাবে চিহ্নিত করা হয়েছে, যা যোগাযোগের অধ্যয়নের জন্য প্রয়োজনীয়, ধারণাটি কখন উদ্ভূত হয়েছিল এবং কীভাবে এটি সংজ্ঞায়িত এবং অধ্যয়ন করা হয়েছে তা জানা উপকারী হবে। অনিশ্চয়তা বিবেচনা করার একটি উপায় তথ্য তত্ত্বের তাত্ত্বিক কাঠামোর মাধ্যমে। শ্যানন এবং ওয়েভার (১৯৪৯) প্রস্তাব করেছিলেন যে একটি নির্দিষ্ট পরিস্থিতিতে অনিশ্চয়তা বিদ্যমান ছিল যখন সম্ভাব্য বিকল্পগুলির একটি উচ্চ পরিমাণ ছিল এবং তাদের ঘটনার সম্ভাবনা তুলনামূলকভাবে সমান ছিল। শ্যানন এবং ওয়েভার বার্তা প্রেরণে অনিশ্চয়তার এই দৃষ্টিভঙ্গিকে সম্পর্কিত, তবে তাদের কাজটি ইউআরটি-র বিকাশেও অবদান রেখেছে।

বার্জার এবং ক্যালাব্রেস (১৯৭৫) তথ্য তত্ত্ববিদদের পাশাপাশি হাইডারের (1958) অ্যাট্রিবিউশন গবেষণা থেকে ধারণা গ্রহণ করেছিলেন। বার্জার এবং ক্যালাব্রেস (১৯৭৪) “প্রতিটি মিথস্ক্রিয়াকারী আচরণ করতে পারে এমন বিকল্প উপায়গুলির সংখ্যা” (পৃ ১০০) হিসাবে অনিশ্চয়তাকে সংজ্ঞায়িত করে আন্তঃব্যক্তিক যোগাযোগের জন্য অনিশ্চয়তার ধারণাকে প্রসারিত করেছে। একটি পরিস্থিতিতে বিদ্যমান অনিশ্চয়তার মাত্রা যত বেশি হবে, ব্যক্তিরা আচরণ এবং ঘটনাগুলির পূর্বাভাস দিতে সক্ষম হবেন তার সম্ভাবনা তত কম।

মিথস্ক্রিয়া চলাকালীন, ব্যক্তিরা কেবল বর্তমান এবং অতীতের আচরণের ভবিষ্যদ্বাণী করতে সমস্যার সম্মুখীন হয় না, তবে কেন অংশীদাররা তাদের আচরণ বা বিশ্বাস করে তা ব্যাখ্যা করে। বার্জার এবং ব্র্যাডকের (১৯৮২) অনিশ্চয়তার সংজ্ঞা এই প্রক্রিয়ার জটিলতাকে হাইলাইট করেছিল যখন তারা বলেছিল: “অনিশ্চয়তা, তারপরে, একটি অপরিচিত ব্যক্তি বিশ্বাস করতে বা সম্ভাব্যভাবে বলতে পারে এমন বিপুল সংখ্যক বিকল্প জিনিস থেকে উদ্ভূত হতে পারে।”

সম্পর্ক পরীক্ষা করার সময় অনিশ্চয়তা একটি গুরুত্বপূর্ণ ভূমিকা পালন করে। উচ্চ মাত্রার অনিশ্চয়তা সম্পর্কগত উন্নয়নকে মারাত্মকভাবে বাধা দিতে পারে। অনিশ্চয়তা স্ট্রেস এবং উদ্বেগ সৃষ্টি করতে পারে যা কমিউনিকেটর দক্ষতার নিম্ন স্তরের দিকে নিয়ে যেতে পারে (ওয়েস্ট অ্যান্ড টার্নার, 2000)। অযোগ্য যোগাযোগকারীরা সম্পর্ক গড়ে তুলতে সক্ষম নাও হতে পারে বা প্রাথমিক মিথস্ক্রিয়ায় জড়িত হতে খুব উদ্বিগ্ন হতে পারে। ওয়েস্ট এবং টার্নার (২০০০) উল্লেখ্য যে নিম্ন স্তরের অনিশ্চয়তার কারণে মৌখিক এবং অমৌখিক আচরণ বৃদ্ধি পেয়েছে, ঘনিষ্ঠতার মাত্রা বৃদ্ধি পেয়েছে এবং পছন্দের বৃদ্ধি ঘটেছে। মিথস্ক্রিয়ায়, ব্যক্তিরা এই লক্ষ্যের সাথে ভবিষ্যদ্বাণী করার ক্ষমতা বৃদ্ধি করবে বলে আশা করা হয় যে এটি ভবিষ্যতের মিথস্ক্রিয়াগুলিতে কী ঘটবে তা ভবিষ্যদ্বাণী করার এবং ব্যাখ্যা করার ক্ষমতার দিকে নিয়ে যাবে। যখন উচ্চ অনিশ্চয়তা বিদ্যমান থাকে তখন এই লক্ষ্যে পৌঁছানো প্রায়শই কঠিন হয়।

