Interpersonal Communication

Interpersonal communication: the way we communicate with others, be it our friends, family, significant other, or some random children that come up to us on the streets asking for a hug. In our text, Tubbs talks about norms – rules, whether implicit, or explicit, about behavior; rules from which we develop certain expectations about how people will act (p. 273). These norms give us certain roles in life such as a friend or sister, as well as our own person. This provides us with a conflict which the book calls “dialectic”. The dialectical approach is the pull between the need to feel separate from the other person, and the need to feel connected (p. 277).
This conflict, however, also determines how much information we are allowed to disclose – depending also on what role we are assuming. For example, if we take a look at the Johari Window, it shows how a person relates to other human beings and the amount of information disclosed to each (p. 283).

Tubbs also explains (p. 233) that the basis of human attraction, which involves the entire web of human relationships. Proximity, referring to our geographic closeness to one another, affects who you have a relationship with, and whether that relationship will continue. The text also points out that there are many different situations in which our relationships and communication with each other will affect attraction (p. 235). One of the most important things that we hope to get out of interpersonal relationships is confirmation, or some type of feeling that makes us feel better or wanted. Most of us would want others to know that we exist, rather than feel we don’t exist at all. So, in order to make ourselves feel wanted and to make others feel wanted is to develop a quality relationship by putting in the time to care for the other person. According to our text (p. 243-244) the quality of time and the desire to spend it most often defines how long the relationship will last. If you spend more time with someone, the breadth and depth of that relationship continues to grow, therefore making relationship maintenance key.


I went to an elementary school that only had one class per grade. By the time I reached fifth grade, we had all become great friends. Of course, there was always the occasional new kid but they always seemed to just jump right into the group – no problem. The reason why we all became good friends is because we were with each other every day. So we had to get along – for six whole years!
My best friend in elementary school was Jennifer. She and I always had play dates and sometimes even had sleepovers. I thought that we would be friends forever. The problem came, however, when we had to go to middle school. She went to Memorial, and I went to Patrick. We tried to keep in contact but our friendship soon dwindled down to nothing and has now come to the random facebook message once a year asking me how I’m doing or to say “Happy Birthday”.
The explanation of why we never stayed in touch is simple. Proximity. It is clearly explained in chapter eight of our text book (Tubbs) that our proximity, our geographic closeness, affects whether our relationships will continue. Jennifer and I still lived in the same town but when you are an 11, 12, or 13 year-old kid who does not own a cell phone and can’t drive, living in the same town does not necessarily mean we will stay friends. Our schools were on the opposite sides of town. We no longer spent nearly seven hours a day together five days a week. She made new friends and I made new friends. Therefore, our communication with each other was basically broken off.
Communication setting and time are all significant factors that play into having a relationship with someone. Thus Jennifer and I’s relationship had reached its final stage where we both parted ways. It was alright though, our relationship disengagement could probably be considered intrapsychic (p. 252) because we both knew that we needed to move on with our lives and go our separate ways.


One of my favorite TV shows of all time is NBC’s The Office. I absolutely love the characters on this show and I think it’s because they are all completely different, and each person has a different relationship with everyone. They each communicate in different ways. For example, Dwight Schrute, a salesman, has a dominant personality. He tends to want more power and is demanding of his colleagues. He also calls himself “Assistant to the Regional Manager” – mostly because he wants to be manager but can’t because that’s Michael’s job. Michael denies Dwight the job of assistant manager because one: Dwight would just go around telling everyone what to do and star firing people and two: because there is no assistant manager at Scranton Branch of Dunder Mifflin Paper Company.

According to the text, Dwight has many of the qualities and behaviors associated with high dominance such as coordinating, leading, initiating, and directing (p. 299). Michael Scott also reflects the same behaviors. So, the relationship between Michael and Dwight is symmetrically structured. Symmetrical structures are based on similarities – when both partners are dominant or both are submissive (p. 299). In this case, both are dominant.
The Triangular Theory of Love, developed by Robert Sternberg of Yale University, declares that love has three different components (p. 295): intimacy, passion, and commitment. Intimacy, he says, involves closeness, bondedness, and connection while passion is a state of physical and psychological arousal (p. 295). Sternberg goes on to say that commitment involves both the decision to love someone as well as the long-term resolve to maintain the relationship. Roy and Pam from The Office represent a clear example of this theory. However, it is not a perfect triangle. The perfect triangle involves an equal amount of each component. But for Pam and Roy, there seems to be a lack of passion from on both sides and a lack of commitment on Roy’s part. It is clear that they have an intimate relationship because they are engaged. Because of that, there is some passion but probably not as much passion that Pam and Jim have for each other.

Jim is Pam’s office buddy. They do as friends do and support each other. Anyway, back to Pam and Roy. So, they have, for the most part, intimacy and passion. But for Roy, commitment may be an issue. Pam and Roy are engaged and Pam is completely devoted and committed to Roy. However, during lunch break on the day the “hot girl” comes in, Roy says that if he wasn’t dating Pam, he would totally go for the “hot girl”. Pam is deeply offended that he would say that. But they stay together out of habit – and because they are engaged even though Pam knows she should dump Roy for Jim.

Tubbs, S. L., & Moss, S. (2006). Human communication: Principles and contexts (11th Ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill