Uncertainty management theory

Last updated

Uncertainty management theory (UMT), developed by Dale Brashers, addresses the concept of uncertainty management. Several theories have been developed in an attempt to define uncertainty, identify its effects and establish strategies for managing it. [1] Uncertainty management theory was the first theory to decline the idea that uncertainty is negative. It was developed and has been applied considering uncertainty neutral; neither positive nor negative. [2] Although viewed as neutral, researchers of uncertainty management propose that uncertainty can be utilized strategically for beneficial purposes while also acknowledging that the effects of uncertainty can be harmful, espousing an approach that requires examination of each situation, the parties involved, the issues at stake and the desired objectives for determining the best method for managing uncertainty, with reduction being one of the many management techniques. [2]

Contents

Background

University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign UIUC Path to Main Quad.jpg
University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign

Uncertainty Management Theory (UMT) was developed by Dale Brashers, an associate professor of Speech Communication at the University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign. [2] Brashers died in 2010 after spending more than 20 years researching uncertainty management. [3] Before Brashers' work, the most prominent literature in the field of uncertainty management was that of Charles Berger. Berger's Uncertainty Reduction Theory (URT) continues to be the dominant theory of uncertainty management, with much of the additional work on this topic being a continuation of Berger's research. [4] This includes the work of William Gudykunst, who continued with Berger's line of thinking, partnering together with him on Anxiety-Uncertainty Management (AUM) theory. [5] Both of these theories focus on the idea that uncertainty produces anxiety. Because of the anxiety produced by heightened levels of uncertainty, individuals are highly motivated to reduce uncertainty. Uncertainty Reduction posits that individuals would rather receive bad news than continue in a state of uncertainty. [4] This thinking was widely accepted, with uncertainty being studied almost exclusively through this lens before the introduction of UMT. With UMT, Brashers established that to fully understand the effects of uncertainty and how uncertainty contributes to various aspects of human life humanity must first move away from the idea that all uncertainty is negative. Brashers approached uncertainty as neutral (neither good nor bad), acknowledging that uncertainty reduction is one of many possible responses to situations that are lacking in the information necessary for full understanding. Brashers notes, however, that individuals will sometimes choose to remain in a state of uncertainty even though reduction opportunities are available. [2]

Aspects of uncertainty

Uncertainty is an unavoidable aspect of everyday life. The degree to which it is felt in a given situation varies among individuals. Because uncertainty is dependent upon perspective, "a person who believes himself or herself to be uncertain is uncertain." [2] However, people have different appetites and tolerances for uncertainty. For some, the existence of uncertainty is stimulating or perhaps even exhilarating, whereas others can be highly motivated to reduce even the slightest degree of uncertainty. The idea of exhilarating uncertainty could best be illustrated by an individual's decision to participate in an extreme recreational activity such as skydiving, bungee jumping or parasailing. [2] Personal tolerance for uncertainty will determine how willing a person is to invest when the likelihood of the desired outcome is unclear; whether this investment is monetary, relational or otherwise. Babrow (1992) applied this principle to research around uncertainty and probability, stating that uncertainty is at its peak when the probability of the outcome is at or near 50%; while extremely low or extremely high probability reduces uncertainty. [6]

Managing uncertainty in relationships

Interpersonal relationships have great application to the field of uncertainty management and arguably the widest appeal since everyone participates in the process of relating to others. In the initial stage of relationship development, individuals engage in heightened observation of the other party to reduce uncertainty about the suitability of the relationship's future. [7] Individuals engage in self-disclosure and other forms of interaction, particularly in the early stages of relationships, often for the sole purpose of exploring how the other party will respond. [8] Much of the research and writing on relational communication focuses on the idea that through interaction, society comes to learn more about itself and others. The focus of uncertainty management has been not only on how people interact, but how they gather information about other people through interaction, what is done with that information, and why it is done. [1] UMT posits that even in the early stages of relationship, one might choose to not self-disclose or to not seek self-disclosure to allow a level of uncertainty to remain.[ citation needed ]

Uncertainty is generally the result of a situation being unclear, unpredictable and/or complicated, with needed information being scarce or contradictory, and the people involved lacking confidence in the amount or reliability of the information they possess about this situation. [9] A state of uncertainty can be temporary or long-term. [10] In relationship development, uncertainty is generally reduced at a rapid pace early in the relationship as the two parties get to know one another. This slows as the relationship progresses and the parties have fewer withheld disclosures to present. The slowdown can also be the result of one or both of the parties reaching the desired level of intimacy and thus withholding additional personal information to not further the development of the relationship. Although this withholding reduces uncertainty around where the relationship is going, it can increase uncertainty or at least maintain uncertainty levels for the other party about the areas of the individual's life and being that are no longer being disclosed. Uncertainty is often the result of multiple contributing factors that are connected to how they can affect different aspects of an individual's life. [6] The same can be true for the functioning of an organization.  

In relationships, individuals are motivated to explore two types of uncertainty. First, predictive uncertainty reveals what one can expect from the other party going forward. An individual desires to be able to predict with some degree of certainty how the other party is going to behave in a specific circumstance or how they are going to respond to information the individual discloses. Second, explanatory uncertainty serves to identify the reasons behind past behavior. People want to be able to make sense of the other party's words or behavior. If their behavior is undesirable and the individual can identify what prompted that behavior, they can alter their behavior or words to not continue prompting the behavior they no longer desire from the other party. [1]

Application

UMT applies across a wide spectrum of topics and experiences, most notably health, organizational and interpersonal settings. [2]

Healthcare

Healthcare, and particularly health communication, is an arena for UMT. Researchers studying health have employed UMT as a way to understand and communicate processes including medicine, technology, payer concerns and political ramifications. This work has resulted in what Brashers referred to as the "culture of chronic illness," [2] where constant testing and evaluation of people's health almost always results in the identification of some level of sickness, infection or disease; resulting in two groups of people: the "chronically ill" and the "worried well." [2] Much work was completed in the late 1990s regarding the effect of uncertainty on the rapidly increasing HIV diagnosed population. Uncertainty was of particular concern with the communication methods that were utilized by healthcare providers with their HIV patients. [11] The role of medical malpractice litigation has also contributed to the complexity of communication between healthcare providers and patients regarding diagnosis and treatment options. [10]

Organizational

Although not as frequently cited, UMT also has widespread applicability to the organizational setting (i.e., the workplace). Research in this setting has included examining the role of uncertainty in unhealthy workplace behavior. [12] Other work has examined expected employee behaviors, channels of communication and deviant employee behavior. [13] In looking at uncertainty in the context of the workplace, Brashers relates uncertainty to ambiguity where there are multiple explanations of behavior or phenomenon; he further states that "ambiguity is not always undesired and individuals sometimes use it for strategic purposes." [2] Sometimes these strategies are for self-preservation or the retention of power, where individuals create and/or maintain ambiguity to protect their status quo. [14] This same line of thinking has been applied to perpetrators in the workplace who cloud inappropriate behavior with enough uncertainty to disguise what would otherwise be viewed as sexual harassment. [15] It is important to note that other uncertainty management theorists, particularly those who view uncertainty as an unhealthy dynamic. view the workplace as the primary venue in need of uncertainty reduction. [16] This argument is particularly relevant when evaluating uncertainty around the decision-making process for organizations. [17]

Interpersonal

People in relationships can frequently experience uncertainty. This uncertainty is not only related to the other party, but even self behavior imposes uncertainty on our relationships that often are unintended. Whether it is the result of notable cultural differences or simply family influence in the way individuals relate to others or show affection, these differences leave the other party guessing at to their intended meaning. [18] Not all uncertainty is negative. Many individuals value the spontaneity that results from some degree of uncertainty in interpersonal relationships or how those relationships are managed. [19]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Social group</span> Two or more humans who interact with one another

In the social sciences, a social group is defined as two or more people who interact with one another, share similar characteristics, and collectively have a sense of unity. Regardless, social groups come in a myriad of sizes and varieties. For example, a society can be viewed as a large social group. The system of behaviors and psychological processes occurring within a social group or between social groups is known as group dynamics.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Team building</span> Term for activities used to enhance social relations and define roles within teams

Team building is a collective term for various types of activities used to enhance social relations and define roles within teams, often involving collaborative tasks. It is distinct from team training, which is designed by a combine of business managers, learning and development/OD and an HR Business Partner to improve the efficiency, rather than interpersonal relations.

Within the realm of communication studies, organizational communication is a field of study surrounding all areas of communication and information flow that contribute to the functioning of an organization. Organizational communication is constantly evolving and as a result, the scope of organizations included in this field of research have also shifted over time. Now both traditionally profitable companies, as well as NGO's and non-profit organizations, are points of interest for scholars focused on the field of organizational communication. Organizations are formed and sustained through continuous communication between members of the organization and both internal and external sub-groups who possess shared objectives for the organization. The flow of communication encompasses internal and external stakeholders and can be formal or informal.

Silent treatment is the refusal to communicate verbally and electronically with someone who is trying to communicate and elicit a response. It may range from just sulking to malevolent abusive controlling behaviour. It may be a passive-aggressive form of emotional abuse in which displeasure, disapproval and contempt is exhibited through nonverbal gestures while maintaining verbal silence. Clinical psychologist Harriet Braiker identifies it as a form of manipulative punishment. It may be used as a form of social rejection; according to the social psychologist Kipling Williams, it is the most common form of ostracism.

Intercultural communication is a discipline that studies communication across different cultures and social groups, or how culture affects communication. It describes the wide range of communication processes and problems that naturally appear within an organization or social context made up of individuals from different religious, social, ethnic, and educational backgrounds. In this sense, it seeks to understand how people from different countries and cultures act, communicate, and perceive the world around them. Intercultural communication focuses on the recognition and respect of those with cultural differences. The goal is mutual adaptation between two or more distinct cultures which leads to biculturalism/multiculturalism rather than complete assimilation. It promotes the development of cultural sensitivity and allows for empathic understanding across different cultures.

Organizational behavior or organisational behaviour is the: "study of human behavior in organizational settings, the interface between human behavior and the organization, and the organization itself". Organizational behavioral research can be categorized in at least three ways:

The uncertainty reduction theory, also known as initial interaction theory, developed in 1975 by Charles Berger and Richard Calabrese, is a communication theory from the post-positivist tradition. It is one of the few communication theories that specifically looks into the initial interaction between people prior to the actual communication process. Uncertainty reduction theory originators main goal when constructing it was to explain how communication is used to reduce uncertainty between strangers during a first interaction. Uncertainty reduction theory claims that everyone activates two processes in order to reduce uncertainty. The first being a proactive process, which focuses on what someone might do. The second being a retroactive process, which focuses on how people understand what another does or says. This theory's main claim is that people must receive information about another party in order to reduce their uncertainty and, that people want to do so. While uncertainty reduction theory claims that communication will lead to reduced uncertainty, it is important to note that this is not always the case. Dr. Dale E. Brashers of the University of Illinois argues that in some scenarios, more communication may lead to greater uncertainty.

The social penetration theory (SPT) proposes that as relationships develop, interpersonal communication moves from relatively shallow, non-intimate levels to deeper, more intimate ones. The theory was formulated by psychologists Irwin Altman of the University of Utah and Dalmas Taylor of the University of Delaware in 1973 to understand relationship development between individuals. Altman and Taylor noted that relationships "involve different levels of intimacy of exchange or degree of social penetration". SPT is known as an objective theory as opposed to an interpretive theory, meaning it is based on data drawn from actual experiments and not simply from conclusions based on individuals' specific experiences.

Communication accommodation theory (CAT) is a theory of communication developed by Howard Giles. This theory concerns "(1) the behavioral changes that people make to attune their communication to their partner, (2) the extent to which people perceive their partner as appropriately attuning to them." The basis of the theory lies in the idea that people adjust their style of speech to one another. Doing this helps the message sender gain approval from the receiver, increases efficiency in communication between both parties, and helps the sender maintain a positive social identity. This theory is concerned with the links between language, context, and identity. It focuses on both the intergroup and interpersonal factors that lead to accommodation, as well as the ways that power, macro- and micro-context concerns affect communication behaviors; emphasizing the important duplexity of both factors in predicting and understanding intergroup interactions. Accommodation is usually considered to be between the message sender and the message receiver, but the communicator also often accommodates to a larger audience – either a group of people that are watching the interaction or society in general. Communication accommodation theory (CAT) predicts and explains why communicants make adjustments to increase, decrease, or maintain social distance.

Problematic Integration Theory is a theory of communication that addresses the processes and dynamics of how people receive, evaluate, and respond to information and experiences. The premises of PI are based on the view that message processing, specifically the development of probabilistic and evaluative orientations, is a social and cultural construction. In situations where there is agreement between probabilistic orientation and evaluative orientation, integration is in harmony, i.e., not problematic. However, when there is disagreement between these orientations about an object, then integration becomes problematic. This disharmony leads to conflict and discomfort, which can manifest itself as cognitive, communicative, affective, and/or motivational.

Charles R. Berger was an American professor emeritus of communication at the University of California, Davis. Berger died on September 25, 2018, from health complications arising from cancer.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Social information processing (theory)</span>

Social information processing theory, also known as SIP, is a psychological and sociological theory originally developed by Salancik and Pfeffer in 1978. This theory explores how individuals make decisions and form attitudes in a social context, often focusing on the workplace. It suggests that people rely heavily on the social information available to them in their environments, including input from colleagues and peers, to shape their attitudes, behaviors, and perceptions.

Anxiety/uncertainty management (AUM) theory is known as the high levels of anxiety one may experience as they come in contact with those of another culture. This concept was first introduced by William B. Gudykunst to further define how humans effectively communicate based on their anxiety and uncertainty in social situations. Gudykunst believed that in order for successful intercultural communication a reduction in anxiety/uncertainty must occur. This is assuming that the individuals within the intercultural encounter are strangers. AUM is a theory based on the uncertainty reduction theory (URT) which was introduced by Berger and Calabrese in 1974. URT provides much of the initial framework for AUM, and much like other theories in the communication field AUM is a constantly developing theory, based on the observations of human behaviour in social situations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Face negotiation theory</span> Theory in social science

Face negotiation theory is a theory conceived by Stella Ting-Toomey in 1985, to understand how people from different cultures manage rapport and disagreements. The theory posited "face", or self-image when communicating with others, as a universal phenomenon that pervades across cultures. In conflicts, one's face is threatened; and thus the person tends to save or restore his or her face. This set of communicative behaviors, according to the theory, is called "facework". Since people frame the situated meaning of "face" and enact "facework" differently from one culture to the next, the theory poses a cross-cultural framework to examine facework negotiation. It is important to note that the definition of face varies depending on the people and their culture and the same can be said for the proficiency of facework. According to Ting-Toomey's theory, most cultural differences can be divided by Eastern and Western cultures, and her theory accounts for these differences.

Judee K. Burgoon is a professor of communication, family studies and human development at the University of Arizona, where she serves as director of research for the Center for the Management of Information and site director for the NSF-sponsored Center for Identification Technology Research. She is also involved with different aspects of interpersonal and nonverbal communication, deception, and new communication technologies. She is also director of human communication research for the Center for the Management of Information and site director for Center for Identification Technology Research at the university, and recently held an appointment as distinguished visiting professor with the department of communication at the University of Oklahoma, and the Center for Applied Social Research at the University of Oklahoma. Burgoon has authored or edited 13 books and monographs and has published nearly 300 articles, chapters and reviews related to nonverbal and verbal communication, deception, and computer-mediated communication. Her research has garnered over $13 million in extramural funding from the National Science Foundation, the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Counterintelligence Field Activity, and the National Institutes of Mental Health. Among the communication theories with which she is most notably linked are: interpersonal adaptation theory, expectancy violations theory, and interpersonal deception theory. A recent survey identified her as the most prolific female scholar in communication in the 20th century.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Identity management theory</span>

Identity management theory is an intercultural communication theory from the 1990s. It was developed by William R. Cupach and Tadasu Todd Imahori on the basis of Erving Goffman's Interaction ritual: Essays on face-to-face behavior (1967). Cupach and Imahori distinguish between intercultural communication and intracultural communication.

Predicted outcome value theory introduced in 1996 by Michael Sunnafrank, posits that people seek information in initial interactions and relationships to determine the benefits of interpersonal relationships by predicting the value of future outcomes whether negative or positive. If a person predicts a positive outcome in the relationship this can lead to increased attraction, however if a person predicts a negative outcome then he or she would pursue limited interaction or possibly relationship termination. The processes of predicted outcome value directly link to continued relationship development and communication as well as stronger attraction and intimacy within the relationship.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Interpersonal communication</span> Exchange of information among people

Interpersonal communication is an exchange of information between two or more people. It is also an area of research that seeks to understand how humans use verbal and nonverbal cues to accomplish several personal and relational goals. Communication includes utilizing communication skills within one's surroundings, including physical and psychological spaces. It is essential to see the visual/nonverbal and verbal cues regarding the physical spaces. In the psychological spaces, self-awareness and awareness of the emotions, cultures, and things that are not seen are also significant when communicating.

Multi-communicating is the act of managing multiple conversations simultaneously. The term was coined by Reinsch, Turner, and Tinsley, who proposed that simultaneous conversations can be conducted using an array of media, including face-to-face, phone, and email tools for communication. The practice allows individuals to utilize two or more technologies to interact with each other.

The theory of motivated information management (TMIM) is a social-psychological framework that examines the relationship between information management and uncertainty. TMIM has been utilized to describe the management of information regarding challenging, taboo, or sensitive matters. In regards to interpersonal information seeking, there are numerous routes and methods one can choose to take in order to obtain that information. TMIM analyzes whether an individual will engage in information seeking within the first place and also assess the role of the information provider. The theory posits that individuals are "motivated to manage their uncertainty levels when they perceive a discrepancy between the level of uncertainty they have about an important issue and the level of uncertainty they want." "TMIM distinguishes itself from other information-seeking theories in that it does not attribute the motivation of information seeking to a desire for uncertainty reduction; rather, the catalyst of information management in TMIM lies in the discrepancy between actual and desired uncertainty." In other words, someone may be uncertain about an important issue but decides not to engage or seek information because they are comfortable with that state and, therefore, desire it. People prefer certainty in some situations and uncertainty in other

References

  1. 1 2 3 Littlejohn, S.W. & Foss, K.A. (2011). Theories of Human Communication. Long Grove, Illinois: Waveland Press. pp. 180–181. ISBN   978-1-57766-706-3.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Brashers, Dale (September 2001). "Communication and Uncertainty Management". Journal of Communication. September 2001 (3). Oxford University Press: 477–497. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2001.tb02892.x.
  3. ↑ Rintamaki, L.S. & Hsieh, E. (2010). "Remembering the legacy of Dale E.. Brashers and his contributions to health communication". Health Communication. 25 (8): 633–637. doi:10.1080/10410236.2010.521911. PMID   21153978. S2CID   24746077.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  4. 1 2 Berger, C.R. (2005). "Interpersonal Communication: Theoretical Perspectives, Future Prospects". Journal of Communication. 55 (3). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press: 415–447. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2005.tb02680.x.
  5. ↑ Gudykunst, William (1995). "The Uncertainty Reduction and Anxiety-Uncertainty Reduction Theories of Berger, Gudykunst, and Associates". Watershed Research Traditions in Human Communication Theory. SUNY Press: 67–100.
  6. 1 2 Babrow, A.S. (1992). "Communication and Problematic Integration: Understanding Diverging Probability and Value, Ambiguity, Ambivalence, and Impossibility". Communication Theory. 2 (2): 95–130. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.1992.tb00031.x.
  7. ↑ Knapp, M.L. & Vangelisti, A.L. (2011). Interpersonal Communication and Human Relationships. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. pp. 36–49.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  8. ↑ Duck, Steve (2011). Rethinking Relationships. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. pp. 203–204.
  9. ↑ Babrow, A.S., Hines, S.C. & Kasch, C.R. (2000). "Managing Uncertainty in Illness Explanation: An Application of Problematic Integration Theory". Explaining Illness: Research, Theory, and Strategies: 41–67.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  10. 1 2 Mishel, M.H. (1988). "Uncertainty in Illness". Journal of Nursing Scholarship. 20 (4): 225–232. doi:10.1111/j.1547-5069.1988.tb00082.x. PMID   3203947.
  11. ↑ Babrow, A.S., Kasch, C.R. & Ford, L.A. (1998). "The Many Meanings of Uncertainty in Illness: Toward a Systematic Accounting". Health Communication. 10 (1): 1–23. doi:10.1207/s15327027hc1001_1. PMID   16370987.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  12. ↑ Thau, S., Bennett, R.J., Mitchell, M.S. & Marrs, M.B. (2009). "How Management Style Moderates the Relationship Between Abusive Supervision and Workplace Deviance: An Uncertainty Management Theory Perspective". Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 108. Elsevier: 79–92. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2008.06.003. S2CID   9532547.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  13. ↑ Herovic, E., Scarduzio, J.A. & Lueken, S. (2019). "It Literally Happens Every Day: The Multiple Settings, Multilevel Considerations, and Uncertainty Management of Modern-Day Sexual Harassment". Western Journal of Communication. 83: 39–57. doi:10.1080/10570314.2018.1485052. S2CID   150172566.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  14. ↑ Eisenberg, E.M. (1984). "Ambiguity as Strategy in Organizational Communication". Communication Monographs. 51 (3): 227–242. doi:10.1080/03637758409390197. S2CID   143628459.
  15. ↑ Dougherty, D. S., Kramer, M. W., Klatzke, S. R., & Rogers, T. K. (2009). "Language Convergence and Meaning Divergence: A Meaning Centered Communication Theory". Communication Monographs. 76: 20–46. doi:10.1080/03637750802378799. S2CID   144997054.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  16. ↑ Berger, C. R., & Calabrese, R. J. (1975). "Some Explorations in Initial Interaction and Beyond: Toward a Developmental Theory of Interpersonal Communication". Human Communication Research. 1 (2): 99–112. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1975.tb00258.x.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  17. ↑ Kramer, M.W. (2013). Managing Uncertainty in Organizational Communication. London: Routledge.
  18. ↑ Berger, C.R. (1995). "Inscrutable Goals, Uncertain Plans, and the Production of Communicative Action". Communication and Social Influence Processes. Michigan State University Press: 1–28.
  19. ↑ Baster, L.A. & Montgomery, B.M. (1996). Relating: Dialogues and Dialectics. New York: Guilford Press.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.