যদিও ব্যক্তিরা অনিশ্চয়তা কমাতে চায়, উচ্চ মাত্রার নিশ্চিততা এবং ভবিষ্যদ্বাণীও একটি সম্পর্ককে বাধা দিতে পারে। হিথ এবং ব্রায়ান্ট (২০০০) বলেছেন: “অত্যধিক নিশ্চিততা এবং ভবিষ্যদ্বাণী একটি সম্পর্ককে ধ্বংস করতে পারে; অত্যধিক অনিশ্চয়তা তার খরচকে অগ্রহণযোগ্য পর্যায়ে উত্থাপন করে। সম্পর্ক নির্মাণ হল স্থিতিশীলতা এবং পরিবর্তন, নিশ্চিততা এবং অনিশ্চয়তার একটি দ্বান্দ্বিকতা” (পৃ. ২৭১)। তাই অনিশ্চয়তা এমন একটি ধারণা যা আন্তঃব্যক্তিক যোগাযোগের ক্ষেত্রে একটি গুরুত্বপূর্ণ ভূমিকা পালন করে। নিম্নোক্ত তাত্ত্বিকরা অন্বেষণ করেন যে কীভাবে যোগাযোগ ব্যক্তিরা অনিশ্চয়তা কমাতে ব্যবহার করতে পারে.

Early Influences[সম্পাদনা]

The following theorists significantly contributed to the examination of uncertainty in communication. The influence of their work can be seen as reflected in the assumptions of Berger and Calabrese (1975).

Leon Festinger (1919-1989)[সম্পাদনা]

Leon Festinger studied psychology at the University of Iowa under the direction of Kurt Lewin. Lewin, one of the founders of social psychology and a pioneer in the research of group dynamics, had a substantial influence on the development of interpersonal communication. After graduation, Festinger initially worked at the University of Rochester, but in 1945 he followed Lewin to Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the Research Center for Group Dynamics. After Lewin's death, Festinger worked at the University of Michigan, Stanford University, and the New School for Social Research (Samelson, 2000).

Much of Festinger’s research followed his mentor Lewin and further developed Lewin’s theories. Several of Festinger's theories were highly influential on the emerging field of interpersonal communication and on the development of URT. Festinger is best known for the theories of Cognitive Dissonance and Social Comparison. Cognitive Dissonance Theory (CDT) attempted to explain how an imbalance among cognitions might affect an individual. Lewin foreshadowed CDT in his observations regarding attitude change in small groups (Festinger, 1982). CDT allows for three relationships to occur among cognitions: a consonant relationship, in which cognitions are in equilibrium with each other; a dissonant relationship, in which cognitions are in competition with each other; and an irrelevant relationship, in which the cognitions in question have no effect on one another (West & Turner, 2000). Cognitive Dissonance, like uncertainty, has an element of arousal and discomfort that individuals seek to reduce.

Social Comparison theory postulates that individuals look to feedback from others to evaluate their performance and abilities. To evaluate the self, the individual usually seeks the opinions of others who are similar to the self. This need for social comparison can result in conformity pressures (Trenholm & Jensen, 2004). Berger and Calabrese (1975) related social comparison to URT by stating that “Festinger has suggested that persons seek out similar others who are proximate when they experience a high level of uncertainty regarding the appropriateness of their behavior and/or opinions in a particular situation” (p. 107).

