Communication Processes, Verbal

Interdependence

Interdependence refers to the idea, advocated by systems theorists, that messages simultaneously influence, and are influenced by, the messages that precede and follow them. This mutual influence creates coherence between messages and across interactions. Although similar to the view of interdependence put forth by John Thibaut and Harold Kelley, this perspective is distinct in that it focuses on the mutual influence of messages rather than on the ways that individuals affect each other's outcomes during interaction.

Interdependence accounts for the central feature of living systems—wholeness (or nonsummativity). That is, the interdependent relationships between components, rather than the components themselves, account for the unique characteristics of the whole. The application of this principle to verbal communication suggests that communication systems are defined by interdependent patterns of interaction rather than characteristics of people or messages per se. Thus, patterns are of primary interest, whereas objects (singular events or individual entities) are secondary.

Interdependence in communication is most often conceptualized in terms of two opposite response tendencies—a tendency to reciprocate or match features of the other's communication versus a tendency to compensate. For example, studies of verbal and vocal behavior indicate that, under most conditions, conversational partners automatically adapt to each other to match each other's discursive style or speech rate. In other situations, individuals may compensate for increases in physical proximity by decreasing speech volume or eye gaze.

In the research literature on personal relationships, the principle of interdependence is reflected in the study of dyadic interaction patterns. The concept of an interaction pattern presumes that there is redundancy and predictability in the way communication events or behaviors are ordered. Interaction patterns reveal a few basic things about [Page 268]communication in personal relationships. First, they demonstrate ways in which communication and relationships are coherent and structured. For example, people can carry on coherent conversations because they understand the rules associated with turn taking.

Second, interaction patterns reflect multiple influences on communication, both of a proximal and distal nature. Every act of communication is enacted and interpreted within a particular historical context, including the time and place, relationship history, and history of the immediate encounter. Thus, each communication behavior is grounded in the overall context as well as in the immediate actions that precede and follow it.

...