MAPÚA UNIVERSITY

SCHOOL OF MEDIA STUDIES

INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION

In partial fulfillment of the requirements of

Media101 – A81
Communication and Media Theory

Submitted by:
Espiritu, Chester
Panis, Lynelle Vince
Llacar, Kim Angela
Gimeno, Sarah Faith
Canlas, Alexandria E.

Submitted to:

Prof. John Xavier Chavez

2nd Quarter SY 2019-2020

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The completion of this report could not have been possible without the assistance and
support of so many people, and also the contributions of the authors of the studies and
theories they are sincerely appreciated. The reporters would also like to express their deep
appreciation to their families and friends. Lastly, the reporters would like to thank our
professor Sir John Xavier Chavez.
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Cover page…………………………………………………………………………………….1
Acknowledgement…………………………………………………………………………….2
Table of Contents……………………………………………………………………………...3
Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………5
Interpersonal Communication…………………………………………………………………5
Coordinated Management of Meaning (CMM)……………………………………………….6
Definition……………………………………………………………………………...6
Nature of Theory………………………………………………………………………6
Theory Classification………………………………………………………………….6
Historical Background………………………………………………………………...6
Important Personage…………………………………………………………………..7
Theoretical Framework……………………………………………………………….7
Accepted Journals…………………………………………………………………….8
Symbolic Interactionism……………………………………………………………………...9
Definition……………………………………………………………………………..9
Description…………………………………………………………………………...10
Nature of Theory……………………………………………………………………..10
Theory Classification………………………………………………………………...10
Historical Background Associated…………………………………………………...10
Important Personages………………………………………………………………...11
Biographical Profile of The Theorist/s……………………………………………….11
Theoretical Framework………………………………………………………………12
Related Studies (Used/Applied the Theory)……………………………………….…12
Importance and Application………………………………………………………….12
Social Penetration Theory……………………………………………………………………14
Definition…………………………………………………………………………….14
Description……………………………………………………………………….......14
Nature of Theory……………………………………………………………………..15
Historical Background………………………………………………………………..15
Important Personage………………………………………………………………….15
Theoretical Framework………………………………………………………………16
Accepted Journal……………………………………………………………………..16
 Significance and Importance…………………………………………………………16
Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………18
References…………………………………………………………………………………....19
Appendices…………………………………………………………………………………...21
 INTRODUCTION

This report is composed of collection of research about the different topics ad theories
that is under Interpersonal Communication. It includes the following: 1.) Symbolic
interactionism of George Herbert Mead, 2.) Coordinated Management of Meaning of W.
Barnett Pearce and Vernon Cronen, and 3.) Social Penetration Theory of Irwin Altman and
Dalmas Taylor.

Interpersonal Communication it is the communication between people. It is the

process of exchanging information, feelings, thoughts, and idea of one person to another.
Coordinated Management of Meaning (CMM)

Definition
Defined as managing means through the patterns of socializing and identifying critical
moments through socializing, the bias of each individual when socializing comes to mind in
this theory.
The theory also includes the strange loop.

Nature of the Theory

The nature of the theory is Interpretive
1. The experience of persons-in-conversation is the primary social process of
human life.
2. The way people communicate is often more important than the content of
what they say.
3. The actions of persons-in-conversation are reflexively reproduced as the
interaction continues.
4. As social constructionists, CMM researchers see themselves as curious
participants in a pluralistic world.

Theory Classification
Coordinated Management of Meaning (CMM) is classified as a Socio-Psychological due
to the study of mental disorders and patterns. CMM is a theory that can be used on groups or
an individual and is practical.

Historical Background
Ph.D. W. Barnett Pearce (1943-2011) and developed, create, and introduced the
Coordinated Management of Meaning during the year 1978, in the mid-1990s they
emphasized the CMM is a practical theory, and in the year 1998 they referred CMM as a
critical theory.
 Vernon and Pearce collaborated at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, a quote
from Pearce is “The three principles of CMM are, there are multiple social worlds, these
social worlds are made in interactions and through conversations with others, and we are all
active agents in the making of social worlds.” Simply our social worlds are evolving because
of our dialogues with each individual, it is also a “primary social process” due to its models.

Important Personage
Ph.D. W. Barnett Pearce (1943-2011) is a practitioner, consultant, coach, facilitator and
trainer, and worked for The Fielding Graduate University, he started developing the CMM in
the mid- 1907s.

Ph.D. Vernon E. Cronen is a faculty member of the University of Massachusetts since

1970, he was a senior consultant at the Kensington Centre on London during 1985 to 2010,
he is a Co-Developer of the CMM.

Theoretical Framework

Image retrieved from Em Griffin’s “A first look at Communication Theory” pg.74

The Serpentine model projects the ideals of a person personally, these are the biases
that each individual has been a factor how there are varieties of behaviors and personalities.
Accepted Journals
“Defining discrimination across cultural groups: Exploring the [un-]coordinated
management of meaning”
Authors: Mark P. Orbe, Sakile K. Camara
Year: 2010
URL:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0147176710000088?via%3Dihub

“Rhetorical Exigence and Coordinated Management of Meaning: Alternative Approach

for Compliance Gaining Studies”
Author: Hataitip Jirathun
Year: 2011
URL:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877042811000991?via%3Dihub

“A first look at communication theory”

Author: Em Griffin
Year:1991
URL:
http://rosalia.mercubuana-yogya.ac.id/wp-
content/uploads/2016/04/ebooksclub.org__A_First_Look_at_Communication_Theory___8th
_Edition_.pdf
Symbolic Interactionism

Definition
The symbolic interaction perspective, also called symbolic interactionism, is a major
framework of the sociological theory. This perspective relies on the symbolic meaning that
people develop and build upon in the process of social interaction. Humans are considered to
be “symbol-creating animals”, who interpret and make sense of their own social situations
(Aakhus et al. 2014) and then react to the situations, rather than directly react to the
situations.

Description
THREE BASIC PREMISES:
1) Humans interact with things based on meanings ascribed to those things;
2) he ascribed meaning of things comes from our interactions with others and
society;
3) the meanings of things are interpreted by a person when dealing with things in
specific circumstances (Blumer 1969).
Blummer suggests that there are three core principles of this theory.
1. Meaning
It suggests that people act and behave towards the other people and
things based upon the meaning that they have given to them. The principle
of meaning is central to the theory of symbolic interactionism.
2. Language
The second core principle which makes the symbols and interactions
comprehensible to the mind. And which helps in formulating assumptions.
According to the theory, the naming assigned through the language, the
naming creates meanings to everything because everything has its own
name. To name a thing, the knowledge about the thing is important and
thus the name indicates some feature or any other kind of knowledge about
the things. This knowledge is converted into names through languages.
 3. Thought
This implies the interpretations that we have assigned to the symbols.
The basis of thought is language. It is a process of mentally conversing
about the meanings, names and symbols. The thought includes the
imagination. Which have the power to provide an idea even about an
unknown thing based on known knowledge.

Nature of The Theory

Symbolic interactionism is considered as practical theory because it is subjective, not
objective. It is also interpretative, it looks at an individual’s own interpretations and meaning
on something or someone. It explains human behavior in how people communicate and
action they would do next.

Theory Classification
The theory is can be classified into different traditions such as Semiotics Tradition,
Phenomenological Tradition, and Socio-cultural Tradition
Semiotics Tradition. Communication as the Process of Sharing Meaning through
Signs. The central theme of symbolic interactionism is that human life is lived in the
symbolic domain. Symbols are culturally derived social objects having shared meanings that
are created and maintained in social interaction. Through language and communication,
symbols provide the means by which reality is constructed.
Phenomenological tradition. Communication as the Experience of Self and others
through Dialogue.
This theory is subjective, subjective experiences are phenomenological data.
Our social interactions are based on how we interpret the world around us, rather than on an
objective reality. No two persons experiences are the same and they have their own different
meaning on things. Additionally, as we interact with others, these meanings we have formed
are subject to change.
Socio-cultural Tradition. Communication as the Creation and Enhancement of Social
Reality
Symbolic interactionism is a sociological perspective that is most concerned with the
face-to-face interactions between members of society. Interactionists see culture as being
created and maintained by the ways people interact and in how individuals interpret each
other's actions.
Historical Background
This theory was based on the ideas of George H. Mead (1934), Charles H. Cooley
(1902), W. I. Thomas (1931), and other pragmatists associated, primarily, with the University
of Chicago in the early twentieth century. Mead is considered the founder of the theory, but
he never published work on it. After Mead’s death in 1931 his students at the University
published his Mind, Self, and Society teachings. Herbert Blumer, Mead’s pupil, further
developed his theory and coined it “Symbolic Interactionism.”