Festinger received the Distinguished Scientist Award of the American Psychological Association and the Distinguished Senior Scientist Award from the Society of Experimental Social Psychology. Festinger’s legacy is significant, and his theoretical influence can still be recognized in contemporary social science research. Aronson (in Festinger, 1980) stated, “It was in this era that Leon Festinger invented and developed his theory of cognitive dissonance, and in my opinion, social psychology has not been the same since” (p. 3).

Fritz Heider (1896-1988)[সম্পাদনা]

Fritz Heider earned his doctorate in philosophy from the University of Graz. During his time in Europe, Heider worked with many renowned psychologists such as Wolfgang Köhler, Max Wertheimer, and Kurt Lewin. Heider, like Festinger, recognized Lewin as a substantial impact on his life: “I want to pay tribute to [Lewin's] stimulating influence, which has affected much of my thinking and which is still strong even in this book, although it does not derive directly from his work” (Heider, 1958, p. vii). In 1929, Heider moved to the United States to work at Smith College and later the University of Kansas where he worked for the remainder of his life (Ash, 2000).

Heider’s 1958 publication, The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations, signified a major breakthrough in the study of interpersonal communication (Heath & Bryant, 2000). At this point, social psychologists like Heider expanded their research to focus on interpersonal relations as an important field of study. Though many social psychologists focused on behavior in interpersonal relations, their research served as a gateway for research examining communication in interpersonal relationships. Heider’s text provided one of the first forums for discussing relational phenomena.

Heider’s work reflected Lewin’s cognitive approach to behavior. Heider (1958) focused on theories in cognitive consistency, emphasizing that individuals prefer when their cognitions are in agreement with each other. Heider examined how individuals perceive and evaluate the actions and behaviors of others, a focus reexamined in Berger and Calabrese’s development of URT. Heider stated: “persons actively seek to predict and explain the actions of others” (Berger & Bradac, 1982, p. 29). Heider’s theory of “naïve psychology” suggested that individuals act as observers and analyzers of human behavior in everyday life. Individuals gather the information that helps them to predict and explain human behavior. “The naïve factor analysis of action permits a man to give meaning to action, to influence the actions of others as well as of himself, and to predict future actions” (Heider, 1958, p. 123).

When examining motivations in interpersonal relations, Heider (1958) found that effective significance is greatly determined by causal attribution. Heider states: “Thus, our reactions will be different according to whether we think a person failed primarily because he lacked the adequate ability or primarily because he did not want to carry out the actions” (1958, p. 123). The condition of motivation becomes the focus and is relied on for making judgments and also interpreting the action.

Heider was awarded a Guggenheim Fellowship, a Distinguished Scientific Contribution Award from the American Psychological Association, and was a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. His influence continues to grow after his death in 1988.

Claude E. Shannon (1916-2001) and Warren Weaver (1894-1978)[সম্পাদনা]

Claude E. Shannon received his B.S. from the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, and his Ph.D. from Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). Shannon worked for the National Research Council, the National Defense Research Committee, and Bell Telephone Laboratories, where he developed the mathematical theory of communication, now known as information theory, with Warren Weaver. Shannon went on to teach at MIT until his death in 2001. During his lifetime Shannon was awarded the Liebmann Prize, Ballantine Medal, Who's Who Life Achievement Prize, and the Kyoto Prize (“Claude Elwood Shannon”, 2002).

Warren Weaver received his B.S. and Ph.D. from the University of Wisconsin. Weaver worked as faculty at Throop College, California Institute of Technology, University of Wisconsin, and served in World War One. Weaver was also an active member of the Rockefeller Foundation, Sloan-Kettering Institute for Cancer Research, Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, and Salk Institute for Biological Studies, serving in many leadership roles. He was awarded UNESCO's Kalinga Prize before his death in 1978 (Reingold, 2000).

Shannon and Weaver significantly contributed to the systematic approach to the study of communication. Both theorists were engineers who sought to explain information exchange through cybernetic processes. They were the first to effectively model information, as they sought to explain how to attain precise and efficient signal transmissions in the realm of telecommunications. In their theory of information, Shannon and Weaver (1949) showed that the need to reduce uncertainty motivates an individual’s communication behavior. This concept was later extended by Berger and Calabrese (1975) in the development of URT.

Information theory provided the connections from information to uncertainty and uncertainty to communication that facilitated the development of URT. “Shannon & Weaver’s (1949) approach stressed the conclusion that information is the number of messages needed to totally reduce uncertainty” (Heath & Bryant, 2000, p. 145). Individuals have a desire to reduce uncertainty and they are able to fulfill this need by increasing information. Individuals increase information through communication (Shannon & Weaver, 1949). These concepts are further explored in the examination of information-seeking strategies in URT.

Uncertainty in the Modern Era[সম্পাদনা]

Charles R. Berger: Biography[সম্পাদনা]

Charles R. Berger received his B.S. from Pennsylvania State University and his M.A. and Ph.D. from Michigan State University. After graduation, Berger worked at Illinois State University at Normal, Northwestern University, and the University of California at Davis, where he continues to work today as the chair of the Department of Communication. Berger has been involved with the International Communication Association since the 1970s, is an active member of the National Communication Association, and belongs to such professional groups as the American Psychological Society, the Society for Experimental Social Psychology, the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, and the Iowa Network for Personal Relationships (“Charles R. Berger”, 2001).

Berger has published on a variety of topics in interpersonal communication including uncertainty reduction, strategic interaction, information-seeking, attribution, interpersonal attraction, social cognition, and apprehension. In the past thirty-five years, Berger has published approximately forty articles appearing in the Communication Education, Communication Monographs, Communication Research, Communication Theory, Communication Quarterly, Communication Yearbook, Educational and Psychological Measurement, Human Communication Research, Journal of Communication, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology Journal of Social Issues, Journal of Personality, Personal Relationship Issues, Speech Monographs, Western Journal of Communication, and the Western Journal of Speech Communication. Berger has coauthored five books and contributed to over thirty other texts. In 1982, Berger received the Golden Anniversary Book Award, presented by the Speech Communication Association, for his text: Language and Social Knowledge.

Richard J. Calabrese: Biography[সম্পাদনা]

Richard J. Calabrese received his B.A. from Loyola University, two M.A. degrees from Bradley University, and his Ph.D. from Northwestern University. Calabrese has taught at Bradley University, the University of Illinois at Urban, and Bowling Green University. Calabrese became a professor in communication at Dominican University in River Forest, Illinois, in 1967, where he continues to work today. Currently, Calabrese is the director of the Master of Science in Organization Management Program at Dominican University and also a consultant for organizational communication (“Richard Joseph Calabrese”, 2001).

Calabrese is a member of the International Association of Business Communicators, the Speech Communication Association, and is involved with the National Communication Association. Calabrese is the coauthor of Communication and Education Skills for Dietetics Professionals.

A Theory of Uncertainty Reduction: “Some explorations in initial interaction and beyond: Toward a developmental theory of interpersonal communication” (1975).[সম্পাদনা]

In 1971, Berger became an assistant professor of communication at Northwestern University. During this time, Calabrese studied under Berger, receiving his Ph.D. in 1973. In 1975, Berger and Calabrese published “Some explorations in initial interaction and beyond: Toward a developmental theory of interpersonal communication,” which serves as the foundation of URT. This article inspired a wave of new research examining the role of uncertainty in communication. Berger and Calabrese (1975) formed URT, also known as initial interaction theory, to explain the role of communication in reducing uncertainty in initial interactions and the development of interpersonal relationships.

The theory was developed, like other interpersonal theories before it (Heider, 1958), with the goal of allowing the communicator the ability to predict and explain initial interactions. Though Berger and Calabrese did not explore the realm of subsequent interaction, they did strongly recommend that future research should investigate the application of the framework of URT to developed relationships. Especially in initial encounters, there exists a high degree of uncertainty given that a number of possible alternatives exist in the situation (Shannon & Weaver, 1949). But individuals can use communication to reduce this uncertainty. Berger and Calabrese (1975) maintained that “communication behavior is one vehicle through which such predictions and explanations are themselves formulated” (p. 101). Individuals have the ability to decrease uncertainty by establishing predictable patterns of interaction. Because of this, reducing uncertainty can help foster the development of relationships.

Berger and Calabrese (1975) found that uncertainty was related to seven other communication and relational-focused concepts: verbal output, nonverbal warmth, information seeking, self-disclosure, reciprocity, similarity, and liking. From those concepts, the researchers introduced a collection of axioms, or propositions, supported by past uncertainty research. Each axiom states a relationship between a communication concept and uncertainty. From this basis of axioms, the theorists were able to use deductive logic to infer twenty-one theorems that comprise the theory of uncertainty reduction (West & Turner, 2000). The procedure used to develop the axioms and theorems was adopted from Blalock (1969). A complete list of the axioms and theorems of URT is available in Appendix A.

