Irwin Altman and Dalmas Taylor’s Social Penetration Theory provides for a deeper analysis on how relational closeness develops. A multi-layered onion model is used to depict the personality structure of an individual. Each layer constitutes perspectives and beliefs about oneself, other individuals, and the world (Griffin 114). Self-disclosure, the process by which we “peel back the layers,” is a gradual process that is motivated by what we perceive as the outcome of an interaction. The depth, level of intimacy, and breadth, the extent of self-disclosed areas, are essential to forming an intimate relationship. Communication privacy management, explaining the ways individuals manage the tension between privacy and disclosure, contributes to the overall outcome of relational closeness. The Social Penetration process can be applied to the concept of ‘work spouses’ to explain the high level of intimacy one would deem equivalent to a married spouse. In the article “Signs You Might Have a ‘Work Spouse,’” Patty Lewis and Tom Bristler shared information about their close relationship in the workplace. Lewis revealed that she shared information with Bristler from psychological to emotional perspectives. This reflects the different layers and areas of the onion that forms the personality structure. Her self-disclosure or vulnerability is like a wedge that is drawn into the onion in multiple areas. Lewis and Bristler’s self-disclosure process was presumably gradual because it’s highly unlikely that they would quickly share deep, personal information with a colleague. The depth and breadth of self-disclosure were equally important to forming their close relationship. Not only did Lewis and Bristler share information about their wor... ... middle of paper ... ...enetration. The area and degree of information the parties shared paired with a cost-benefit motivational factor produced an intimate relationship not commonly seen in the work environment. Privacy coordination also played a role in Lewis’ relational closeness with her husband and colleague. Lewis and Bristler’s or any ‘work spouse’ relationship may be the result of social penetration. Works Cited Griffin, Emory A. "Semiotics of Roland Barthes." A First Look at Communication Theory. Seventh Ed. Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education, 2009. Print. Dorsett, Katherine. "Signs You Might Have a 'Work Spouse' - CNN.com." CNN.com - Breaking News, U.S., World, Weather, Entertainment & Video News. 16 Feb. 2011. Web. 28 Feb. 2011. .
For this paper, we will be talking about relational communications and Goffman’s terms. The definition of relational communication is “communication processes in personal relationships such as romantic, family, and friendships. We assess the role of communication in developing, maintaining, and dissolving relationships, how communication impacts partners and their relationships, and how to improve relational quality or individual well-being through communication. Recent topics examined include conflict mediation, relational standards, relational uncertainty in dating relationships, and communication environments in families” (n.d.). As it has said, it is about the relationships in our life. Goffman also stated that there was a front and
This case is discussed here for informational purposes only and should not be construed as a
Every individual has a distinct past that shapes his or her identity. The situations people face may cause them to have distorted perceptions of themselves. These distorted perceptions allow people to lose sight of the important things in life. In order to discover their true selves they will need to create a path for self transformation. Scott Momaday, Victor Joseph and Macklemore have different pasts but all share a common thread of reconnecting with the important things in life. Many variables affect each person’s destiny, but it is their physical and psychological factors that predisposition their vulnerability. Vulnerability can often be seen as a sign of weakness, but these protagonists are examples of those who embrace their vulnerabilities. Within Scott Momaday’s The Way to Rainy Mountain, Sherman Alexie’s Smoke Signals and Macklemore’s life, the protagonists claim their true identities by becoming vulnerable.
LICSW, Terry Gaspard MSW. "Vulnerability: The Secret to Divorce-Proofing Your Relationship." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 30 Sept. 2013. Web. 24 Nov. 2015.
Providing a fascinating and meticulously crafted first-person insight into the effect of the various relationships formed between humans, Robertson Davies’ Fifth Business is a magnificent exploration of both the positive and negative consequences that interpersonal relationships can have. Davies’ protagonist Dunstan Ramsay- known also by alternative variations of the name such as his given “Dunstable” and affectionate “Dunny”- reflects upon the interpersonal relationships he has navigated throughout the course of his life. With the aid of age and experience, he is able to consider how these relationships have affected his own intrapersonal introspection. Though Dunstan’s tale is one of immense guilt and self-discovery, the driving forces between
People who are in an interpersonal relationship share the same common goals and objectives. They do respect each other even regarding giving out opinions and views hence transparency play a very significant role (Meeks, Brenda, Hendrick and Hendrick 752).