Important Personages Associated

Herbert Blumer was a student of Mead that through Mead’s ideas coined Symbolic
Interactionism. He sets the premises of symbolic interactionism in his book “Symbolic
Interaction: Perspective and Method”.
Charles Horton Cooley work on connecting society and the individuals influenced
Mead's further workings. Cooley felt society and the individuals could only be understood in
relationship to each other. Cooley's concept of the “looking-glass self”, influenced George
Herbert Mead’s theory of self and symbolic interactionism.
William Isaac Thomas is also known as a representative of symbolic interactionism.
His main work was a theory of human motivation addressing interactions between individuals
and the "social sources of behaviors."

Biographical Profile of The Theorist/S

George Herbert Mead was born in South Hadley, Massachusetts, on February 27,
1863, and he died in Chicago, Illinois, on April 26, 1931. In 1894, Mead moved from The
University of Michigan to Chicago, Illinois, where he would later become the center of the
sociological department at The University of Chicago.
George Herbert Mead is a major figure in the history of American philosophy, one of
the founders of Pragmatism along with Peirce, James, Tufts, and Dewey. He published
numerous papers during his lifetime and, following his death, several of his students
produced four books in his name from Mead's unpublished (and even unfinished) notes and
manuscripts, from students' notes, and from stenographic records of some of his courses at
the University of Chicago. Through his teaching, writing, and posthumous publications,
Mead has exercised a significant influence in 20th century social theory, among both
philosophers and social scientists.
Theoretical Framework

Image grabbed from wannabeinsociology.wordpress.com

Related Studies (Used/Applied the Theory)

“The networking practices of women managers in an emerging economy setting:
negotiating institutional and social barriers.”
Authors: Klerk, Saskia; Verreynne, Martie‐Louise.
Year: 2017
DOI: 10.1111/1748-8583.12151

Importance and Application

In Medicine
- Health and illness are social constructions
- Studies about the interaction between patients and health-care professionals
In Education
Symbolic interactionist studies of education examine social interaction in the classroom, on
the playground, and in other school venues. These studies help us understand what happens in
the schools themselves, but they also help us understand how what occurs in school is
relevant for the larger society.
- Children’s playground activities reinforce gender-role socialization
- Teachers’ view about students can affect how much student learn
Others
Some fundamental aspects of our social experience and identities, like race and gender, can
be understood through the symbolic interactionist lens. Having no biological bases at all, both
race and gender are social constructs that function based on what we believe to be true about
people, given what they look like. We use socially constructed meanings of race and gender
to help us decide who to interact with, how to do so, and to help us determine, sometimes
inaccurately, the meaning of a person's words or actions.
Social Penetration Theory

Definition
It is defined as the interpersonal communication which take place during social
interaction. this theory is a general approach to interpersonal attraction that looks at the
development of an interpersonal relationship from acquaintanceship to close friendship as a
gradual and systematic process.
The theory also includes the principles of disclosure. Closeness Through Self-
Disclosure Voluntary sharing of personal history, preferences, attitudes, feelings, values,
secrets, etc. with another person.
Altman and Taylor emphasized the various stages of intimacy that result from this
process of self-disclosure:
1. Orientation Stage — Also known as the “small talk” or “first impression” stage.
Communicators become acquainted by observing mannerisms and personal dress and by
exchanging non-intimate information about themselves. Interaction adheres to social norms.
2. Exploratory Affective Stage — Communicators begin to reveal more about
themselves, such as their opinions concerning politics and sports teams. Deeply personal
information is withheld. Casual friendships develop at this stage, and most relationships stay
at this level.
3. Affective Stage — Communicators begin to disclose personal and private matters.
Personal ways of speaking, such as using idioms or unconventional language, is allowed to
come through. Communicators feel comfortable enough to argue or criticize each other.
Romantic relationships develop at this stage.
4. Stable Stage — Communicators share a relationship in which disclosure is open
and comfortable. They can predict how the other person will react to certain types of
information.
5. Depenetration — Occurs when one or both communicators noticed that the cost of
self-disclosure outweighs its benefits. Communicators withdraw from self-disclosure, thus
ending the relationship.
Progress through these stages is usually linear at first but may become cyclical later.
Psychologists say intimate relationships can switch stages at different times—moving, for
example, from the stable stage to the exploratory effective stage and back again—as partners
work through their insecurities and reservations.
The Breadth and Depth of Self-Disclosure: 4 Observations
1. Peripheral items exchanged more frequently and sooner than private
information
2. Self-disclosure is reciprocal, especially in early stages of relationship
development.
3. Penetration is rapid at start but slows quickly as the tightly wrapped inner
layers are reached
4. Depenetration is a gradual process of layer-by-layer withdrawal

Nature of Theory
Social penetration theory is considered as practical theory because it explains and
predict human behavior. And also, because knowledge is created socially.