Central to URT is the supposition that in initial interactions, an individual’s primary concern is to decrease uncertainty and increase predictability regarding the behaviors of the self and the communicative partner. This idea is based on Heider's (1958) notion that individuals seek to make sense out of the events he perceives (Berger & Calabrese, 1975). Individuals must be able to engage in proactive and retroactive strategies to learn how to predict what will happen and also explain what has already happened.

Heath and Bryant (2000) stated: “Uncertainty-reduction theory is a powerful explanation for communication because it operates in all contexts to help explain why people communicate as they do” (p. 271). The impact of Berger and Calabrese (1975) on the field of interpersonal communication was and continues to be prolific. In the past thirty years, this article has generated a plethora of research, changing the way that relationships are explored and analyzed.

Expansions on Uncertainty Reduction[সম্পাদনা]

Although URT was primarily formed to explain behavior in initial interactions, its application has since been expanded to incorporate all levels of interpersonal relationships. “Uncertainties are ongoing in relationships, and thus the process of uncertainty reduction is relevant in developed relationships as well as in initial interactions” (West & Turner, 2000, p. 141). The following section will examine uncertainty reduction research since its introduction in 1975.

A. Charles Berger[সম্পাদনা]

Since its conception, Berger has produced a plethora of research expanding URT to better fit the dynamic nature of interpersonal relations. Berger (1979) established that three predeceasing conditions must exist for an individual to reduce uncertainty. These motivations to reduce uncertainty include the potential for costs or rewards, deviations from expected behavior, and the possibility of future interaction.

In 1982, Berger teamed up with James J. Bradac, formerly of the University of California at Santa Barbara (1980–2004), to publish a book devoted to uncertainty reduction research. Their text, titled Language and Social Knowledge: Uncertainty in Interpersonal Relations, was also edited by Howard Giles, the originator of Communication Accommodation Theory and also faculty of UCSB. In this text, the authors focused on the function of communication, and specific language, as a proponent for reducing uncertainty.

Berger and Bradac (1982) proposed six axioms that built on URT’s original seven axioms to extend the relationship between uncertainty reduction and language. Through the use of these axioms, the authors specifically examined the role of language as an uncertainty reducing agent. The authors further arranged uncertainty into two categories: cognitive uncertainty and behavioral uncertainty (Berger & Bradac, 1982). Cognitive uncertainty refers to the uncertainty associated with beliefs and attitudes. Behavioral uncertainty refers to uncertainty regarding the possible behaviors in a situation. This categorization helped researchers identify the origins of uncertainty, which resulted in an increased ability to address the discomfort produced by uncertainty.

Berger and Bradac were cognitive that URT would be more useful if its influence was extended to include developed relationships as well as initial interaction. Berger and Bradac (1982) alleviated this by stating that uncertainty reduction was critical to relational development, maintenance, and dissolution as well. Berger again related his research to Heider (1958) by stating that individuals make casual attributions regarding communicative behavior. As relationships further develop, individuals make retroactive and proactive attributions regarding a partner’s communication and behavior (Berger & Bradac, 1982).

Berger (1987) highlighted the role of costs and rewards in relationships by stating that “uncertainty reduction is a necessary condition for the definition of the currency of social exchange, and it is through the communicative activity that uncertainty is reduced” (Berger, 1987, p. 57). Berger (1987) also expanded URT by claiming that three types of information-seeking strategies are used to reduce uncertainty: passive, active, or interactive strategies. This is related to the concepts of information theory (Shannon & Weaver, 1949), emphasizing that increased information results in decreased uncertainty.

B. Developments from Other Researchers[সম্পাদনা]

The latter improvements made by Berger expanded the scope and value of URT. Other researchers also made contributions to further developments of URT. Since its introduction in 1975, URT has been expanded from a theory of relational development to one also important in established relationships. The following sections examine the contributions made by current interpersonal researchers to URT.

