Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-8bbf57454-w5vlw Total loading time: 1.566 Render date: 2022-01-22T12:17:35.600Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

18 - Communication

Basic Properties and Their Relevance to Relationship Research

from Part V - Basic Processes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 June 2018

Anita L. Vangelisti
Affiliation:
University of Texas, Austin
Daniel Perlman
Affiliation:
University of North Carolina, Greensboro
Get access

Summary

The temptation to engage in extradyadic sex and the tendency to respond with jealousy to such behavior by one's partner are interrelated and universal human phenomena, which are part of our human evolutionary heritage. In the present chapter, we first discuss the norms with respect to extradyadic sex, the incidence of extradyadic sexual involvement, and determinants of such involvement, for example attitudes towards sexuality, attachment styles, and relationship factors. In the second part of the chapter we focus on the consequences of extradyadic involvement for the individual and the primary relationship, with a particular focus on the experience of jealousy. After discussing several types of jealousy, we discuss the determinants of jealousy, such as the type of infidelity, the characteristics of the romantic rival, and the influence of hormones. The final part of the chapter is devoted to coping with extradyadic sex and jealousy as well as therapeutic approaches.
Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2018

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Afifi, T. D., Merrill, A. F., & Davis, S. (2016). The theory of resilience and relational load. Personal Relationships, 23, 663683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aloia, L. S., & Solomon, D. H. (2015). Conflict intensity, family history, and physiological stress reactions to conflict within romantic relationships. Human Communication Research, 14, 367389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Altman, I., Vinsel, A., & Brown, B. B. (1981). Dialectic conceptions in social psychology: An application to social penetration and privacy regulation. In Berkowitz, L. (ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 14, pp. 107160). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Argyle, M., & Dean, J. (1965). Eye contact, distance, and affiliation. Sociometry, 28, 289304.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Barratt, M. S. (1995). Communication in infancy. In Fitzpatrick, M. A. & Vangelisti, A. L. (eds.) Explaining family interactions (pp. 533). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind. New York, NY: Ballantine.Google Scholar
Baucom, B. R., Dickenson, J. A., Atkins, D. C., Baucom, D. H., Fischer, M. S., Weusthoff, S., Hahlweg, K., & Zimmermann, T. (2015). The interpersonal process model of demand/withdraw behavior. Journal of Family Psychology, 29, 8090.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baucom, B. R., McFarland, P. T., & Christensen, A. (2010). Gender, topic, and time in observed demand–withdraw interaction in cross- and same-sex couples. Journal of Family Psychology, 25, 570580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bavelas, J. B., Black, A., Chovill, N., & Mullett, J. (1990). Equivocal communication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Bavelas, J. B., & Coates, L. (1992). How do we account for the mindfulness of face-to-face dialogue? Communication Monographs, 59, 301305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baxter, L. A. (1987). Symbols of relationship identity in relationship cultures. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 4, 261280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baxter, L. A., & Montgomery, B. M. (1996). Relating: Dialogues and dialectics. New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Berger, C. R., Gardner, R. R., Clatterbuck, G. W., & Schulman, L. S. (1976). Perceptions of information sequencing in relationship development. Human Communication Research, 3, 3439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berger, C. R., & Palomares, N. A. (2011). Knowledge structures and social interaction. In Knapp, M. L. & Daly, J. A. (eds.) The Sage handbook of interpersonal communication (4th edn., pp. 169200). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Bloch, L., Haase, C. M., & Levenson, R. W. (2014). Emotion regulation predicts marital satisfaction: More than a wives’ tale. Emotion, 14, 130144.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bruess, C. J. S., & Pearson, J. C. (1997). Interpersonal rituals in marriage and adult friendship. Communication Monographs, 64, 2546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruner, J. (1990). Acts of meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Buehlman, K., Gottman, J. M., & Katz, L. (1992). How a couple views their past predicts their future: Predicting divorce from an oral interview. Journal of Family Psychology, 5, 295318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burgoon, J. K., Stern, L. A., & Dillman, L. (1995). Interpersonal adaptation: Dyadic interaction patterns. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burleson, B. R., Metts, S., & Kirch, M. W. (2000). Communication in close relationships. In Hendrick, C. & Hendrick, S. S. (eds.) Close relationships: A sourcebook (pp. 245258). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Byng-Hall, J. (1988). Scripts and legends in families and family therapy. Family Process, 27, 167179.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cappella, J. N. (1987). Interpersonal communication: Fundamental questions and issues. In Berger, C. R. & Chaffee, S. H. (eds.) Handbook of communication science (pp. 184238). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Cappella, J. N. (1988). Personal relationships, social relationships, and patterns of interaction. In Duck, S. W. (ed.) Handbook of personal relationships (pp. 325342). Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
