Standpoint Theory

An example of Standpoint Theory is the rap community. The rap community is dominated mostly by young, black men, this creates a hierarchy and creates marginalized groups. The marginalized groups in that hierarchy are white people and most women. In the exact opposite of the normal hierarchy, rich, old white people are looked at as the worst kind of people. Their inability to relate to the young black rappers makes them look foolish when they try. This also creates some animosity for the rich, old white people that has caused them to try to hurt rap by labeling it. They don’t like being the marginalized group, they want to be the dominant members of society. The rap community has created a hierarchy that changes the normal hierarchy of our society, it has given some of the marginalized groups power and made the powerful somewhat marginalized.

Genderlict Styles

An example of Genderlict Styles is a Saturday Night Live skit in which Will Ferrell, Ana Gastyer and Sarah Michelle Geller are sitting at their table eating dinner and they have a series of conversations that display their varying styles. This is very evident when Will is telling a story and Ana interrupts with feedback, she is trying to add to the story and show that she is listening but he shouts “Can I finish one damn story.” This shows that he would have stayed quiet and waited for her to finish the story before giving feedback. Throughout the scene the family starts yelling at each other and Will usually ends the fight with a statement to show his power and status, he says things like “I am a division manager in charge of 29 people” or most notably “I drive a Dodge Stratus.” He says this with pride as if driving a Dodge Stratus will show is authority over his wife and daughter because his car is nicer than theirs.

Face-Negotiation Theory

An example of Face-Negotiation Theory is when my roommate and I had a dispute about how much he owed for the utility bills last month. He felt that because he had paid for groceries more than everyone else did that he didn’t have to pay what he promised to pay when it came to the bills. We used two totally different conflict management strategies, he tried the dominating approach and I was trying to come up with a compromise. As soon as I brought up the topic he started yelling and swearing and I just sat there asking him to calm down and talk about it. It didn’t matter what I said he wasn’t going to calm down but we got the problem worked out eventually. Julian was acting exactly how I expect a person from a very individualistic culture to act, whereas I feel like I was trying to help everyone and not just myself. He was trying to restore face and I was trying to give face, had he done what I asked he would have saved face, but instead his face saving method caused him to lose face even more.

Anxiety/Uncertainty Management Theory

An example of Anxiety/Uncertainty Management Theory is the first time I met some of my teammates on the KSU football team. The first time I met some of the guys on the team I was extremely anxious and uncertain. Here I was, a white kid from the suburbs and I was going to be playing on a team with guys from the heart of some of the most dangerous cities in the country. The first time I met Coleman, one of our receivers from Atlanta, I was a little nervous because, aside from football we had very little in common. Our first meeting there was little effective communication because even though we both were speaking English it was difficult for me to understand him once in awhile because his dialect was very different from my own. My levels of both anxiety and uncertainty increased because I was meeting someone from a different culture than my own, but I don’t think that they were too high and eventually me and Coleman became friends. At the beginning of our relationship I was consciously incompetent when it came to Coleman; now, almost three years later, I can understand him most of the time.

Spiral of Silence

A good example of the Spiral of Silence is the debate about the war in Iraq. It seems that pretty much everyone is lobbying to bring the troops home. The president is seemingly the only person who thinks that we should still be there. This can’t be the case though, I’m sure that there are a large number of people who believe in what the president says or they wouldn’t have elected him in the first place. The problem with them speaking out is that the perceived majority believe that he is wrong and that the war is a lost cause. The people who are willing to speak out are the people who are for bringing the troops home, whereas the people who think we still need to be there consider themselves to be the minority and will keep their opinion to themselves. The media also is playing a role in this, you would be hard pressed to find a news station or pretty much any program that openly supports the war and the president.