William Douglas
William Douglas was a student at Northwestern University while Berger was on faculty. The two scholars collaborated in their study of uncertainty in 1982, and Douglas continued in the same vein of research after graduation. Douglas’ research has appeared in major communication journals including: Communication Monographs, Communication Research, Human Communication Research, Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, and the Journal of Personal and Social Relationships. Douglas’ research in uncertainty accounts for individual differences when examining initial interactions. Much of his research expanded previous work in initial interaction, examined global uncertainty, self-monitoring, and the relationship of verbal communication to uncertainty reduction.
Douglas (1987) examined one of the motivations to reduce uncertainty originally posited in Berger (1979): the anticipation of future interaction. In this study, question-asking in situations of varying levels of anticipated future interaction was analyzed. Douglas found that high levels of mutual question-asking occurred when the level of anticipated future interaction was moderate. This finding suggested that individuals seem to avoid negative consequences (Douglas, 1987). Douglas (1990) expanded this verbal communication to uncertainty relationship by discovering that question-asking resulted in uncertainty reduction which in turn resulted in increased levels of disclosure.
Douglas (1991) defines global uncertainty as “uncertainty about acquaintanceship in general” (p. 356). In this article, Douglas found that individuals with high global uncertainty are less likely to engage in question-asking, self-disclosure, and are evaluated as less competent communicators than individuals with low global uncertainty. Findings also suggested that high global uncertainty positively correlates to communication apprehension. This has a negative effect on relational development and can result in low levels of relational satisfaction.
Uncertainty-Increasing Events
Sally Planalp and James Honeycutt (1985) also made substantial contributions to uncertainty reduction research. Planalp and Honeycutt recognized that communication does not always function as an uncertainty reducing agent, but can also serve to increase uncertainty when information conflicts with past knowledge. The authors researched what specific events lead to increased uncertainty in interpersonal relationships and their effects on both the individual and the relationship. The results found that uncertainty-increasing events were very likely to result in relational dissolution or decreased closeness of the relational partners. This research was very beneficial because it led to better explanations regarding the role of communication in uncertainty reduction.
Romantic Relationships
Malcolm Parks and Mara Adelman (1983) sought to expand the breadth of URT to apply to romantic relationships. Data was collected from individuals in premarital romantic relationships through questionnaires and telephone interviews. Individuals who communicated more often with their romantic partner and their partner’s network (family and friends) perceived greater similarity to their partner. They also received greater support from their own network (family and friends) and experienced a lower degree of uncertainty (Parks & Adelman, 1983). These findings support URT’s axioms that greater verbal communication and similarity serve to decrease uncertainty (Berger & Calabrese, 1975), and also extend the scope of URT to romantic relationships.
Relational Maintenance
In recent years, studies have begun to link uncertainty reduction to relational maintenance processes. Dainton and Aylor (2001) connected relational uncertainty positively to jealousy and negatively to relational maintenance behaviors. These results suggested that individuals are less likely to engage in relational maintenance when high uncertainty exists in the relationship.
Cultural Studies
Research conducted by William Gudykunst and Tsukasa Nishida (1984) expanded URT’s scope to intercultural contexts. Specifically, the researchers examined the effects of attitude similarity, cultural similarity, culture, and self-monitoring on attraction, intent to interrogate, intent to self-disclose, attributional confidence, and intent to display nonverbal affiliative behaviors (Gudykunst & Nishida, 1984). Research conducted on individuals of the Japanese and American cultures found a positive correlation between each of the variables indicating that uncertainty varies across cultures.

C. Criticisms of URT[সম্পাদনা]

Berger (1987) recognized that URT “contains some propositions of dubious validity” (p. 40). Like many other successful theoretical approaches, Berger and Calabrese’s (1975) theory of uncertainty reduction has inspired subsequent research that served both as supporting evidence and in an oppositional role to the theory. These criticisms help to clarify the underlying principles of the theory and suggest ways for improvement for future research.

Michael Sunnafrank (1986) argued that a motivation to reduce uncertainty is not a primary concern in initial interactions. His belief was that a “maximization of relational outcomes” (p. 9) was of more significant concern in initial encounters. Sunnafrank argued that the predicted outcome value (POV) of the interaction had a greater effect on uncertainty. Berger (1986) combated Sunnafrank’s arguments by acknowledging that outcomes cannot be predicted if there is no previous history of interaction regarding the behavior of the individuals. Berger claims that Sunnafrank’s arguments simply expanded URT: that by predicting outcomes (using POV) individuals are actually reducing their uncertainty (Berger, 1986).