Cappella, J. N., & Planalp, S. (1981). Talk and silence sequences in informal conversations: Interspeaker influence. Human Communication Research, 7, 117132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carr, D., Freedman, V. A., Cornman, J. C., & Schwarz, N. (2014). Happy marriage, happy life? Marital quality and subjective well-being in later life. Journal of Marriage and Family, 76, 930948.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carston, R. (2002). Thoughts and utterances: The pragmatics of explicit communication. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caughlin, J. P. (2010). A multiple goals theory of personal relationships: Conceptual integration and program overview. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 27, 824848.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caughlin, J. P., Basinger, E. D., & Sharabi, L. L. (2016). The connections between communication technologies and relational conflict: A multiple goals and communication interdependence perspective. In Samp, J. A. (ed.) Communicating interpersonal conflict in close relationships: Contexts, challenges and opportunities (pp. 5277). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Caughlin, J. P., Petronio, S., & Middleton, A. (2013). When families manage private information. In Vangelisti, A. L. (ed.) Routledge handbook of family communication (2nd edn., pp. 321337). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Caughlin, J. P., Scott, A. M., Miller, L. E., & Hefner, V. (2009). Putative secrets: When information is supposedly a secret. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 26, 313743.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caughlin, J. P., & Vangelisti, A. L. (1999). Desire for change in one’s partner as a predictor of the demand/withdraw pattern of marital communication. Communication Monographs, 66, 6689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caughlin, J. P., & Vangelisti, A. L. (2009). Why people conceal or reveal secrets: A multiple goals perspective. In Afifi, T. & Afifi, W. (eds.) Uncertainty, information management, and disclosure decisions: Theories and applications (pp. 279299). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Clark, R. A., & Delia, J. G. (1979). Topoi and rhetorical competence. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 65, 187206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colvin, C. R., Vogt, D. S., & Ickes, W. (1997). Why do friends understand each other better than strangers do? In Ickes, W. (ed.) Empathic accuracy (pp. 169193). New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Craig, R. T. (1999). Communication theory as a field. Communication Theory, 9, 119161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Craig, R. T., Tracy, K., & Spisak, F. (1986). The discourse of requests: Assessment of a politeness approach. Human Communication Research, 12, 436478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cushman, D., & Whiting, G. C. (1972). An approach to communication theory: Toward consensus on rules. Journal of Communication, 22, 217238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Danziger, K. (1976). Interpersonal communication. New York, NY: Pergamon.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denzin, N. (1970). Rules of conduct and the study of deviant behavior: Some notes on the social relationship. In McCall, G., McCall, M., Denzin, N., Suttles, G., & Kurth, S. (eds.) Social relationships (pp. 6294). Chicago, IL: Aldine.Google Scholar
Dillard, J. P., Segrin, C., & Harden, J. M. (1989). Primary and secondary goals in the production of interpersonal influence messages. Communication Monographs, 56, 1938.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doohan, E. M., Carrere, S., & Riggs, M. L. (2010). Using relational stories to predict the trajectory toward marital dissolution: The oral history interview and spousal feelings of flooding, loneliness, and depression. Journal of Family Communication, 10, 5777.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duck, S. (1995). Talking relationships into being. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 12, 535540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duck, S. (2002). Hypertext in the key of G: Three types of “history” as influences on conversational structure and flow. Communication Theory, 12, 4142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duck, S. W., & Pond, K. (1988). Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your retrospective data: Rhetoric and reality in personal relationships. In Hendrick, C. (ed.) Review of social psychology and personality, Vol. 10: Close relationships (pp. 327). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Duck, S., Rutt, D. J., Hurst, M. H., & Strejc, H. (1991). Some evident truths about conversations in everyday relationships: All communications are not created equal. Human Communication Research, 18, 228267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duncan, S., & Fiske, D. W. (1977). Face-to-face interaction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Erbert, L. (2000). Conflict and dialectics: Perceptions of dialectical contradictions in marital conflict. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 17, 638659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erbert, L. A., & Duck, S. W. (1997). Rethinking satisfaction in personal relationships from a dialectical perspective. In Sternberg, R. J. & Hojjat, M. (eds.) Satisfaction in close relationships (pp. 190217). New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Fisher, B. A., & Drecksel, G. L. (1983). A cyclical model of developing relationships: A study of relational control interaction. Communication Monographs, 1, 6678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fletcher, G. J. O. (2015). Accuracy and bias of judgements in romantic relationships. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 24, 292297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franklin, B., Warlaumont, A. S., Messinger, D., Bene, E., Iver, S. N., & Lee, C. C. (2014). Effects of parental interaction on infant vocalization rate, variability, and vocal type. Language Learning and Development, 10, 279296.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frentz, T. S., & Farrell, T. B. (1976). Language-action: A paradigm for communication. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 62, 333349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frost, D. M. (2012). The narrative construction of intimacy and affect in narrative stories: Implications for relationship quality, stability, and mental health. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 30, 247269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gergen, K. J., & Gergen, M. M. (1987). Narratives of relationship. In Burnett, R., McGhee, P., & Clarke, D. (eds.) Accounting for relationships (pp. 269288). New York, NY: Methuen.Google Scholar
Gillen, H. G., & Horan, S. M. (2013). Toward an understanding of the relationships among deceptive affection, deceptive beliefs, and relational qualities. Communication Research Reports, 30, 352358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giles, H., & Gasiorek, J. (2010). Intergenerational communication practices. In Schaie, K. W. & Willis, S. (eds.) Handbook of the psychology of aging (7th edn., pp. 231245). New York, NY: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Giles, H., & Ogay, T. (2007). Communication accommodation theory. In Whaley, B. & Samter, W. (eds.) Explaining communication: Contemporary theories and exemplars (pp. 293310). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, D. J., & Baxter, L. A. (1996). Constituting relationships in talk: A taxonomy of speech events in social and personal relationships. Human Communication Research, 23, 87114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gottman, J. M. (1982). Temporal form: Toward a new language for describing relationships. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 44, 943962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gottman, J. M., Coan, J., Carrere, S., & Swanson, C. (1998). Predicting marital happiness and stability from newlywed interactions. Journal of Marriage and Family, 60, 522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heavey, C. L., Layne, C., & Christensen, A. (1993). Gender and conflict structure in marital interaction: A replication and extension. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 61, 1627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmberg, D. Orbuch, T. L., & Veroff, J. (2004). Thrice-told tales: Married couples tell their stories. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Hopper, R. (1981). The taken-for-granted. Human Communication Research, 7, 195211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopper, R., Knapp, M. L., & Scott, L. (1981). Couples’ personal idioms: Exploring intimate talk. Journal of Communication, 31, 2333.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ickes, W. (2003). Everyday mind reading: Understanding what other people think and feel. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.Google Scholar
Jacobs, S. (2002). Language and interpersonal communication. In Knapp, M. L. & Daly, J. A. (eds.) Handbook of interpersonal communication (pp. 213239). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Kellermann, K. (1992). Communication: Inherently strategic and primarily automatic. Communication Monographs, 59, 288300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klinetob, N. A., & Smith, D. A. (1996). Demand–withdraw communication in marital interaction: Tests of interspousal contingency and gender role hypotheses. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 58, 945958.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koenig Kellas, J., Baxter, L., LeClair-Underberg, C., Thatcher, M., Routsong, T., Lamb Normand, E., & Braithwaite, D. O. (2014). Telling the story of stepfamily beginnings: The relationship between young adult stepchildren’s stepfamily of origin stories and their satisfaction within the stepfamily. Journal of Family Communication, 14, 149166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koenig Kellas, J., & Kranstuber Horstman, H (2015). Communicated narrative sense-making: Understanding family narratives, storytelling, and the construction of meaning through a communicative lens. In Turner, L., & West, R. (eds.), The Sage handbook of family communication (pp. 7690). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koenig Kellas, J., & Trees, A. R. (2006). Finding meaning in difficult family experiences: Interaction processes during joint family storytelling. Journal of Family Communication, 6, 4976.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lavelli, M., & Fogel, A. (2013). Interdyad differences in early mother–infant face-to-face communication: Real-time dynamics and developmental pathways. Developmental. Psychology, 49, 22572271.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lawrence, S. G. (2003). Rejecting illegitimate understandings. In Glenn, P. J., LeBaron, C. D., & Mandelbaum, J. (eds.) Studies in language and social interaction: In honor of Robert Hopper (pp. 195205). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
LeBaron, C. D., & Koschmann, T. (2003). Gesture and the transparency of understanding. In Glenn, P. J., LeBaron, C. D., & Mandelbaum, J. (eds.) Studies in language and social interaction: In honor of Robert Hopper (pp. 119136). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Lemay, E. P., & Clark, M. S. (2015). Motivated cognition in relationships. Current Opinion in Psychology, 1, 7275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malis, R. S., & Roloff, M. E. (2006). Demand–withdraw patterns in serial arguments: Implications for well-being. Human Communication Research, 32, 198216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGlone, M. S., & Giles, H. (2011). Language and interpersonal communication. In Knapp, M. L. & Daly, J. A. (eds.) The Sage handbook of interpersonal communication (4th edn., pp. 201–237). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