Theory Classification
Social Penetration theory classifies as a Socio-Psychological. It is a type of
communication that has an interpersonal influence and has an effect on the person himself
and to the other person in relationship.

Historical Background
Altman and Dalmas published the theory on a book while working together at the
Naval Medical Research Center entitled Social Penetration: The Development of
Interpersonal Relationships. Irwin Altman and Dalmas Taylor developed the Social
Penetration Theory in 1973.
Dalmas Taylor became a research assistant while studying for his doctorate at the
University of Delaware. He was assigned to a project directed by Irwin Altman and Bill
Haythorn at the Naval Medical Research Institute in Bethesda, Maryland. The project's
acronym was ARGUS; Advanced Research on Groups Under Stress. These associations
would lead to life-long influences in Taylor's work and was the foundation for the
development of the Social Penetration Theory.

Important Personage
 Irwin Altman is a Research Psychologist at the Naval Medical Research Institute in
Bethesda, Maryland from 1962-1969. During these years he studied interpersonal exchange
in isolated groups that would lead to publications with Taylor on the social penetration theory.
Irwin Altman is a social psychologist who earned his B.A. degree from New York University
in 1951, his M.A. degree from the University of Maryland in 1954 and his Ph.D. from the
University of Maryland in 1957.
Dalmas Taylor work focuses in self- disclosure and the social penetration theory, but
as his career progressed, he became more focused on issues of social justice and ethnic
minorities' equal inclusion in society and academia. His formal education started at Case
Western Reserve University where he finished his bachelor’s degree, his M.A from the
Howard University, and his Ph.D. from the University of Delaware.

Theoretical Framework

Image retrieved from emaze.com

The onion model is a metaphor for describing how social penetration theory operates,
it elaborates the process of communicating and getting to know a person deeply. The onion
model shows that it takes time to reach another’s core, it is the most intimate details about
another person. The conception of personality in the social penetration process is compared to
that of an onion with many layers progressing from the outer layer to the inner core. The
outer layers of the personality consist of characteristics such as age and gender. Personality
characteristics vary from "common to unique and from high to low visibility" (Altman &
Taylor, 1973, p.18). Social penetration theory describes several layers including superficial
layers, middle layers, inner layers, and core personality. Superficial layers are made up of
shallow information such as preference in clothing, food and music. Middle layer is the goals
and aspiration of a person. Inner layers contain religious convictions, deep fears, hopes,
goals, fantasies, and secrets. The core personality includes the most private information about
a person.

Accepted Journal

"And Do You Take This Stranger To Be Your Lawfully Wedded Wife?": The Usefulness
of Social Penetration Theory within Premarital Counseling”
Authors: Beich-Forkner, Katherine
Year:2013
URL: https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/masters/265

Coming Home to Friends: Third Culture Kids' Relational Development through the
Lens of Social Penetration Theory
Authors: Jurgensen, Nathan
Year:2014
URL: https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/masters/304

More Than Just Talking: The Role of Self-Disclosure in the Fast Friends Procedure
Authors: Shearer, Chloe
Year: 2017
URL:
https://scholarship.shu.edu/dissertations/2420 Significance and Importance

Significance and importance

The importance of social penetration theory is it illustrates the connection and the
development of a person in a relationship. It describes the system and stages of intimacy
level. Interpersonal relationships are an important part of the work environment. People come
to know one another gradually.
CONCLUSION
Human connection is a product of interacting to one another. All topics are considered
as interpersonal communication. Coordinated Management of Meaning tackles the pattern of
socializing. Symbolic interactionism shows how people uses symbols or signs to
communicate. The last topic is about social penetration theory that discuss how relationship
develop. The importance of these studies and theories are communication is important and it
has a process, patterns, procedures, etc.
REFERENCE LIST/ BIBLIOGRAPHY