Agenda Setting Theory

A good example of Agenda Setting Theory is that Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie adopting kids from other countries is newsworthy. The first level of agenda setting in this case is that they report every time Brad and Angelina adopt a new kid. I have seen pictures of the children that they have adopted, and I’m happy for them but there is no reason that this should be national news. The media’s agenda has made their adopting habit’s the public agenda. You see it on TV and in magazines, you can’t get through the line at any grocery store without seeing them with their newly adopted child. If it wasn’t for the media the only reason the public would care about Brad Pitt or Angelina Jolie would be if they had a new movie coming out. I think that the gatekeepers in this situation are Jolie’s public relations people because they wanted to change her image. The media has told us to change our view of Angelina, we should be happy for her and be happy that she is adopting a child every other week, ok that’s a little bit of an exaggeration but you can see my point. The stories about these two shouldn’t be important but the media has made them important so we will continue to follow their family’s growth.

Cultivation Theory

An example of Cultivation Theory is my Grandma Sunny and her new 357 Magnum. She watches at least three hours of television a day, which makes her a moderate TV viewer by this theory’s standards, and most of the programs she watches are either news or cop/doctor dramas. The news is inherently violent and the dramas on TV are usually very violent. After she saw that a large number of houses in her town had been broken into, on the news, she went out and bought a 357 Magnum handgun. My grandmother is about 5’1 and maybe 105 pounds soaking wet, if she ever fired this gun it would knock her to the ground, but because she saw on TV that houses had been broken into she decided that the world was not as safe as she thought and needed protection. Television has caused my grandma to develop “mean world syndrome” because she thinks that she could possibly be involved in violence.

Dramatism

An example of dramatism is a McDonald’s commercial I saw today. The commercial was based around a fictional company that said that it’s website was going to be “bigger than the Big Mac.” The commercial identified with the viewers because most of the people in the commercial were regular people. The commercial filled all of the dramatic pentad qualifications.
The Act- the company launched their website and said it was going to be bigger than the Big Mac, then word spread throughout the country that it would be bigger than the Big Mac. In the end of the commercial the website had only three hits and someone came into view with a Big Mac and said that it wasn’t bigger than the Big Mac.
Scene- the commercial was set in present day and it took place in the company’s office, and also in the living room of someone watching the debate about whether the product would be bigger than the Big Mac.
Agent- the people who worked at the company claiming to be bigger than the Big Mac, the people on the television discussing whether or not the company was right in their claim.
Agency- the people in the company talked amongst themselves about their website, the people on TV were talking about it, the guy at the end was eating a Big Mac and talked.
Purpose- The purpose was to say that it is hard to be bigger than a Big Mac. McDonald’s is trying to promote the Big Mac.

Cultural Approach to Organizations

One organization that is it’s own culture that I know a lot about is the Kent State football team. The team is definitely a puzzle that has been put together from many different pieces. There are sub-cultures such as the coaches, the administration, the players and the training staff. These sub-cultures each have their own sub-cultures.
The corporate stories are those told by the administration and the coaches because they are the people in power. They tell stories about their view of the program and the players. The personal stories that the players tell tend to be different than that of the coaches. Even though our goals are the same, sometimes our views about both the coaches and other players are different. We will tell stories to each other that we wouldn’t dare tell the coaches. The collegial stories are usually about new players coming in. If someone has seen that person on tape or in person they will give their feelings about the recruits chances of playing.
There are many rituals and traditions in the KSU football program. One example is that we sing the fight song after every win, another is the 4th of July cookout we have every year. The KSU football program is a great example of the Cultural Approach to Organizations.

Adaptive Structuration Theory

A good example of Adaptive Structuration Theory is the University of Florida’s football team this past season, particularly the addition of Tim Tebow, a freshman quarterback. The team had a very specific structure before Tebow got there, Chris Leak was their leader and their quarterback and that was not a debated issue. Tebow took that structure and changed it to fit his need to play. Because of his ability, Tebow earned playing time and became one of the leaders of the team. Usually the rule and that the seniors are the leaders and it takes age to develop leadership skills, Tebow broke that rule and changed it to now the players at Florida might start to look at younger players to become leaders. Tebow appropriated rules from teams he played on in the past, when everyone was looked upon to be a leader. Communication definitely made a difference in this situation, it was because of his ability to communicate that Tebow was able to become a leader and change the structures of the University of Florida football program.