McLaren, R., & Sillars, A. L. (2014). Hurtful episodes in parent–adolescent relationships: How accounts and attributions contribute to the difficulty of talking about hurt. Human Communication Research, 81, 359385.Google Scholar
McNulty, J. K., Baker, L. R., & Olson, M. A. (2014). Implicit self-evaluations predict changes in implicit partner evaluations. Psychological Science, 25, 16491657.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McNulty, J. K., & Fincham, F. D. (2012). Beyond positive psychology?: Toward a contextual view of psychological processes and well-being. American Psychologist, 67, 101110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McNulty, J. K., & Russell, V. M. (2010). When “negative” behaviors are positive: A contextual analysis of the long-term effects of problem-solving behaviors on changes in relationship satisfaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 587604.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McPhee, R. D. (1998). Giddens’ conception of personal relationships and its relevance to communication theory. In Conville, R. L. & Rogers, L. E. (eds.) Meaning of “relationship” in interpersonal communication (pp. 83106). Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
Meltzoff, A. N., & Moore, M. K. (1977). Imitation of facial and manual gestures by human neonates. Science, 198, 7578.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Montgomery, B. (1992). Communication as the interface between couples and culture. In Deetz, S. (ed.) Communication yearbook 15 (pp. 475507). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Motley, M. T. (1990). On whether one can(not) not communicate: An examination via traditional communication postulates. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 54, 120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murray, S. L., & Holmes, J. G. (1994). Storytelling in close relationships: The construction of confidence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 650663.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noller, P., & Callan, J. (1988). Understanding parent–adolescent interactions: Perceptions of family members and outsiders. Developmental Psychology, 24, 707714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ogolsky, B. G., & Bowers, J. R. (2012). A meta-analytic review of relationship maintenance and its correlates. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 30, 343367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oscarby, S. M., & Halford, W. K. (2013). Couple relationship distress and observed relationship intimacy during reminiscence about positive relationship events. Behavior Therapy, 44, 686700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Overall, N. C., Fletcher, G. J. O., Simpson, J. A., & Sibley, C. G. (2009). Regulating partners in intimate relationships: The costs and benefits of different communication strategies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 620639.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Parks, M. R. (1982). Ideology in interpersonal communication: Off the couch and into the world. In Burgoon, M. (ed.) Communication yearbook 6 (pp. 79107). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Pellegrini, R. J., & Empey, J. (1970). Interpersonal spatial orientation in dyads. Journal of Psychology, 76, 6770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Planalp, S. (1993). Friends’ and acquaintances’ conversations II: Coded differences. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 10, 339354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Planalp, S., & Garvin-Doxas, K. (1994). Using mutual knowledge in conversation: Friends as experts on each other. In Duck, S. (ed.) Dynamics of relationships (pp. 126). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Reddy, M. J. (1979). The conduit metaphor – A case of frame conflict in our language about language. In Ortony, A. (ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 284324). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Redlick, M. H., & Vangelisti, A. L. (2018). Affection, deception, and evolution: Deceptive affectionate messages as mate-retention behaviors. Evolutionary Psychology, 16, 1–11.CrossRef
Rogers, L. E. (1998) The meaning of relationship in relational communication. In Conville, R. L. & Rogers, L. E. (eds.) The meaning of “relationship” in interpersonal communication (pp. 6981). Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
Rogers, L. E., & Millar, F. E. (1988). Relational communication. In Duck, S. (ed.) Handbook of personal relationships (pp. 289305). London: Wiley.Google Scholar
Roloff, M. E., & Chiles, B. W. (2011). Interpersonal conflict: Recent trends. In Knapp, M. L. & Daly, J. A. (eds.) The Sage handbook of interpersonal communication (4th edn., pp. 423442). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Rubin, B. D. (1978). Communication and conflict: A system-theoretic perspective. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 64, 202210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruesch, J., & Bateson, G. (1951). The social matrix of psychiatry. New York, NY: Norton.Google Scholar