Kathy Kellermann and Rodney Reynolds (1990) also tested the validity of the URT. Their primary concern was axiom three, which related high uncertainty to high information seeking (see appendix A). Their study of over a thousand students found that want for knowledge was a greater indicator than a lack of knowledge for the promotion of information-seeking (Kellermann & Reynolds, 1990). These researchers emphasized that high uncertainty does not create enough motivation to result in information-seeking; rather want for information must also exist.

Canary and Dainton (2003) explored uncertainty reduction in terms of relational maintenance across cultural contexts and found that the applicability of URT may not hold to multiple cultures. Canary and Dainton (2003) focused on the concept of uncertainty avoidance in cultures stating: “individuals from cultures with a high tolerance for uncertainty are unlikely to find the experience of uncertainty as a primary motivator for performing relational maintenance” (p. 314). This leads to a general questioning of the validity of URT other cultures.

Legacy and Influence[সম্পাদনা]

Research has found that communication plays a critical role in initial interactions and relational development. Berger and Calabrese (1975) were the first to investigate the role of communication in initial interactions with the development of a theory of uncertainty reduction. Its widespread influence led to its adoption in other relational and communicative contexts such as small groups, mass communication, and computer-mediated communication.

The influence of URT is well noted by others in the field: “Postulates by Berger and Calabrese prompted more than two decades of research to prove, clarify, and critique uncertainty reduction’s explanation of how people communicate interpersonally” (Heath & Bryant, 2000, p. 275). Berger and Calabrese (1975) generated additional studies on uncertainty reduction accomplished by such scholars as Hewes, Planalp, Parks, Adelman, Gudykunst, Yang, Nishida, Douglas, Kellerman, Hammer, Rutherford, Honeycutt, Sunnafrank, Capella, Werner, and Baxter. URT has withstood the test of time, proving itself as a heuristic theory with the utility that increases with subsequent research.

Appendix A: Axioms and Theorems of Uncertainty Reduction Theory[সম্পাদনা]

Axioms of Uncertainty Reduction Theory[সম্পাদনা]

  1. Given the high level of uncertainty present at the onset of the entry phase, as the amount of verbal communication between strangers increases, the level of uncertainty for each interactant in the relationship will decrease. As uncertainty is further reduced, the amount of verbal communication will increase.
  2. As nonverbal affiliative expressiveness increases, uncertainty levels will decrease in an initial interaction situation. In addition, decreases in uncertainty level will cause increases in nonverbal affiliative expressiveness.
  3. High levels of uncertainty cause an increase in information-seeking behavior. As uncertainty levels decline, information-seeking behavior decreases.
  4. High levels of uncertainty in a relationship cause decreases in the intimacy level of communication content. Low levels of uncertainty produce high levels of intimacy.
  5. High levels of uncertainty produce high rates of reciprocity. Low levels of uncertainty produce low reciprocity rates.
  6. Similarities between persons reduce uncertainty, while dissimilarities produce increases in uncertainty.
  7. Increases in uncertainty level produce decreases in liking; decreases in uncertainty level produce increases in liking.

Theorems of Uncertainty Reduction Theory[সম্পাদনা]

  1. Amount of verbal communication and nonverbal affiliative expressiveness are positively related.
  2. Amount of communication and intimacy level of communication are positively related.
  3. Amount of communication and information seeking behavior are inversely related.
  4. Amount of communication and reciprocity rate are inversely related.
  5. Amount of communication and liking are positively related.
  6. Amount of communication and similarity are positively related.
  7. Nonverbal affiliative expressiveness and intimacy level of communication content are positively related.
  8. Nonverbal affiliative expressiveness and information seeking are inversely related.
  9. Nonverbal affiliative expressiveness and reciprocity rate are inversely related.
  10. Nonverbal affiliative expressiveness and liking are positively related.
  11. Nonverbal affiliative expressiveness and similarity are positively related.
  12. Intimacy level of communication content and information seeking are inversely related.
  13. Intimacy level of communication content and reciprocity rate are inversely related.
  14. Intimacy level of communication content and liking are positively related.
  15. Intimacy level of communication content and similarity are positively related.
  16. Information seeking and reciprocity rate are positively related.
  17. Information seeking and liking are negatively related.
  18. Information seeking and similarity are negatively related.
  19. Reciprocity rate and liking are negatively related.
  20. Reciprocity rate and similarity are negatively related.
  21. Similarity and liking are positively related.

