Journey of Intimacy

Knapp’s journey towards intimacy is interesting, as I’ve seen “couples” in High School navigate all stages pretty quickly, both into and out of a relationship. Before reading the theory, I actually did not notice the similarities between the relationships, but Knapp’s model showed me how they progressed, and that they were not dissimilar in many ways.

The High School couples would go through the “initiating” stage quickly, seeing as they may not have as much time to get to know each other. The “experimenting” stage tended to happen in classes that were in common, as they would experiment with different roles in doing classwork and homework. The “intensifying” stage would occur when they’d begin asking things of each other they wouldn’t normally, like going to each other’s house to study or even cheating on assignments. Finally, they’d achieve the “integrating” stage when they’d start doing a lot more together, even if it was to the detriment of their work.

Usually, they’d advance too quickly, and they’d then go through the “retreat from intimacy.” They’d pick on the simple things that begin to annoy them in the “differentiating” stage, and go on to not talk about their personal failures or what they felt their partner had caused them to mistake in the “circumscribing” stage. The “stagnating” stage would be them staying away from one another socially by migrating to other groups for classwork or homework, and only communicating when it was necessary. Then they’d hit the “avoiding” stage where they’d select somewhere else to eat for lunch, sit elsewhere in the class, and avoid going with them to work together as well as avoid them completely. Finally, the “termination” stage would occur, and I’ve seen it end in three ways: It’s mutual and respectful, one party tries to repair it, or it’s a shock.

Relationship Filters

The main things I use to judge someone “unattractive” is if they openly do not accept of as well as if they are unwilling to learn in general. These two filters can easily be considered “cognitive cue” filters. This is because the two of them are psychological values: One must be willing to be tolerant and accepting of new views, and one must be willing to learn, in order for either to actually be possible.

Duck’s theory makes a great amount of sense to me, personally. We judge our compatibility with someone based on their age, appearance, location, how they act, how they treat others, and how well they adapt to different situations. The first three are sociological, or incidental, the next is pre-interaction, the next is interaction, and the final being cognitive. The theory makes complete sense, as we won’t be willing to live with someone who is conflicting too heavily on those wavelengths, although we might be willing to compromise on the location and appearance if the other three are synchronized well enough.

Dysfunctional Patterns

I think “Competitive Symmetry” would be the most difficult to change. This is simply because, when both parties want the power and control, it’s sometimes difficult to alter that desire. With “Rigid Complementary ” it can be changed to be less rigid, thus simply being “ complementary,” whereas, in “Submissive Symmetry,” one party can just make a unanimous decision to finally end whatever arguments or exchanges they may find themselves in.

On the same thing, “competitive symmetry” would be damaging to both individuals’ self-esteem. This is because the two are vying for a controlling position. If, in a more personal relationship, neither party obtains the controlling position, they may feel slighted by their partner, not giving them the control they feel they deserve. “Rigid complementary  may only end up being damaging to the one-down person, while “submissive symmetry” wouldn't be very damaging to either, as only their view of their partner would be altered.

Intercultural Business

The idea of different cultures reacting very differently to things we see as “cool,” “hip” or respectful” is something that has been around for a very long time. For example, an urban legend, which isn’t actually true, states the Chevrolet Nova didn’t sell well in Spanish-speaking areas because “Nova” can be translated to “does not go.” Additionally, a candy bar that was released in the United States had the name of zit. Because of the name, and the connotation with said name, and it did sell very poorly. This sort of issue can be avoided simply by doing research into the area in which you are attempting to do business. Otherwise you might find yourself in the same situation as the company which got booted because they used pigskin leather for their contract, disrespecting their hosts; or you might find yourself selling a candy bar with a name that causes people to cringe when thinking about eating it.

Premises

I believe in all three, to a point. The rationality premise is definitely true on some level because, through study, one can begin to understand a majority of things that they encounter, including those from other cultures. Additionally, they can discover the origin of specific things, like beliefs or even all matter at some point in the future. The rationality premise is the definite baseline for any sort of institution, including schools, universities, and scientific labs.

The perfectibility premise also has merit, seeing as it is easier to simply succumb to desires and temptations than it is to “do the right thing.” If you make a mistake, it’s sometimes easier to lie about it than to come clean, showing what you did wrong. At times, these mistakes are grave and horribly erroneous, which makes it even more difficult to admit how you did err. The perfectibility premise is the underlying belief of religious institutions.

The mutability premise is also true, which is evidenced by how easily our accent will change when exposed to a different one for a period of time. We are definitely influenced by our surroundings, as well as how those around us act at different times. When we immerse ourselves in another culture, or even in a world that does not exist, we tend to pick up different values and beliefs that they hold, and react as they would. Immersive video games as well as language and religious classes hold the mutability premise as a key point.

Societal Pressures

Our habits and beliefs are most definitely shaped by our culture. When one looks at what we do openly, other cultures may see it as offensive, and we may see what other cultures do disgusting. Because of how our culture views different things, our habits are shaped by these views. If there wasn’t a great pressure on an aesthetically pleasing appearance, there wouldn’t be people who are in the habit of exercising for the explicit purpose of “getting into shape” or alter their diet for the same purpose. Additionally, if there was more of a pressure on appropriate communication, there wouldn’t be as many “text shorts” or even “texting” in general because of the need for face-to-face interaction. On the same note, there isn’t as great of a pressure on spelling words appropriately, seeing as Spelling as a subject that is stopped being taught in sixth grade, so people don’t go into habits of ensuring the words they do use fully are spelled correctly.

Eye Behavior

Eye behavior is an interesting topic to think about. When one pictures expressions, they imagine more of the muscles of the face adjusting in such a way to create an expression. However, when you look at the behavior of the eyes, it also reveals just as much as the rest of their face. If their eyes are focused forward, they are paying attention. However, if they’re wandering, it could show boredom or that other things are simply catching their attention.

In addition to this, if their eyes are looking down, it has several connotations within. It could be they are tired, or they may not be feeling well. It could also be that they are afraid of looking someone in the eyes, or that they don’t think they should carry themselves as such. The behavior of the eyes is a fascinating topic because of how in-depth it can be, as well as how revealing one’s eyes can truly be.

Nonverbal Signals

In America, the “Thumbs Up” expression is used to convey “success” or “approval.” However, in Iran and Iraq, that same gesture is considered the same as “flipping the bird” in America. On the same level, the “A-Okay” gesture, touching the fore finger to the thumb while extending the other three fingers, is a sign of things going according to plan. In Latin communities, though, it shares a meaning with the bird.

Another gesture in America is extending the palm with all five fingers extended. It’s seen as rude because of it being a forced dismissive to the recipient. In Africa, it has a similar feeling behind it, although the actual effect is basically saying the recipient has five fathers and is, therefore, an illegitimate child. Although I have “been around” in the United States, I have not experienced differences in culture that are large enough to involve a change in connotation of nonverbal signals.

Nonverbal Interpretation

I have been wrong about someone’s nonverbal message. For the most part, it was simply a point in my direction, despite it being towards someone behind me. I reacted accordingly, although with confusion as I didn’t know why said person was pointing at me. A moment later, someone came from behind me, and I then knew that the person didn’t mean me, but a person that was standing behind me.
The best way to improve the accuracy of the interpretation of nonverbal messages is to accompany them with verbal messages. If you specify verbally at least some sort of context to the nonverbal message, it narrows the possibilities of the implied meaning dramatically. For instance, if someone simply points at a crowd, it could mean they are showing the crowd to someone, trying to pick someone out in the crowd, or even showing someone that the direction they need to go is through the crowd.