Schrodt, P. (2016). Relational frames as mediators of everyday talk and relational satisfaction in stepparent–stepchild relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 33, 217236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schrodt, P., Witt, P. L., & Shimkowski, J. R. (2014). A meta-analytical review of the demand/withdraw pattern of interaction and its associations with individual, relational, and communicative outcomes. Communication Monographs, 81, 2858.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, A. M., & Caughlin, J. P. (2014). Enacted goal attention in family conversations about end-of-life health decisions. Communication Monographs, 81, 261284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts. London: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sillars, A. L. (2011). Motivated misunderstanding in family conflict discussions. In Smith, J. L., Ickes, W., Hall, J., & Hodges, S. (eds.) Managing interpersonal sensitivity: Knowing when – and when not – to understand others (pp. 193213). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science.Google Scholar
Sillars, A., & Canary, D. J. (2013). Conflict and relational quality in families. In Vangelisti, A. L. (ed.) The Routledge handbook of family communication (pp. 338357). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Sillars, A., Roberts, L. J., Leonard, K. E., & Dun, T. (2000). Cognition during marital conflict: The relationships of thought and talk. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 17, 479502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sillars, A., Smith, T., & Koerner, A. (2010). Misattributions contributing to empathic (in)accuracy in parent-adolescent conflict discussions. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 27, 727747.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1995). Relevance: Communication and cognition (2nd edn.). MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (1996). Love stories. Personal Relationships, 3, 5979.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stone, E. (2004). Black sheep and kissing cousins: How our family stories shape us. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.Google Scholar
Street, R. L. Jr., & Cappella, N. (1985). Sequence and pattern in communicative behavior: A model and commentary. In Street, R. L. Jr. & Cappella, J. N. (eds.) Sequence and pattern in communicative behavior (pp. 243276). London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Surra, C. A., & Ridley, C. (1991). Multiple perspectives on interaction: Participants, peers, and observers. In Montgomery, B. M. & Duck, S. W. (eds.) Studying interpersonal interaction (pp. 3555). New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Thibaut, J. W., & Kelley, H. H. (1959). The social psychology of groups. New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
Thomas, G., & Fletcher, G. J. O. (1997). Empathic accuracy in close relationships. In Ickes, W. (ed.) Empathic accuracy (pp. 194217). New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Tracy, K. (1985). Conversational coherence: A cognitively-grounded rules approach. In Street, R. & Cappella, J. N. (eds.) Sequence and pattern in communicative behavior (pp. 3049). London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Vangelisti, A. L. (1994). Family secrets: Forms, functions, and correlates. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 11, 113135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vangelisti, A. L., Crumley, L., & Baker, J. (1999). Family portraits: Stories as standards for family relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 16, 335368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vangelisti, A. L., Maguire, K. C., Alexander, A. L., & Clark, G. (2007). Hurtful family environments: Links with individual, relationship, and perceptual variables. Communication Monographs, 74, 357385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Egeren, L. A., & Barratt, M. S. (2004). The development and origins of communication: Interactional systems in infancy. In Vangelisti, A. L. (ed.) Handbook of family communication (pp. 287310). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Van Egeren, L. A., Barratt, M. S., & Roach, M. A. (2001). Mother–infant responsiveness: Timing, mutual regulation, and interactional context. Developmental Psychology, 37, 684697.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Voegtline, K. M., Costigan, K. A., Pater, H. A., & DiPietro, J. A. (2013). Near-term fetal response to maternal spoken voice. Infant Behavior and Development, 36, 526533.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
von Bertalanffy, L. (1968). General system theory: Foundations, development, applications. New York, NY: Braziller.Google Scholar
Watzlawick, P., Beavin, J., & Jackson, D. D. (1967). Pragmatics of human communication: A study of interactional patterns, pathologies, and paradoxes. New York, NY: Norton.Google Scholar
Weakland, J. (1976). Communication theory and clinical change. In Guerin, P. (ed.) Family therapy: Theory and practice (pp. 111128). New York, NY: Gardner.Google Scholar
Weigel, D. J., & Ballard-Reisch, D. S. (2014). Constructing commitment in intimate relationships: Mapping interdependence in the everyday expressions of commitment. Communication Research, 41, 311332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williamson, H. C., Karney, B. R., & Bradbury, T. N. (2013). Financial strain and stressful events predict newlyweds’ negative communication independent of relationship satisfaction. Journal of Family Psychology, 27, 6575.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilson, S. R. (2002). Seeking and resisting compliance: Why people say what they do when trying to influence others. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Wilson, S. R., & Sabee, C. M. (2003). Explicating communicative competence as a theoretical term. In Greene, J. O. & Burleson, B. R. (eds.) Handbook of communication and social interaction skills (pp. 350). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
3
Cited by

Send book to Kindle

To send this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Send book to Dropbox

To send content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Send book to Google Drive

To send content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×