References[সম্পাদনা]

Ash, M.G. (2000). Heider, Fritz. American National Biography Online. Retrieved October 10, 2005 from http://www.anb.org/articles/14/14-00910.html

Berger, C.R. (1979). Beyond initial interaction: Uncertainty, understanding, and the development of interpersonal relationships. In H. Giles & R. St. Clair (eds.), Language and social psychology (pp. 122–144). Oxford: Blackwell.

Berger, C.R. (1986). Uncertain outcome values in predicted relationships: Uncertainty reduction theory then and now. Human Communication Research, 13, 34-38.

Berger, C. R. (1987). Communicating under uncertainty. In M. E. Roloff & G. R. Miller (Eds.), Interpersonal processes: New directions in communication research (p. 39-62). Newbury Park, C.A.: Sage.

Berger, C.R. (2005). Interpersonal communication: Theoretical perspectives, future prospects. Journal of Communication, 55, 415-447.

Berger, C.R., & Bradac, J.J. (1982). Language and social knowledge. London: Edward Arnold Publishers Ltd.

Berger, C.R., & Calabrese, R.J. (1975). Some explorations in initial interaction and beyond: Toward a developmental theory of interpersonal communication. Human Communication Research, 1, 99-112.

Blalock, H.M. (1969). Theory construction: From verbal to mathematical formulations. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.

Canary, D., & Dainton, M. (Eds.). (2003). Maintaining relationships through communication. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Charles R. Berger. Contemporary Authors Online. The Gale Group, 2001. Retrieved October 5, 2005

Claude Elwood Shannon. Contemporary Authors Online. The Gale Group, 2002. Retrieved October 15, 2005

Dainton, M. & Aylor, B. (2001). A relational uncertainty analysis of jealousy, trust, and maintenance in long-distance versus geographically close relationships. Communication Quarterly, 49, 172-189.

Douglas, William. (1987). Question-asking in same- and opposite-sex initial interactions: The effects of anticipated future interaction. Human Communication Research, 14, 230-245.

Douglas, W. (1990). Uncertainty, information-seeking, and liking during initial interaction. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 54, 66-81.

Douglas, W. (1991). Expectations about initial interaction: An examination of the effects of global uncertainty. Human Communication Research, 17, 355-384.

Festinger, L. (Ed.). (1980). Retrospections on Social Psychology. New York: Oxford University Press.

Gudykunst, William B., and Nishida, Tsukasa. (1984). Individual and cultural influences on uncertainty reduction. Communication Monographs, 51 23-36.

Heider, F. (1958). The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Heath, R.L., & Bryant, J. (2000). Human communication theory and research. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Kellerman, K., & Reynolds, R. (1990). When ignorance is bliss: The role of motivation to reduce uncertainty in uncertainty reduction theory. Human Communication Research, 17, 5-35.

Parks, Malcolm R., and Adelman, Mara B. (1983). Communication networks and the development of romantic relationships. Human Communication Research, 10, 55-79.

Planalp, Sally, and Honeycutt, James M. (1985). Events that increase uncertainty in personal relationships. Human Communication Research, 11, 593-604.

Reingold, N. (2000). Weaver, Warren. American National Biography Online. Retrieved October 10, 2005 from http://www.anb.org/articles/14/14-01999.html

Richard Joseph Calabrese. Contemporary Authors Online. The Gale Group, 2001. Retrieved October 5, 2005

Samelson, F. (2000). Festinger, Leon. American National Biography Online. Retrieved October 10, 2005 from http://www.anb.org/articles/14/14-00887.html

Shannon, C.E. & Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana, I.L.: University of Illinois press.

Sunnafrank, M. (1986). Predicted outcome value during initial interactions: A reformation of uncertainty reduction theory. Human Communication Research, 13, 191-210.

Trenholm, S., & Jensen, A. (2004). Interpersonal communication. New York: Oxford University Press.

West, R., & Turner, L. (2000). Introducing communication theory. Mountain View, C.A.: Mayfield Publishing Company.

Who’s Who in the Midwest 1992-1993. (1993). Wilmette, I.L.: Marquis Who’s Who.

টেমপ্লেট:Communication Theory/Navigation