Functional Perspective on Group Decision Making

A great example of Functional Perspective on Group Decision Making is when the kids have to get the Babe Ruth autographed ball back from The Beast in the movie “The Sandlot.” In the movie the kids analyze the problem first, they know that nobody has ever gotten a ball back once it went over the fence into the beast’s yard. They set a goal to get the ball back, they tried to find alternatives by buying another baseball and attempting to sign in themselves to replace the one they lost. They also tried alternative ways of getting the ball back because they didn’t want to have to go into the yard themselves to get the ball and they tried every idea they could think of so they did a good job brainstorming. They developed some of the wildest ideas possible, from dropping one of them down on a pulley, or building a remote control catapult to throw the ball over the fence. Most of them were promotive when dealing with getting the ball back, they all understood how important it was to get it back and used most of their energy getting the job done.

Elaboration Likelihood Model

An example of ELM is when my dad and step mom were watching the State of the Union address that President Bush was giving this past year. My dad, being a republican, took the central route when he was listening to the address. He was more motivated to listen carefully because he likes the president. My step mom, a staunch democrat, took the peripheral route. My dad had very little noise because my little brother and sister were asleep so he was able to pay close attention. My step mom had some physiological noise because she was very tired.
Neither of them could say that they were objective or unbiased on the issues because they both have long standing biases when it comes to politics.
The president did get my step mom to become more central when he was talking about the war. Her brother was in the military so she became interested when he started talking about that. The peripheral cues that he gave when he began talking about the war got her attention.

constructivism

Cognitive complexity is said to be “a sophisticated set of mental constructs that enables a person to distinguish subtle differences among people.” (Griffin 2006 p. A-1) I interpret that as an ability to read people. I think this theory shows that some people are better than others at reading people and a great example of this is the differences in the Kent State football coaching staff.
The head coach, I feel, has a very good grasp of this idea and he shows it in the way he deals with his players. He knows that different players respond to criticism in different ways so he handles each player individually the way he thinks will get his point across best. Certain players respond to being yelled at, so he will yell at them; certain players respond better to being talked to calmly, so he will call them over and have a conversation as opposed to yelling at them.
One of the other coaches has less of a grasp on cognitive complexity, he treats everyone exactly the same regardless of what they respond to best.
The head coach’s construct abstractness is good, he understands each players states and motives and determines the best way to get his point across. The other coach has a poor grasp on construct abstractness because he doesn’t look that closely into each players mental state.
I think the reason that the head coach is better with players is because of his construct differentiation. He has developed a large number of constructs that he uses when dealing with his players, he has developed so many because he has been coaching for a long time. The other coach hasn’t been coaching as long so he hasn’t had time to develop as many constructs. The head coach uses person centered messages very well, whereas the other coach doesn’t use person centered messages.

Relational Dialectics Theory

The example I decided to use for Relational Dialectics Theory is my relationship with my ex-girlfriend. I want to preface this entry by saying that this is going to sound like I am being harsh when I talk about her. I don’t mean to and don’t really want to but our relationship was very fitting in with Relational Dialectics.
When it came to Integration/Separation we definitely fit that mold, however, we didn’t fit it in the way that most people consider normal in a relationship. Usually it is the guy who wants to go out with his friends and the girl wants to spend more time together. In our situation she didn’t want to spend every day together, which I was alright with but I wanted to spend more time together than she did. We also were very secluded as opposed to being included with each other’s friends. We had no mutual friends, I didn’t know her friends very well and my friends didn’t like her very much so we never went out together. There was definitely always tension between us and our friends.
When it came to Stability/Change we tended to lean towards stability. One of the reasons that our relationship ended was that it became very predictable and it became a dialectic that was too much for us to deal with.
She was a horrible communicator so when it came to expression/nonexpression we definitely had some issues. I tried to be very open in dealing with her but she had problems expressing herself to me which was quite straining on me. She also struggled with revealing anything about herself to me. She actually said “there are things I will never tell you” which is not something you want to hear after being in a relationship for a year.
Maybe if I had a better grasp on Relational Dialectics when we were together then we would have made it but oh well, life goes on.

