Hannah Dumaine

Communication Senior Seminar

Doctor Kristen Berkos

September 20, 2021

DP1- Chapter 3: Cognition and Intrapersonal Communication

Summary:

This chapter discusses intrapersonal communication and the theories that align with the
overarching idea that meaning is only derived from communication when a person perceives the
message and gives it meaning. The book states that communication has no meaning without an
individual’s interpretation. Individuals cannot get the meaning of a message by just looking at
the words and behaviors, but instead, personal interpretations are needed. The book discusses
four main theories: attribution theory, uncertainty reduction theory, expectancy violations theory,
and cognitive dissonance theory. While describing the theories, the authors discuss the contexts,
persuasion, and relationships and their role in communication messages.

Attribution theory explains how individuals assign causation and motive to the messages
of others. The theory states that there are two categories of factors as for who is responsible for
the behavior of the message sender: dispositional and situational. Dispositional factors are
internal or personal features of the individual which are motivating them to send the message,
such as personality or character. Unlike dispositional, situational factors are the external
dynamics surrounding the sender, such as environment and circumstance. This theory puts a lot
of power in the hands of the receiver and inserts more ambiguity and personal reasoning behind
the message- it allows the receiver to use their own personal framework to decipher each
message. This theory is most interesting because it leaves so much room for interpretation on the
receiver’s end. No matter the intention of the sender, this theory is saying that it’s the receiver’s
interpretation of the causal factors that determines the meaning of the communication.

Secondly, uncertainty reduction theory describes the feeling of being uncomfortable and
an individual’s need to reduce that uncertainty. The theory describes three main motivations as
for why an individual works to reduce the uncertainty about a situation or message. The first is
the anticipation of future interactions, and this states that individuals move to reduce uncertainty
when they are likely to see the sender again. The second is incentive value, an individual is more
apt to learn more about the sender when there is perceived value to be gained from the situation
or sender. The third and final motivation is deviance, meaning that if someone or something is
bizarre or abnormal, the receiver is likely to try and learn more.

Next, expectancy violations theory intends to predict and explain an individual’s reaction
to their assumptions of a situation or what will happen is contradicted. The theory also states that
individuals have competing needs and expectations. For example, an individual can desire
closeness but can also want privacy at the same time, this is what makes humans so complex.
The violation valence is also a key contributing factor as to how an individual interprets and
reacts to a message or situation. Judee Burgoon explains that there are two variations of how you
can evaluate and interpret a message, positive and negative. Relationship characteristics play a
role in determining if the valence is positive or negative. If you are in good standing with and
enjoy the sender, when they violate an expectation, it is less likely that you will react negatively
to the message. But, if the individual already has a negative framework surrounding the sender,
then it is more likely that the receiver will react negatively, and the message will be seen as
negative and a more serious violation.

Lastly, the cognitive dissonance theory explains how individuals strive to have
congruence between their beliefs and their behaviors. There are three relationships between an
individual's beliefs and behaviors: irrelevance, consonance, and dissonance. An irrelevant
relationship means that there is no connection to the behaviors and beliefs, therefore the
relationship is irrelevant, it's the absence of both consonance and dissonance. Consonance is
when an individual’s beliefs and behaviors are aligned, whereas when there’s dissonance, they
are contradicting each other. Individuals then make changes to their beliefs or actions in order to
align them and create consonance.

Application:

The chapter also explains how persuasion and the cognitive dissonance theory can be
used as a cognitive tool. An individual can create dissonance for another person, and then
provide a solution to create the outcome they desire. I found this view of the theory captivating
and it made me think of manipulation from psychopaths and sociopaths.

Currently, in the show that I am watching, Reese, one of the main characters, her dad has
a diagnosed anti personality disorder. In one of the episodes, he reappears after abandoning
Reese for 20 years, and fakes a heart attack after having major heart surgery so that his daughter
will come to his rescue and aid him in his recovery. We then see him manipulate her throughout
the next couple of episodes and guide her towards the decision of becoming his sole caretaker
once he gets out of the hospital. Her father created dissonance between her wanting to help him
recover and wanting to have nothing to do with him since he abandoned her as a child. Once the
dissonance was created, he gave her a multitude of solutions so that in the end he was the one
benefiting from the situation. He no longer would have to suffer alone and would always have
someone to take care of him after his surgery. He created consonance where there had originally
been irrelevance.
Discussion Q’s:

1. When examining other people’s communication, do you tend to look more at their
dispositional factors or their situational factors, and why? Do you make assumptions off
of their personality and character or their situation and environment?
2. Do you think some level of uncertainty is healthy or do you think that we should always
be asking questions and trying to have it so that there is the least amount of uncertainty?
3. As com majors, do you think we have a responsibility to reduce uncertainty for others
who may not feel as comfortable discussing harder and more taboo topics?
4. Is it ethical to use persuasion through dissonance just so that we can develop the outcome
we want?