Advances in Theory and Research, Vol. 11, Human Behavior and Environment, Environment
and Behavior Studies, Irwin Altman and Kathleen Christensen (eds.), Plenum, New
York, 1990, pp. 225–255.
Ballantine, J. H., & Hammack, F. M. (2009). The sociology of education: A systematic
analysis (6th ed.). Retrieved from https://saylordotorg.github.io/text_sociology-
understanding-and-changing-the-social-world-comprehensive-edition/s19-02-
sociological-perspectives-on-e.html#:~:targetText=The%20symbolic%20interactionist
%20perspective%20focuses,may%20affect%20their%20students'%20performance.
Barkan, S. E. Sociological Perspectives on Health and Health Care. A Primer on Social
Problems. Retrieved from https://2012books.lardbucket.org/books/a-primer-on-social-
problems/s16-01-sociological-perspectives-on-h.html#:~:targetText=The
%20symbolic%20interactionist%20approach%20emphasizes%20that%20health
%20and%20illness%20are%20social%20constructions.&targetText=The%20ADHD
%20example%20just%20discussed,after%20the%20development%20of%20Ritalin.
Cole, N. L. (2019). Studying race and gender with symbolic interaction theory. Retrieved
from https://www.thoughtco.com/symbolic-interaction-theory-application-to-race-
and-gender-3026636
Communication Theory (n.d.). Symbolic interactionism theory. Retrieved from
https://www.communicationtheory.org/symbolic-interactionism-theory/
Cronk, G. (n.d.). George herbert mead (1863 – 1931). Retrieved from
https://www.iep.utm.edu/mead/
Crossman, A. (2018). What is symbolic interactionism. Retrieved from
https://www.thoughtco.com/symbolic-interaction-theory-3026633
Irwin Altman and Dalmas Taylor, Social Penetration: The Development of Interpersonal
Relationships, Holt, New York, 1973.
Irwin Altman and Dalmas Taylor: history of the social penetration theory.. (n.d.) >The Free
 Library. (2014). Retrieved Dec 09 2019
from https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Irwin+Altman+and+Dalmas+Taylor
%3a+history+of+the+social+penetration...-a0323349767
Irwin Altman, “Toward a Transactional Perspective: A Personal Journey,” in Environment
and Behavior Studies: Emergence of Intellectual
Klerk, S., & Verreynne, M. (2017). The networking practices of women managers in an
emerging economy setting: negotiating institutional and social barriers. Human
Resource Management Journal, 27(3), 477–501. DOI: 10.1111/1748-8583.12151.
Klerk, S., & Verreynne, M. (2017). The networking practices of women managers in an
emerging economy setting: negotiating institutional and social barriers. Human
Resource Management Journal, 27(3), 477–501. DOI: 10.1111/1748-8583.12151.
Leyson, S. (2015). Socio cultural tradition and symbolic interactionism. Retrieved from
https://prezi.com/nrhz0agmgczv/socio-cultural-tradition-and-symbolic-interactionism/
Lumen (n.d.). Symbolic interactionist theory. Retrieved from
https://courses.lumenlearning.com/alamo-sociology/chapter/reading-symbolic-
interactionist-theory/
Lumen. (n.d.). Theoretical perspectives on culture. Retrieved from
https://courses.lumenlearning.com/alamo-sociology/chapter/reading-theoretical-
perspectives-on-culture/
Patrick, T.J. (2013). The phenomenological tradition. Retrieved from
https://torajoypatrick.wordpress.com/2013/10/24/the-phenomenological-tradition/
Pranata, E. W., Latif, M. C., & Fanani, F. (2019). Symbolic interactionism of the deaf
students in public school. Junal The Messenger.
http://dx.doi.org/10.26623/themessenger.v11i1.876
Wanna Be, (n.d.). Symbolic interactionism: work of goffman. Retrieved from
https://wannabeinsociology.wordpress.com/2016/09/18/symbolic-interactionism-
work-of-goffman/
 APPENDICES
Appendix A
Theoretical Framework

Image retrieved from Em Griffin’s “A first look at Communication Theory” pg.74

Image grabbed from wannabeinsociology.wordpress.com

Image retrieved from emaze.com

Appendix B
Multimedia Presentations

Symbolic Interactionism
https://youtu.be/jFQIIM8IRZU

Social Penetration Theory

https://youtu.be/Fj-r1MdXv2Y

Coordinated Management Meaning

https://youtu.be/zmBnqRSrIeI