Workplace romance is an issue that has been causing employers to create and enforce a No-Fraternization Policy. A No-Fraternization Policy is sometimes called a “Love Contract,” according to Kathryn Taylor from Society for Humans Resource Management (2008). A love contract is a policy that is signed by those involved in the relationship and the employer. This contract is a testimony stating that the relationship is consensual and voluntary by both. Many employees would say this is an invasion of their privacy but to others, including myself, it’s a protection for them and for the company. The No-Fraternization Policy is valuable because it helps reduce the possibility of harassment, favoritism, and will help keep productivity at a healthy level.
The author seems almost ashamed of her writings, and “blushes” over the fact that they have been made public (Perkins & Perkins 102). She anthropomorphizes
According to the social networking site Facebook, the company’s overview states “to give the people the power to share and make the world more open and connected”. Within the last few years we have seen the world increasingly becoming smaller by way of social networking sites. The everyday tasks that we use seem so insignificant have now become an integral part of many lives. Simple daily tasks such as talking, setting plans, playing games, and even dating now have all become accessible through Facebook by bringing our personal relationships out into the public domain. Each user has the ability to declare to the world their relationship status by selecting through a variety of options ranging from single, married, to it’s confusing. In some areas, Facebook is considered the official announcement tool of our social status. The power given to us by Facebook has grown to the point of complete control in every aspect of our social interaction with people, but has it eliminated the need for personal interaction within human relationships?
Closeness in marriage allows for faults to appear and truths to reveal themselves. Shakespeare writes
Roeper, R. (2005). “Nothing is as inevitable, or tricky, as workplace dating,” Chicago Sun- Times, pg. 11.
In discussing the different views of social organization, Radcliffe-Brown is mentioned as an anthropologist who focused on how groups formed and what rules held them together. Monaghan and Just define Radcliffe-Brown as a functionalist. They quote his definition of a joking relationship as “one where one party ‘is permitted, and sometimes required to tease or make fun of the other, who in turn is required to take no offense’” (Monaghan and Just 57). An avoidance relationship, on the other hand “are characterized by extreme mutual respect and a limitation of direct personal contact” (Monaghan and Just 57). The authors then go on to describe Radcliffe-Brown’s analysis of these relationships and showcase his conclusions that they are “standardized social relationships” used to regulate two potentially awkward or conflict-prone situations such as with a sister-in-law, generally normalized through joking, or a mother-in-law, typically normalized through avoidance (Monaghan and Just 57-59). These customary relationships give people a way to navigate tricky social waters.
The components of the relational strain is the extent in which two people in a relationship do not relate smoothly, there is disagreement or hostility. Interpersonal boundaries is the separation between oneself and another person, formality, and boundaries are defined by positions in social networks. Interactive involvement refers to what individuals do with and for each other, involving face to face contact and exchange in aid. The results were connected to these three components.
A majority of employees feel those employees who get involved in a workplace relationship are seeking favoritism, career advancement, or special treatment. Employees are concerned about the pair engaging in PDA at work, favoritism, and the impact of the employees breaking up. This perception of workplace relationships damages office morale, decreases worker productivity, and opens up the company to a potential sexual harassment lawsuits. Companies must have policies in place that protect the company, the employees in the relationship, and the rest of the employees in the workplace.
Relationships among workplace peers are the most common type of organizational relationships. At times, these platonic relationships turn romantic which are often regarded as an organizational issue. A workplace romance (WR) is defined as a no-platonic bond between two members of an organization in which both sexual attraction and affection is present (Cowan & Horan, 2014). WRs are common in organizations. According to a poll by the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM), found that 40% of employees had been involved in a WR at some point in their careers (Cowan & Horan, 2014). The SHRM also found that over 70% of organizations do not have policies that prohibit WR. One of the most concerning questions that arises regarding workplace