Social Information Processing Theory

An example of Social Information Processing Theory is in the movie “Out Cold.” In the movie two of the characters form a very special bond through use of the computer, the twist is that they know each other and don’t like each other at all. However, because of Computer Mediation Communication, they have a very intimate moment. Both characters, Eric and Pigpen, are men but they both log on to a lesbian chat room and make up fake names and characteristics about themselves. The hyperpersonal perspective applies to their situation because they both hide the fact that they are men and highlight their fake attributes as women. This situation is intended to be funny for the purposes of the movie but it applies to this theory anyway. When Pigpen and Eric were having their conversation they used verbal cues to show how they were feeling. They both used expressions of affinity and disclosed information that was intended to make the other more comfortable. Because they were both so interested in finding a woman who was looking to have a very sexual conversation they both over attributed the similarities that they had. This situation is obviously isn’t what Walther had in mind when he was talking about Computer Mediated Communication but it shows how much this form of communication has evolved since they first started doing research

Uncertainty Reduction Theory

The best example of Uncertainty Reduction Theory that I can think of is my first week as a student at Kent where I was forced to develop a relationship with someone I had never met before because I had a randomly assigned roommate. We both were very motivated to reduce uncertainty because we were going to be living together all year and wanted to be comfortable with each other quickly. We both had a high incentive value for one another because, again, we had to live together all year so it was important that we got along. We were forced to deal with the uncertainty interactively. Axioms one, three and six particularly applied to our situation because once we talked we were more certain that we could live together. At the beginning uncertainty was very high and so was our information seeking behavior, for the first week we did very little but ask questions about each other. Axiom six was especially accurate in our situation because once we realized that we both played sports and had a lot in common our uncertainty levels went way down and we were comfortable with each other.

Expectancy Violations Theory

An example of Expectancy Violations Theory that I have observed is the interaction between Uncle Jerry and Rob on a recent episode of the MTV show “Rob and Big.” In the episode Rob and Big go to Mississippi to visit Big Black’s family. When Rob meets Big’s uncle Jerry he seems normal at first but as the episode progresses Jerry develops a very low Communicator Reward Valence. He does this by gradually getting closer and closer to Rob to the point where Rob has to tell him that he is too close. Jerry’s behavior may have been normal for him, but Rob, who had never met him before was obviously expecting him to act differently. Jerry also failed to meet Rob’s expectations in the way he talked. Jerry continually repeated himself and it made Rob uncomfortable.
The funny thing about this situation is that Jerry acted the same way when he was interacting with both Rob and Big Black, the only difference is that Big was expecting it because he knew his uncle and knew how he was going to act. Rob, who had no idea Jerry was like this, was uncomfortable and was constantly trying to avoid the uncomfortable situations with Jerry.

Social Penetration Theory

A real life example of Social Penetration Theory, specifically the Comparison Level of
Alternatives, that I have seen is the interaction between Marshall and the men he works with on an episode of CBS’ “How I Met Your Mother.” In the episode Marshall goes to work for a new firm and initially hates working there, especially the way that the other guys there interact. They are very loud and boisterous. Marshall wants to quit his job but he needs the money in order to pay for his upcoming wedding so he is forced to become friends with these guys. The Comparison Level of Alternatives fits in this situation because he has no other options. If he doesn’t get along with the people he works with then they will probably fire him, so he becomes friends with them, and eventually begins to act like them because he is left with no other options.
Social Penetration Theory also states that as a relationship grows the breadth and depth of information that we are willing to disclose increases. This happened to Marshall in the episode. At the beginning he didn’t tell the guys anything but once he got to know them he began to share much deeper and broader information and eventually developed a relationship with them through self disclosure.