Chp. 18 Adaptive Structuration Theory

Chapter 18, Adaptive Structuration Theory, is an interpretive theory that says people are active participants in groups, and that people are both affected by and affect the rules and resources of a group. In the past, the stage model did not include communication as a big role of group decisions. However, AST (along with some main ideas in Chp. 17) both reiterate the idea that communication is the biggest factor of group work.
Our class discussion last Thursday helped me to get a better understanding of this theory, and how it is applied to situations in my life. This theory looks at the "structure" of group work not as being permanent, but something that is continually evolving. Duality of structure explains how our actions create the grounds for developing traditions, which are constantly being produced and reproduced or altered. Everyone in a group has different attributes they can bring to the table.
When I first came to Kent State, I was very shy and timid, especially when having to work in groups in class. I was so scared that my ideas and opinions were not good enough and that everyone would shoot down my ideas. Now that I am a junior, I feel more comfortable stepping out of my "shy zone" and always share my thoughts about what needs to be done in order for the assignment to be completed well. The more ideas thrown out there, the more options the group has to choose from. Traditions are constantly changing and evolving when people decide to speak up, or someone decided to go against what has always been done, and take their own route. If more people start doing this, then more ideas can be created and accepted for new traditions.

Chp. 17 Func. Perspective on Group Decision Making

Chapter 17, Functional Perspective on Group Decision Making, discusses the four functions a group must fulfill to make a good decision. The four functions, analysis of the problem, goal setting, identification of alternatives and the evaluation of positive and negative characteristics, may be completed in any order, but every step must be fulfilled in order for progressive group work to occur.
When working in groups the other day in class, we were to create a commercial about a reality television show that has never been done before. This seemed like a very difficult task because SO many reality television shows are out there today. However, the three girls I worked with and I worked together and included all four of the steps into our developmental process. We followed, without knowing it, the "traditionally successful path" and succeeded at completing the task. We demonstrated promotive, disruptive, and counteractive communication, when we began formulating ideas and getting our thoughts out on the table, then got side tracked by talking about what reality shows we personally like/dislike, and then finally brought it all back together when we brought our strongest ideas together. Our group communication helped us to develop the ideas and quantitative analysis that is needed for successful group decision making.

Chp. 16: Cognitive Dissonance Theory

Chapter 16, Cognitive Dissonance Theory, explains what happens when theories and actions don't match up. As was explained in class, when there is an inconsistency between opinions and behaviors, there is usually some discomfort. When dealing with cognitive dissonance, we are more like to change out attitudes than our behaviors. It involves three hypotheses, saying that: selective exposure prevents dissonance, postdecision dissonance creates a need for reassurance, and minimal justification for action induces a shift in attitude.
I experienced my own cognitive dissonance when I was asked to help out at a Christmas food drive this past December. I would of had to get up at 7 am on Christmas morning, skip opening presents and spending time with my family when I wanted to, so obviously, my first reaction was, "No way!!". However, my friend, Sarah talked me into it and I was not a happy camper when I got there. I served homeless people from 8am-4pm, missing out on the opening of presents, Christmas dinner with the family, etc. And, I was not getting paid any money to help out, either. But, surprisingly enough, when the day was done and I came home to my family, I only had good things to say about the day. I told them how happy I was to have helped out for a good cause, and that seeing all of those homeless people smile because they had a meal on Christmas meant everything to me. My attitude shifted because there was minimal justification in the matter. I didn't receive anything in return from helping out that day, but I really did leave with some fulfillment.

Chp. 15: Elaboration Liklihood Model

Chapter 15, Elaboration Liklihood Model, focuses on alternative routes of persuasion. Petty and Cacioppo focus on elaboration, or "the extent to which a person carefully thinks about issue-relevant arguments contained in a persuasive communication" (217). Speakers use the central route to try and figure out if what they are about to say will stick with their receiver, and if they will believe what they are saying. The peripheral route allows receivers of the message to decide quickly, by the means of cues, to decide if they like or dislike what is being said to them. The "click, whirr" response involves reciprocation, consistency, social proof, liking, authority and scarcity. All of these attribute to the taking in of messages and how the receiver and sender react to them. Petty and Cacioppo explain how many of us are lazy towards most issues of life, and our brains act as a mental filter, allowing only issues that are ego-involved to be stored and remembered.
I definitely follow the Elaboration Liklihood Model in most situations. When I am being persuaded, as well as acting as the persuader, I search for persuasive means of communication, to get someone to do something. I can remember a specific time in high school my freshman year and was being persuaded to drink alcohol and did not want to take part in it. A group of older senior boys were trying to get my friends and I to drink, and everyone wanted to, except me. They tried to get us to drink by using persuasive messages, such as, "Everyone does it" and "It will make you feel really good." I was motivated to try it because of how great they made it sound, but I was distracted by the nonverbal cues of some of the boys, and I began not to trust them. This is where I began to develop a strong, negative attitude change. The alcohol no longer seemed appealing, and all I could think about was how much trouble I would get it if my parents found out. The boys used the "wrong" cues in this specific situation, and did not succeed in getting me to drink with them.

Chp. 13 Constructivism

Chapter 13, Constructivism, is a theory that communication scholars refer to as the "black box." Its main point is that "people make sense of the world through a series of personal constructs that dictate how we communicate." These constructs consist of congitive complexity, sophisticated communication, person centered messages, and beneficial outcomes. When we started talking about this theory in class, I remembered a situation involving my boyfriend's younger sister, Kelly, who is 7 years old. Kelly and I were looking at my high school yearbook and I noticed that Kelly thought every girl that had short hair was "ugly" and every girl with long hair was "pretty." Her cognitive complexity is not very complex at all. Kelly hasn't experienced enough or met enough people in her life to be able to distinguish how people really are. Her personal construct is not fully developed and how she views people is based on very few past experiences. She might have had a friend with short hair who was mean to her at one point, and so now whenever she sees a girl with short hair, she associates her friend that was mean to her to a short-haired girl. Her dimension of construct integration is not balanced, either. She cannot see that a girl with short hair can also be nice. Her construct differentiation is very narrow, in that she either sees a girl as "ugly or pretty" based on their hair length. Kelly's person-centered messages are not getting through to her yet because of her age, and she is unable to adapt to someone's true identity. Her cognitive complexity will surely develop as she grows up, but it just shows how age definitely affects how you judge others and how well you are able to communicate.

Chp. 11 Relational Dialectics

Chapter 11, Relational Dialectics, is an interpretive theory also known as relational maintenance. This theory assumes that people in relationships live with three dialectical tensions that must be managed. These three tensions consist of Integration-Separation, Stability-Change, and Expression-Nonexpression. All of these tensions can be felt internally and externally. Dialectics make up a huge part of this theory because it involves tensions that are inherent, or unable to be resolved. When I first read about this theory, I immediately thought of my friends Jon and Ashley. They have been dating for almost six years, and the entire relationship has been one big dialectical tension. The subtensions of connectedness-separateness and inclusion-seclusion, certainty-uncertainty and conventionality-uniqueness, and openness-closedness and revelation-concealment are all applied to their relationship. Ashley has always been the one in the relationship that wanted she and Jon to always be together at all times. If Jon wasn't by her side or on the phone with her, she didn't know how to function. Jon, on the other hand, likes the feeling of separateness and being able to function on his own. He loves Ashley, but realizes he does not need to be with her at all times to be happy. Ashley did not enjoy including friends in their affairs, either. When she was with Jon she wanted it to be strictly just the two of them. Jon always wanted to be around both friends and Ashley. When Jon moved to Florida his senior year of high school, Ashley really had a hard time dealing with the absence of her boyfriend. She needed to teach herself to manage the distance and deal with the fact that they couldn't be together at all times. She became uncertain of their relationship, as did Jon, and they revealed less to each other, going from a very open relationship to more of a closed one. Traditionally, couples should be integrated, certain/conventional, and open with each other. Ashley and Jon dealt with these tensions the best they could, and now they are engaged to be married next year. This theory proves that relational tensions will always be in flux, but they are able to be managed.